Mouse Extra

Bob Iger was recently quoted on CNN Money as saying the following:

“And not everything has to be a franchise. I was recently asked whether “Ratatouille” was a franchise. I said no: “Ratatouille” is an extremely good animated film and will be a classic unto itself, but it is not a franchise. You are not going to see “Ratatouille” attractions in parks. When you look at “Toy Story,” we’re making our third film, we’re opening two Toy Story Mania attractions at parks this summer, we have a very strong consumer products line, we have a “Toy Story” musical opening on the cruise line, we have a game in development - that’s a franchise.”

Of course, this nips in the bud the many rumors of a Ratatouille “wild mouse” coaster in Disney Hollywood Studios, a clone of the Crush Coaster from the Paris park. Which is too bad, since I think a wild ride through the sewers of Paris as a rat might have been fun. I feel Ratatouille is one of the better Pixar films.

But the real problem is the reasoning behind this. I can certainly live without a Ratatouille coaster, but i don’t want all future attractions restricted to those of a franchise. Does everything have to be based on the Princesses or Toy Story? Yes, I know Expedition Everest is not a “franchise” based attraction, not a pirate to be found anywhere. But that seems to be the exception to the rule these days. I hope this is not a sign of the end of original attractions like the Haunted Mansion or Soarin’ being imagineered. Lets hope not!

This morning’s posting over at Jim Hill Media deals with the problems associated with the shrinking popularity of Disney’s pirates franchise.  Apparently the Pirates and Princesses Party is still struggling and Disney is cutting some costs to make it more profitable.  But perhaps the most disappointing is the red light given to the often rumored Tortuga restaurant project.

“So why didn’t the ‘Tortuga’ project go forward?,” you ask. Well, in addition to the problems associated with the “Pirates & Princess Party” and those declining “Pirates of the Caribbean” merchandise sales … There was the matter of what it would cost to change the Adventureland Veranda from a quick service facility to a full service restaurant.

Then when you factor in that the Magic Kingdom doesn’t really need a brand-new full service restaurant right now (Why For? Well, while places like Liberty Tree Tavern and the Crystal Palace are typically running at 90 - 95% occupancy at lunch & dinner these days, there are still in-park facilities like Tony’s Town Square that will have empty tables at various times of the day. So why should WDW officials spend the money necessary to add a brand-new dining facility to the Magic Kingdom when that theme park isn’t really making full use of the restaurants that it already has?) … It just didn’t make sense to spend the money now that would be necessary to turn the Adventureland Veranda into a “Pirates of the Caribbean” -themed dining experience.

There are a couple of things I find interesting in this analysis.  First, is the cost of converting a quick service into a full service restaurant so high that Disney would find the investment too much to handle?  That seems to be a bit of a stretch to me.  While kitchen equipment and renovations may be difficult, it is only a drop of what Disney puts into many other projects built from the ground up.  This sounds like a rationalization to me.

Second, I also have to question the conclusion that the Magic Kingdom does not need a new full service restaurant.  The 90-95% capacity seen at the Crystal Palace and the Liberty Tree is rather high, and certainly does not mean another would not be attended.  Many people don’t go to these places because they know how crowded it can be at lunch and dinner times.  Also, one is a buffet and the other family style, so a regular order-off-the-menu place would be a welcome addition.  And let’s be honest, Tony’s Town Square has empty tables because it isn’t all that great.

The reason for this ship being scuttled is much more obvious then that.  It seems the popularity of the entire Pirates franchise took a shot to the hull that left it crippled and sinking, and it was called “At World’s End”.  The film may have done well at the box office, but it failed to generate the cross generational appeal Disney was banking on.  The wit-filled swashbuckling that made adults laugh and kids run to find the nearest household object that could be imagined into a sword was replaced with a convoluted and way too dark storyline that anyone under 16 struggled to follow, and some of us more than twice that age did too.  Now Disney is left with a franchise that needs to be rebuilt before it can sail again.

