Or: Fan mail from a flounder!!
You surely can't deny that the animated films division made a huge comeback during the Eisner years, can you?
I do not deny it. And at first glance it seems as though Ei$ner should indeed take credit for the recent "classics". I know my kids enjoyed them, as have I. Very good films. Very good indeed. But the purpose of this thread was not to look at press clips and appearances, but to delve a little deeper. To take
all the actions collectively to see if they support the spin. So, while we do not dispute the fact that these films were made under Ei$ner's watch, just what did he do to help the process or (more importantly) make sure things didn't degrade after a few successes? You seemed to address that question in almost the same way I would have.
Oh, I know you and AV will state that others were allowed to do what they do best and I don't dispute that. But one man, the Midget, is associated with several of these "blockbusters" and brought the Disney name front and center. Now I know the much ballyhooed departure of Katzenberg made Mikey look like a horses***
The only thing I would have brought out that you didn't was the Rescuers fiasco. And how he wanted to deep-six Mermaid. Smart kind of guy, isn't he?
Now, in fairness you do continue the thought with:
but the point is, the movies were made. Katzenberg made them. Who was directly responsible for the hiring of Katzenberg? Credit = Eisner.
Well, I don't know for sure who exactly hired him. Was he part of the deal (Wells, etc.)? Or a crony from Paramount? Maybe AV has the answer. But to me it's irrelevant. I think the bottom line is his very questionable judgement as to the right Disney vehicle (Mermaid vs. Rescuers) and how he let success slip through his fingers and actually become a driving force for the competition!! That's just plain stupid!
Next you mention the growth of the brand. And I will admit that he has a certain obsession with "branding". But you continue with:
What has happened since (devaluation & over saturation are different subjects) and do not diminish the fact that world wide brand recognition & family entertainment recognition came to Disney in unprecedented fashion during the Eisner years. Credit = Eisner.
PETER!!! It is
not a different subject!! It is what happens when you single-mindedly push the brand down everyone's throat!! It is the natural consequence of short term gains over long range planning!! It's just like Millionaire. You have to admit that they pushed that show (and milked that show) so hard over the last year or so that everyone in the country knows about. You can't turn on ABC (or even other entertainment news shows) without seeing something about it. Almost every day of the week! But what good is that if NO ONE IS WATCHING!!!??? Or if it seems like noting more than cheap hype? SO yes, I'll credit = Ei$ner with the devaluation & over saturation of the Disney name!!! (say, who's side are you on, anyway?
)
WDW expansion. Well, whole threads have been created relative to this issue. I think we all know most of the facts. Which is why I wanted to discuss the expansion in a little bit different light. Not whether or not it should have happened at all, but what choices were made along the way. I know it's terribly subjective, but I personally feel a little cheated when I think about 'what could have been'. And at the same time I feel a little bit guilty criticizing such wonderful places! But, come on! How many "American" made resorts do we need!? Is there really that much of a difference between them? However, I've covered that ground before (see first post in thread).
But you bring up a whole different spin on it. You say:
Again the recent downturns may expose mistakes in managing this growth but they do not erase the fact that these tremendous 'happenings' occurred. Credit = Eisner.
Yes! Credit him indeed! For being ridiculously greedy during the unprecedented good times. And for not being able to foresee that someday the good times may end (something taught in "Basic Business 101) and we would see Disney shuttering resorts, reminiscent of a going out of business sale!! (Did they soap the windows of Port Orleans?) Credit = Ei$ner!!
SO far Capt
Peter, I haven't found one single solitary thing that isn't tainted somehow. (with the exception of the Broadway stuff. But if I mentioned that I couldn't have written "one single solitary thing". And I really like that phrase!!)
It doesn't mean it's all bad, it just means he isn't the guy for Disney!!!
PS: Has anyone else noticed the way Bob O seems to hit the mark everytime!