Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause

[dbm20th]

I agree with you.. Especially those people who "KNOW" what Walt would do if he were alive today.... And what exactly is the "REAL" Disney?? Last time I checked, Disney World was real and not a figment of my imagination LOL....

You get an Amen from me on that. That drives me nuts.

But are you sure about that???

I couldn't resist

 

[yensiD naF]

And let me say, I didn't feel attacked... but I do agree with MJM.... I was questioned about forseeing into the future.. When, DIsney Fan (Backwards) did the same thing.. But it is over with... On to bigger and brighter things.

True, I didn't attack you. I made the comment about seeing into the future with my tongue firmly planted in my cheek. And I thought it was pretty funny too. I appreciate you being an adult and playing along.

Now....

My first shot at Disney Fan might have been a little over the top. I'll concede that. Maybe. But I find that whole "I'm a fan of the REAL Disney and you're not" rant objectionable and ludicrous. I consider myself a fan of the Real Disney.

First! My comments to Tink's Tormentor about being a fan of the REAL Disney meant that as a purist, I mainly appreciate the many things that Walt Disney gave us, as well as the great things that came from some of his successors. But as with most purists, I tend to resent most things that have come from the incompetence of the Ei$ner era, especially the last ten years.

Second! I never referred to anyone specifically as NOT being a fan of the Real Disney. I used a generalization about fans "of the hour" which was not intended to be about Tormentor, and I don't believe he took it that way either.

Third! If Tormentor feels he wasn't attacked, and exDS vet seems to agree, why do you continue with all of the drama? I mean really. The facts seem obvious. I'm a Disney purist and you are not. (Please note that I am not referring to you as anything else here.)

Fourth (and finally)! I WASN'T EVEN TALKING TO YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE! You got angry at a comment that I made in a reply that I sent to someone else. I think that falls under the heading of "Mind Your Own Business." But this is a public board, so I guess you can get mad at anything you want to. I would recommend taking your meds before reading future posts.

OK. NOW you can get mad.

 

[Tink's Tormentor]

You get an Amen from me on that. That drives me nuts.

But are you sure about that???

I couldn't resist

Actually, I like to believe the current version of the ride is just a figment of my imagination and the boring ride does not really exist... **HERE IS TO HOPING DREAM FINDER COMES BACK AND RENEWS THE RIDE TO ITS FORMER GLORY!!!**

 

[Tink's Tormentor]

True, I didn't attack you. I made the comment about seeing into the future with my tongue firmly planted in my cheek. And I thought it was pretty funny too. I appreciate you being an adult and playing along.

No problem.. We are all entitled to our opinions. I feel no one should bash another person for their opinions... Isn't that what these forums are for? Expressing our opinions, and hey, even jokng around and teasing each other about certain things??? As long as it doesn't get too carried away.. Then mods step in and that ends that....

I too am a fan of classic Disney... I am also a fan of new Disney... I don;t want to see them changing rides just for the sake of chaning the ride.. I want to see then change for the better, new innovating technology...

I think a real Disney fan is someone who enjoys what Disney provides us, whether it is a dark ride, classic ride getting updated and, as Walt called it, PLUSSED, a ride based off a movie, a movie based off a ride... We are not all going to like everything.. but, not everything is meant for everyone..

 

[dbm20th]

I would recommend taking your meds before reading future posts.

OK. NOW you can get mad.

Well, it is good to see we are trying to keep this civil and respectful.

 

[dbm20th]

I think a real Disney fan is someone who enjoys what Disney provides us, whether it is a dark ride, classic ride getting updated and, as Walt called it, PLUSSED, a ride based off a movie, a movie based off a ride... We are not all going to like everything.. but, not everything is meant for everyone..

Sounds right to me. However, I am not sure the "purists" would always agree with us.

 

[MJMcBride]

True, I didn't attack you. I made the comment about seeing into the future with my tongue firmly planted in my cheek. And I thought it was pretty funny too. I appreciate you being an adult and playing along.

Now....


First! My comments to Tink's Tormentor about being a fan of the REAL Disney meant that as a purist, I mainly appreciate the many things that Walt Disney gave us, as well as the great things that came from some of his successors. But as with most purists, I tend to resent most things that have come from the incompetence of the Ei$ner era, especially the last ten years.

