Disney General - The saddest fandom on Earth

  • Thread starter Thread starter KO 864
  • Start date Start date

Which is Better

  • Chicken Little

    Votes: 384 26.0%

  • Hunchback 2

    Votes: 53 3.6%

  • A slow death

    Votes: 1,038 70.4%
  • Total voters
    1,475
omori said:
The company flourished under Eisner because Frank Wells was there to keep his ideas in check. After Wells’ death Eisner had no one to talk him down from dumbass ideas. Chapek and Iger don’t have that voice of reason behind them.
Click to expand...
iirc there was also an element of Eisner steering the company back to profits after Wells/Roy almost bankrupted the company with EPCOT Center?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Oats12345 and Vyse Inglebard
Vyse Inglebard said:
View attachment 3160735

"Nothing?"
Click to expand...
Lilo and Stitch was an outright success among a series of very modest successes or outright flops. It stands out (above the crowd) because (just to stick with the decade it came out) it was released after Dinosaur and Atlantis, and prior to Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Chicken Little, Meet the Robinsons, and Bolt. If I included the post Lion King lineup the list would be even longer. I know that people are going to respond with "but I liked X", but performatively they were either modest successes that only still get mentioned because people saw it as a kid and have nostalgia, or were outright flops that nobody saw or cared about even when they were new. And that's fine, a lot of the classic Disney movies aren't real great and often talked about either, like Dumbo, the Sword in the Stone, and Aristocats. But people have their nostalgia glasses on and are seriously forgetting how bad things were starting with Pocahontas.

Basic Blonde Boy said:
The dude was ferocious as fuck, building shit like animal kingdom as a massive fuck you to potential competition.
Click to expand...
He also gave us California-themed California Adventure in southern California instead of Westcot. They're still trying to make CA a park people actually want to go to (and for longer than half a day) while keeping Disneyland proper relevant. Remember, when CA opened it had a couple of unique but really cheap rides, a handful of your fairly generic carnival rides, a whole section dedicated to scammy carnival games (not sure if it's still there or not), and that was basically it. Pretty much everything that is actually still there has been heavily rethemed.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Pina Colada, Oats12345, Akumaten and 1 other person
When Eisner was bad, he was horrible. There's definitely an element of bias to this Disney CEO stuff because a lot of people who criticize Eisner also hold the opinion that Iger is the best, and his aggressive acquisitions, especially of Star Wars and Marvel saved Disney. So people who hate Iger's decisions and modern Disney might feel compelled to defend Eisner, seeing how Iger saving the company panned out.

That being said, with the left and right hating Disney for their political pandering stunts blowing up in their faces, couldn't happen to a nicer company.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: Xenomorphs Are Cute, Pina Colada, The-Mad-Asshatter and 12 others
MysticMisty said:
Lilo and Stitch was an outright success among a series of very modest successes or outright flops. It stands out (above the crowd) because (just to stick with the decade it came out) it was released after Dinosaur and Atlantis, and prior to Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Chicken Little, Meet the Robinsons, and Bolt. If I included the post Lion King lineup the list would be even longer. I know that people are going to respond with "but I liked X", but performatively they were either modest successes that only still get mentioned because people saw it as a kid and have nostalgia, or were outright flops that nobody saw or cared about even when they were new. And that's fine, a lot of the classic Disney movies aren't real great and often talked about either, like Dumbo, the Sword in the Stone, and Aristocats. But people have their nostalgia glasses on and are seriously forgetting how bad things were starting with Pocahontas.


He also gave us California-themed California Adventure in southern California instead of Westcot. They're still trying to make CA a park people actually want to go to (and for longer than half a day) while keeping Disneyland proper relevant. Remember, when CA opened it had a couple of unique but really cheap rides, a handful of your fairly generic carnival rides, a whole section dedicated to scammy carnival games (not sure if it's still there or not), and that was basically it. Pretty much everything that is actually still there has been heavily rethemed.
Click to expand...
Yeah as much as cheapek is cheap, Eisner had some problems in that department too.
and he put the WDW complex dependent on the buses, which is lame and not cool like boats and monorails and shit.
And he was behind the French Push like Jungle 2 Jungle

Is there a real answer about why Disney always did (does) those shit live action movies well-past the Medfield Cinematic Universe? was it just to Hollywood Accounting various other parts of the company?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Vyse Inglebard
XYZpdq said:
And he was behind the French Push like Jungle 2 Jungle
Click to expand...
"French Push"? I thought Disney just wanted to remake the film because they had the distribution rights...

XYZpdq said:
Is there a real answer about why Disney always did (does) those shit live action movies well-past the Medfield Cinematic Universe? was it just to Hollywood Accounting various other parts of the company?
Click to expand...
Live-action is cheaper to do than animation so a crappy family comedy can bring in some dough if it does well.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Feels
Reactions: XYZpdq and Vyse Inglebard
Someone in a Tree said:
In other Disney adjacent news, Netflix announced that they will be the new studio releasing Nimona, the film that Blue Sky was working on before Disney shut them down.
Click to expand...
Nimona-First-Look-Netflix.png

Glow-up of the fucking century, holy shit.
(Left is the movie, right is the original comic).
 
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Xenomorphs Are Cute, Pina Colada, The-Mad-Asshatter and 4 others
Rome's rightful successor said:
I think with Eisner is that at least in the beginning he had people like Frank Wells to tard wrangle him.
Click to expand...
I think they both probably wrangled each other to a degree.
Like I said, I'm pretty sure Wells and Roy were why the company had to go into rebuilding mode and go as weird as "hire that Paramount guy" and "make movies with a chick's ass on the screen" and stuff
now that I think about it did WDW make any more normal hotels after Eisner? iirc the delayed Pops were started under his watch, and obviously I'm not counting Star Wars LARPtastic cruiser
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Xenomorphs Are Cute, Pina Colada, Syaoran Li and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back