I don’t care what any Hollywood elitist tells me.  I will harp on this forever.  Ratatouille deserved to be nominated for Best Picture.  But the Academy Award nominations just came out and the Disney-Pixar film was not on the list.

However all was not lost.  Amazingly the Academy members, who obviously feel that animated films are beneath them, managed to nominate Ratatouille for Best Original Screenplay.  All of the experts are calling this nomination a “big surprise”.  I wonder, is it surprise because they felt something else should be nominated?  No, they feel it is a surprise because even though they feel this great film should be awarded, no one expected the snobbery to give any plaudits to a “kid’s film”.

In 2001 the Oscars added a category for “Best Animated Feature Film”.  Since that time, we can pretty much guarantee that “Beauty and the Beast” will be the last animated film nominated in the Best Picture category.  One would have thought that Ratatouille might have busted through that firewall.  Apparently that is not the case.

So, congratulations to the folks at Pixar for this surprising nomination.  The “best reviewed film of the year” gets a little love after all.  But wouldn’t you think being so positively reviewed would help get it a “Best Picture” nomination?

There is an article I have been meaning to discuss here for a couple of days and have been unable to get around to it until today.  It is this New York Times piece by Michael Cieply from this past week that goes into detail about Ratatouille’s  chances in the Best Picture category at this year’s Oscar Awards and the big choices Disney and Pixar have in front of them in this regard.

As the awards season heats up, the Walt Disney Company and its Pixar Animation Studios unit have been wrestling with a conundrum posed by their warmly received, computer-animated fable about a rat who aspires to become a Parisian chef: Any move to promote it as the year’s best picture might lead to ballot-splitting that would diminish its chances of getting the less prestigious but more easily won Oscar for best animated film.

It is an amazingly complicated and intricate situation.  You would logically assume that if one thinks it is the best picture, that one would also think it is the year’s best animated feature as well.  But apparently such simple logic doesn’t’ apply to the academy.  I don’t know why I am so shocked by this.  I can’t remember the last time I agreed with their decisions anyway.  Here’s a taste of what I mean…

The studios’ reluctance to advance their animated wares as candidates for best picture is enforced by a perception that actors, the academy’s largest branch, with about 20 percent of the membership, are reluctant to honor movies without live performances. Additionally, the academy has a definite allergy to family fare, like the G-rated “Ratatouille”: 28 R-rated films have been nominated for best picture in the last 10 years, while only two PG-rated movies — “Finding Neverland” and “Good Night, and Good Luck” — have. And none with a G rating have made the cut.

The simple fact of the matter is that Ratatouille is a great film, and people who know me know that I do not hand out this kind of praise easily for a film.  (Here’s my review if you are interested)  There was nothing about it that wasn’t terrific.  It was an amazing visual journey that also just happened to have a truly wonderful story.  This film should be nominated and strongly considered for Best Picture, and win the animated award easily, regardless of whatever nonsensical stupidity academy members like to use for reasoning when voting. 

If I were Disney I would shoot for the moon.  A nomination for Best Picture should be in itself a deserved achievement and a realistic one.  However, I do understand why they think the year’s best film will not win the award.  It rarely does.  Here’s hoping that this year is an exception.  Pay attention academy members!  If you haven’t seen it because cartoons are somehow beneath your intellectual prowess, you owe it to yourself and the entire industry to give this masterpiece the chance it deserves.

Enchanted is a film that has been talked about and anticipated by Disney fans for months.  Since the concept art first came out and fans read the plot of a cartoon princess making her way to New York, people were excited about combining Disney’s return to hand drawn animation with the potential of a really fun live action film.  Enchanted delivers the goods, but it is certainly not without problems and lost opportunities.