Second! I never referred to anyone specifically as NOT being a fan of the Real Disney. I used a generalization about fans "of the hour" which was not intended to be about Tormentor, and I don't believe he took it that way either.

Third! If Tormentor feels he wasn't attacked, and exDS vet seems to agree, why do you continue with all of the drama? I mean really. The facts seem obvious. I'm a Disney purist and you are not. (Please note that I am not referring to you as anything else here.)

Fourth (and finally)! I WASN'T EVEN TALKING TO YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE! You got angry at a comment that I made in a reply that I sent to someone else. I think that falls under the heading of "Mind Your Own Business." But this is a public board, so I guess you can get mad at anything you want to. I would recommend taking your meds before reading future posts.

OK. NOW you can get mad.

I'm not mad. Im just curious what makes you a Disney purist or me not a Disney purist?

Because you say you're a fan of the "Real Disney" you are obviously stating that I'm not. And by that implication, you are stating that anyone who likes something from the last 15 or so years must not a be real fan of Disney. And thats nonsense.

In reviewing the posts, it seems to me that you're the one that got overly dramatic in response to me saying you were bitter over the Pirates' update. It also seems to me that you got exceedingly angry over the fact that you realized the completely illogical nature of your intial remarks.

If you don't want anyone on the DIS boards to criticize you or to point out clear errors in your thinking. May I suggest you stay off the Boards or just PM people you want to discuss things with. That will keep you safe.

And I promise not to call you "bitter" anymore if that helps you.

Now where is my medication....its here somewhere......

 

[Tink's Tormentor]

Sounds right to me. However, I am not sure the "purists" would always agree with us.

But don't the purists know that WALT DISNEY himself took classic attractions and "PLUSSED" then??? He saw declining attendance in a ride and either replaced it or "PLUSSED" it...

Wasn't this thread about The Santa Clause 3 movie??? LoL... I am sure this movie will be cute... For every 1 person on this thread who thinks Disney should not have made this movie, there are 1,000 people who will go see it... I say lets wait until this movie comes out and how it performs in the theater.. After all, the profit made determines if this was a success or a waste of money....

 

[dbm20th]

But don't the purists know that WALT DISNEY himself took classic attractions and "PLUSSED" then??? He saw declining attendance in a ride and either replaced it or "PLUSSED" it...

But sometimes I think people think he did that because he loved his fans and not to up the take at the gate. That's nonsense.

 

[Tink's Tormentor]

But sometimes I think people think he did that because he loved his fans and not to up the take at the gate. That's nonsense.

They fail to realize Walt was a shrewd business man... he too worried about the bottom line.. true, he may have been more free with spending the money to build newer and better attractions than the management of today, but.. he was worried about the bottom line nonetheless...

 

[DancingBear]

But sometimes I think people think he did that because he loved his fans and not to up the take at the gate. That's nonsense.

I don't think it's quite that simple either way. I think Walt wanted to make money, but, to a much larger extent than Roy, and far from Eisner, thought that the path was to create quality, leading to increased guest satisfaction, leading to profits. Rather than the budget being both the means and the end.

 

[Tink's Tormentor]

I don't think it's quite that simple either way. I think Walt wanted to make money, but, to a much larger extent than Roy, and far from Eisner, thought that the path was to create quality, leading to increased guest satisfaction, leading to profits. Rather than the budget being both the means and the end.

I agree that Walt wanted quality.. Eisner wanted cheap fixes... (STITCH'S GREAP ESCAPE ring a bell?)

 

[raidermatt]

I think a real Disney fan is someone who enjoys what Disney provides us, whether it is a dark ride, classic ride getting updated and, as Walt called it, PLUSSED, a ride based off a movie, a movie based off a ride... We are not all going to like everything.. but, not everything is meant for everyone..

I think that Disney, like any other entity that has fans, has two types of fans. Fans that are essentially fans of the name, and fans that are fans because of the way that entity operates or conducts itself.

A fan of the Disney name is essentially going to support whatever Disney puts out. As you say, they may not like everything, but Disney is still Disney, and will always be Disney no matter what.

The other type is a fan of Disney because of what they have done and how they have done it. They see the changes in how the company operates and see a company that no longer conducts itself in the same manner that drew them to Disney in the first place. They speak out on how this could and should be changed.

I can't call either less of a fan than the other. But I know that all Disney fans should be glad there are at least some in the latter category.

