PDA

View Full Version : "Theatre" at DL



merlinjones
07-19-2002, 07:00 AM
One aspect of the Disneyland entertainment debacle we are not hearing enough about comes down simply to taste and intent.

I don't car how cheap the show is, the writing and performance at nearly all of the offerings is extremely condescending. I suspect that the
genesis of this was somebody's experience in "children's theatre" or "street theatre" workshops of the PC variety, which tend to treat and interact with children from a preachy parental point-of-view, as if they were beneficently holding court at the Sunshine School.

Getting kids to scream is not entertianment.

This "gloves on" PBS approach sounds like another New York import, and is typical in all areas of the Company today of execs who don't get (or want to) the whole Walt Disney approach to entertainment, which assumes that kids are smarter than adults. Instead they want to project their own brand of
elitist wank-off "because these fly-over people are too stupid to get it anyway" approach to entertaining "the masses".

"It's just for kids" is a deadly phrase that has no merit in the philosophy of true Disney entertainment.

True Disney entertainment aims upward - - it comes from the inner child and connects with the inner child of any age group. It does not go downward - - coming from the parent or adult. Heavy handedness and lack of respect for your target audience insures you will connect with no
one. This is one of the same problems they have at Disney TV Animation with the offensive animated feature sequels, etc, etc.

What they need are some grown up kids - - cartoonist type storytellers and slightly kooky entertainers who really believe in the characters and their fantasy worlds... and don't just view them as mass marketing images and products to use for political agendas and PC re-education - - or a sorry placeholder for their stalled lofty careers on Broadway or in live-action film.

Theatre cronyism has been a bane to the animation divisions (after the death of the talented Walt-loving Howard Ashman), and now through Theatrical's control over park entertainment, the disease spreads.

Walt always respected his audience at any budget. Something many of the current WDC execs seem incapable of. Surely the shareholders can't be held responsible for taste and imagination and respect (or lack thereof).

It's from real Walt Disney style full-bodied family entertainment that the stockholders dreams are made - - when the inner child is pleased they make a lot of cash.

Bill Catherall
07-19-2002, 07:20 AM
Are you refering to one particular show, or just a general lack of proper show business?

merlinjones
07-19-2002, 07:28 AM
>>Are you refering to one particular show, or just a general lack of proper show business?<<

In general (Blast! obviously excepted), the recent character shows and street entertainment as a whole (Farmer Mickey, Monsters Inc, Lilo and Stitch luau, Club Buzz, etc. etc.) are highly condescending and offer very little full-bodied entertainment for a family audience. There is a lack of suspenion of disbelief in the material and lack of respect for the audience and simply bad writing.

Remember the Golden Horseshoe and Tahitian Terrace revues... even the Kids of the Kingdom? Those were the days!

Ghoulish Delight
07-19-2002, 08:06 AM
Very true. And it's not just Disney. It's a sad trend in entertainment period. Everyone seems to be afraid to aim any entertainment at kids that might "go over their heads." But everyone seems to be forgetting two things. 1) Kids are more intelligent than people generally give them credit for. 2) The best childrens' entertainment, the shows, books, and movies that have lasting power always have content that goes over kids' heads. Look at Alice in Woderland. Look at Bugs Bunny for crying out loud. Kids don't get every joke, or subtle inuendo. But they manage to be entertaining without pandering to lowest common denominator.

Bill Catherall
07-19-2002, 08:10 AM
Originally posted by merlinjones
Remember the Golden Horseshoe and Tahitian Terrace revues...
Yes. I never grew tired of those shows. We would go see them both almost every visit. And if they still had them my kids would also love them.

Ghoulish Delight
07-19-2002, 08:28 AM
Ugh. I just got through reading the DIG. How depressing. I think, as the "source" pointed out, the most telling line was "And so, when we are faced with the decision to do what's right versus what will make money, 9 times out of 10 we have to choose what will make money." Good God. That's the most short-sighted view, it makes me want to vomit.

You don't make money by putting out crap! I love how the argument is "Tokyo Disney is privately owned, therefore has the freedom to make different decissions" blah blah blah. You know what? The people walking in the front gate don't know the difference! Like being publicly owned somehow changes what does and doesn't work in entertainment?! Get a freaking clue! I'm a stockholder. I don't want crap at Disneyland! Where do they get that idea.