                                              photo copyright Disney Enterprises 2007

The opening sequence is fully animated and it has a perfectly nostalgic feel to it, bringing that “multi-plane camera” look back in true classic Disney fashion.  But at the same time, it has a very modern look as well.  Think of Snow White meets Beauty and the Beast and you get my drift.   The main character is a girl named Giselle and she has a family of animal friends that all have their roots firmly planted in classic Disney animated animals.  It certainly is done in a tongue-in-cheek manner, but never turns ridiculous.  It is a parody to be sure, but not one that is in your face.

The story sees Giselle fall in love at first sight with a prince named Edward who seems to embody all the Disney princes of the past without any of their brains.  His mother is Queen Narissa of the storybook land Andalasia, and she doesn’t want these two love birds to get married and her throne to be threatened.  So she disguises herself as a near duplicate of Snow White’s evil witch and sends her future daughter-in-law down a well that leads to a terrible place, midtown Manhattan.  (Perhaps I am the only one who thinks Manhattan is a much nicer place than Andalasia, but that’s beside the point.)  It is there she is helped out of the rain by a lawyer named Robert and his daughter Morgan, who introduce her to the “real” world.

As we transition into live-action, the film falters slightly and takes a bit of time to get going.  The opening sequence of Giselle in Times Square has all the average New York City clichés and stereotypes and was particularly uninventive.  But just when you think this is going to turn into a boring and unimaginative film it turns back to the not-so-gentle poking at classic Disney films.  When in need of friends, Giselle sings out her window to call some animals to her side.  Instead of adorable chipmunks, rabbits and deer, she gets very real looking flies, rats and pigeons.  It is a terrifically funny scene and a perfect parody, but not so over-the-top that you can’t wait for it to end.  Neither is the big song scene in Central Park where everyone comes to sing and dance alongside the main character in perfect “Under the Sea” style.

                                                                                                             photo copyright Disney Enterprises 2007

But the story is where the film misses some great opportunities.  At first it appeared as though Giselle was going to use her fantasyland innocence to help Robert find his inner romantic and improve his sputtering relationship with a girl he has been with for five years, while Robert helps Giselle get back to her prince.  But instead it takes the much more predictable boy-meets-girl approach, which makes the ending terribly anti-climactic. 

The film also makes itself painfully obvious that it is another tool in the “Princess” franchise Disney has been pushing throughout the company, as well as other marketing campaigns. “Dreams come true” is an often used theme in the film, and the Bippity Boppity Boutique nearly made an appearance at the end.  This is not ever blatant enough to detract from the film’s quality, but Disney fans will certainly not find this hard to pick up on.

My only other complaint is with the music.  It is not bad at all, but it isn’t terrific either.  Disney’s great films are known for their immensely memorable tunes that stay in your head for weeks after you leave the theater.  Enchanted sets the stage for these kinds of songs, but it never delivers.  Perhaps the issue is that the film’s producers wanted the music to be more humorous then the typical Disney film, but that doesn’t mean it has to be pedestrian as well.

I must say that overall Enchanted left me feeling good about paying the money for a ticket.  It was never ridiculous, but always pleasantly goofy.  It walks a fine line between quirky and stupid and it walks it very well.  It’s lighthearted feel, sense of humor about itself and ability to humorously poke fun at the great movies that came before it was enough to keep it better than some of the story ideas and music that might not have been so impressive.  Kids will adore it, and adults will find it keeps them smiling.

It appears as though Disney’s new film “Enchanted” is the cash generator Disney was hoping for and that many predicted it would be.  According to the Los Angeles Times, the new live action film brought in around $50 million over the holiday weekend.

The PG-rated Walt Disney Co. picture, starring Amy Adams as an animated princess whisked to modern-day, live-action Manhattan, grossed an estimated $50 million from Wednesday through Sunday at U.S. and Canadian theaters, one of the biggest hauls ever for the Thanksgiving period.

The concept and trailers for this film both look fantastic and the reviews have mostly been positive.  That along with a marketing full-court press usually makes for financial success.  I plan on seeing the film this afternoon, so check back later for my review.