But sometimes I think people think he did that because he loved his fans and not to up the take at the gate. That's nonsense.

Certainly not the people that post or used to post around here. As DancingBear said, its not that Walt didn't care about making money. Its that he first and foremost cared about creating products that he was proud of. In doing so, he believed his business would be successful, moreso than if he started his day by asking "How can I make more money today?"

Given his success relative to his peers, its hard to argue with his philosophy.

 

[dbm20th]

Certainly not the people that post or used to post around here. As DancingBear said, its not that Walt didn't care about making money. Its that he first and foremost cared about creating products that he was proud of. In doing so, he believed his business would be successful, moreso than if he started his day by asking "How can I make more money today?"

Given his success relative to his peers, its hard to argue with his philosophy.

Both you and DancingBear are right about that, but I am sure you can both admit you went a bit beyond the simplicity of my point that the "purists" can sometimes pre-judge as much as a "pixie duster" can.

And of course that philosphy had been missing in the later years of Eisner's reign, or at least missing in a direct comparison to Walt and Roy. But part of that needs to also be traced to the massive differences in the companies these men were leading. Eisner was a dope, believe me when I say that, but that doesn't always mean that everything WDI did in those years was not for the enjoyment of guests. That too, is nonsense.

They didn't just build hotels, they built some of the most incredible resorts in the country. They didn't just build a cruise ship, they built 2 of the most classic and gorgeous vessels around. They also built some fantastic attractions. They did that for money sure enough, but also because of the same reasons you just described. They didn't do it as well as those under Walt, and that may be a direct link to leadership as well, but I am not simply going to assume that Lasseter and Iger are going to fail in leadership. Or push the wants and needs of the guests aside. Does that make me a pixie duster?

I will be the first to admit they built some junk. But that does not mean that is ALL they built.

Very well put, raidermatt and DancingBear. Good conversation is always a great thing

 

[raidermatt]

I will be the first to admit they built some junk. But that does not mean that is ALL they built.

But see, that misses the point. Bad processes sometimes produce good results, just as good processes sometimes fail. That doesn't change the fact that a bad process is bad. In this case, "bad" is still good enough to remain a profitable business, but is largely the same as everybody else, meaning the other media conglomerates, though its a far cry from what drew all of us to Disney in the first place.

So if all you want is to see some good products come out of Disney now and then, you'll probably get it for a long time. But if you want to see true Disney-like products coming out of Disney with greater frequency, there's going to have to be some changes made, because the current Disney just doesn't work that way and hasn't for a long time.

It really does look like Lasseter and company are trying to change that, at least in some areas. We'll have to see how successful they are, and whether they try and succeed to extend their scope beyond animation and the Pixar attractions.

 

[MJMcBride]

But see, that misses the point. Bad processes sometimes produce good results, just as good processes sometimes fail. That doesn't change the fact that a bad process is bad. In this case, "bad" is still good enough to remain a profitable business, but is largely the same as everybody else, meaning the other media conglomerates, though its a far cry from what drew all of us to Disney in the first place.

So if all you want is to see some good products come out of Disney now and then, you'll probably get it for a long time. But if you want to see true Disney-like products coming out of Disney with greater frequency, there's going to have to be some changes made, because the current Disney just doesn't work that way and hasn't for a long time.

But I think you miss the point to some extent here. Whether or not Disney had bad processes during the Dark Ages aka the Eisner Years, they still had some great rides and certainly some great movies. Ones that stand up well to movies Walt himself made. I for one don't believe "bad processes" led to The Lion King. But even if it did, Disney fans were left with a great movie so who cares.

I don't consider myself a pixie duster (stop laughing). But I do think some great attractions and great movies were made during the Eisner years. I also believe there was a lot of junk and bad decisions. More so then with previous "administrations". But there was still some good stuff.

 

[MJMcBride]

Wasn't this thread about The Santa Clause 3 movie???

The funny thing about that is, I probably agree with exDIS Vet and Disney Fan(backwards) when I say - you couldn't pay me to that flick.

 

[yensiD naF]

But I think you miss the point to some extent here. Whether or not Disney had bad processes during the Dark Ages aka the Eisner Years, they still had some great rides and certainly some great movies. Ones that stand up well to movies Walt himself made. I for one don't believe "bad processes" led to The Lion King. But even if it did, Disney fans were left with a great movie so who cares.