Good shows mean repeat business. Good shows mean good word of mouth which means NEW business. Good shows means satisfied, loyal performers, which means more good shows. Good shows means longevity.

Bad shows means bored, angry parents who won't come back. Bad shows means terrible word of mouth which will keep people away in droves. Bad shows means performers whose intelligence is being insulted and whose talent (and, as Al said, these are talented people stuck in terrible shows) is being wasted.

They say they are publicly owned, so are accountable to the stock holders. Well, anyone want to point out to them that since they've started this new era of park operations, the stock has gone nowhere but down? What's going to clue them in? Bad attendence, bad word of mouth, falling stock prices. Oh yeah, sounds like the Pressler/Harris/Hamburger/etc. regime REALLY has thier act together :rolleyes:

Hyperboy
07-19-2002, 09:19 AM
And if they are ixnaying Billy Hill and the Hillbillies, as Al alluded to at the end of the DIG Update today, we had better start flooding City Hall with complaints.

I mean, think about what Disneyland "entertainment" would put in it's place? Maybe, oh boy, we could have a Western Mickey nod his head while a performer screams at the audience and the kids scream back. Whee! :mad:

merlinjones
07-19-2002, 12:16 PM
Ghoulish Delight, you have hit the issues right on the grave!

hbquikcomjamesl
07-19-2002, 12:54 PM
Respect for the audience is everything. Consider two of the longest-running children's shows on television: Captain Kangaroo (i.e., the original, with Bob Keeshan) and Mister Rogers' Neighborhood. Both shows have produced enough episodes that they could run in strip syndication for decades without a single rerun. Why did they last so long? Because both Keeshan and Rogers (who did, incidentally, do guest appearances on each other's shows) managed to play (and talk) TO children without playing (or talking) DOWN to them. Both felt that children deserved the very best entertainment, even if they weren't the ones paying the bills, and both managed, through a refusal to compromise on respect or on principles, to deliver exactly that. As a result, much of the sketch comedy on Captain Kangaroo was better than anything that could be found on prime time, and Mister Rogers' Neighborhood, while not exactly an everflowing fount of sketch comedy (and often the butt of an awful lot of comedy, not all in good taste), had excellent musical and "how things work" features.

As to the ALL the classic animated cartoons and features, and some early (and, indeed, contemporary) television animation, we must not forget that these films were NOT intended specifically for children. Not Mickey Mouse, not Silly Symphonies, not The Flintstones, not The Jetsons, not the classic Warner Bros. shorts. They were intended for EVERYBODY, just as the newspaper comics section is intended for EVERYBODY. (I was three when my father first started reading "Beetle Bailey" to me every evening; I still read Beetle Bailey, 37 years later).

Incidentally, I loved the Beauty and the Beast stage shows (I remember at least two), was profoundly UNimpressed with Animazement, and UTTERLY LOATHED "Waste of Time" (I'd have walked out on it, but I kept hoping it would get better. The glossary of a classic programming text defines an "optimist" as a programmer who codes in ink; guess what: I code in ink.)

wonderful
07-19-2002, 01:19 PM
Amazingly, there are not that many comments coming in about the quality of entertainment in the parks... not to City Hall or the Guest Relations Lobby or to the survey takers. Maybe one a day, if that.
The saddest thing is to see both children and adults walk away from shows with a "jeeze... I wasted my time on THAT?" look on their face. It makes me sick. If it truly IS about the "bottom line" why on earth would anyone waste money on six or seven severely sub-standard shows rather than producing one or two quality shows? The "Scream at the Harry Blue Monsters" and Ohana Luaus are rolled out without any type of Cast Member or AP "previews" because everyone knows what anyone with half a brain would say: "Try again... and I mean TRY!"
A perfect example of a show that could be produced on a fairly small budget yet still provide the audience with something more than screaming kids or paper detective badges is the new show at the castle in WDW. Many, many classic characters, a story line that makes sense, and very minimal props... I'd suggest it to anyone. I understand that DLR is not Tokyo, but if one compares it to WDW it still falls way below standard as far as entertainment goes.
Don't get me started on the parade...