I don't consider myself a pixie duster (stop laughing). But I do think some great attractions and great movies were made during the Eisner years. I also believe there was a lot of junk and bad decisions. More so then with previous "administrations". But there was still some good stuff.

Guess What? I can now agree with you on something!! There were some great products that came from the Eisner era. The Lion King, Aladdin, Beauty and The Beast, The Little Mermaid. And you are correct when you say that they can all stand up well with some of the films that Walt made.

The only problem is that the credit for those films needs to go to Jeffrey Katzenberg and not Eisner. Also, all of the big successes from 1984 to 1994 were among the best things to happen at Disney during the Eisner years. But another person who seldom gets any credit for the Disney boom is Frank Wells. Can all of us agree that after Wells died and Katzenberg left, Disney fell apart? One read of Disney War and anyone should agree with this statement. I also forgot abut Roy E. Disney. He deserves credit too.

Here's where my views become extreme. I don't like the Pixar stuff. And after seeing such Disney garbage as The Emperor's New Groove, Dinosaur and others, I lost interest in the animated stuff. So I gave up on it all. The last Disney film of any type that I saw (which was a Pixar one) was Monster's Inc. After Tarzan, the last film that I actually liked was Fantasia 2000.

I have not seen a Disney film of any kind since 2001. I love the classics from Walt's time through Tarzan. But I also prefer traditional animation to the newer stuff. I also love the parks, but prefer the classic attractions of Disneyland (over 200 visits) to the Magic Kingdom. That's why seeing Walt's classic attractions changed such as POTC bothers me, and probably the other "purist's" so much. New stuff is fine, but messing with the classics is bad.

I think of the people who went crazy when Mr. Toad was replaced by the Pooh ride at WDW. I felt the same way when they did it to the Country Bear Playhouse at DL in 2001. It's funny that DL's Pooh ride is nowhere as popular at the Florida version, but they are the same. Go figure.

Now back to the original topic. I never saw any of the Santa Clause films. I would imagine that if they do a 4th one though, it will either go direct to video, or it will be a TV movie that they put on ABC. Since Disney's big thing is to milk even the mediocore stuff dry, this will last for a few more holidays.

 

[SoCalKDG]

A fan of the Disney name is essentially going to support whatever Disney puts out. As you say, they may not like everything, but Disney is still Disney, and will always be Disney no matter what.

The other type is a fan of Disney because of what they have done and how they have done it. They see the changes in how the company operates and see a company that no longer conducts itself in the same manner that drew them to Disney in the first place. They speak out on how this could and should be changed.

I can't call either less of a fan than the other. But I know that all Disney fans should be glad there are at least some in the latter category.

All Disney fans should be glad that there are some in the former as well. The financial stability of the company needs those fans as well. Satisifying both sets, as well as bringing in new fans is the way to longevity.

 

[DancingBear]

Guess What? I can now agree with you on something!! There were some great products that came from the Eisner era. The Lion King, Aladdin, Beauty and The Beast, The Little Mermaid. And you are correct when you say that they can all stand up well with some of the films that Walt made.

The only problem is that the credit for those films needs to go to Jeffrey Katzenberg and not Eisner. Also, all of the big successes from 1984 to 1994 were among the best things to happen at Disney during the Eisner years. But another person who seldom gets any credit for the Disney boom is Frank Wells. Can all of us agree that after Wells died and Katzenberg left, Disney fell apart? One read of Disney War and anyone should agree with this statement. I also forgot abut Roy E. Disney. He deserves credit too.

Wells gets a big thumbs up. Eisner doesn't get credit for the films (particularly after then expecting everything after Lion King to match its numbers), but I wouldn't give too much credit to the midget. It's not like he's knocked it out of the park at Dreamworks.

Here's where my views become extreme. I don't like the Pixar stuff.

That is extreme. You're missing some great movies.

I think of the people who went crazy when Mr. Toad was replaced by the Pooh ride at WDW. I felt the same way when they did it to the Country Bear Playhouse at DL in 2001. It's funny that DL's Pooh ride is nowhere as popular at the Florida version, but they are the same. Go figure.

My understanding is that DL's Pooh is not the same as WDW's (and of course Tokyo's blows them both away). I love the original Country Bears show. The Great Outdoors show stunk. But I thought that a well-done update (given the popularity of country and roots music) might help keep Country Bears around.