Modern Disney and the difference of enthusiasm vs. 'selling' future projects

[RegionsBeyond]

At the outset, if you will, please watch this video clip as an illustrative example which got me thinking about this topic.



For the sake of context, this episode of the Disneyland TV show aired in 1965 and centered on Disneyland's 'tencennial' anniversary. Walt took the young woman (Julie Reihm) and introduced her to various designers and Imagineers, and most notably showed her previews of Pirates and Haunted Mansion. This segment, with the Plaza Inn, nearly equals the length of time spent talking with Marc Davis about the HM. It is clear Walt was excited about the Plaza Inn visibly, and wanted to share such, even giving it was something as 'mundane' as a new tray-slide restaurant competing for air time with a large, million-dollar expansion to the park and two new E-ticket attractions. He gave a brief tease of each, in the end, talking about overall decor and ambiance, style.

Now, today, the Disney Parks arm widely publicizes new additions, including stores, restaurants, even single architectural elements and especially 'insider' references and homages. They do this via blog format and online videos, which will spread quickly amongst the fans who know where to look and share such in preview centers in the parks. The level of ‘enthusiasm’ would seem to be there on a surface level, still, for such projects and I have no doubt designers put a lot of effort and genuine thought and desire to please guests into the featured projects.

The difference is…in 1965, when that video clip aired…that was a nationwide TV show. There was no widespread niche demand market for backstage Disneyland info that the company fed or had contact with each other. Unless you went to the park and got a souvenir book with some ‘coming attractions’ material, that would be all you saw: what the one-hour weekly program chose to share, which looking back is a tiny sliver of the work and design that went into Disneyland’s operation.

Today, the material coming out (about the food service of the parks, attractions and areas being built, homages to the past, backstage operations, etc) all has the feeling of a hard sell to me: lacks real personal connection of any sort, but the content is generated for the internet and hardcore guests just in kind of a ‘keep churning it out’ method which feels like an obligation or desire to prove how detailed and appreciative of the past they are, rather than actual enthusiasm as Walt shows just talking about how neat this new eating place will be.

I am grateful for the in depth coverage and there genuinely is some neat material and talented folks on display talking about their work: but the massive, slickly produced feel of going into minute detail or things the average guest won't even consider does, in the end, come off as a push to 'sell' just how much the management loves these references to the past and wants each and every fan to find all the hidden references. I have posted before about the Hidden Mickey mentality winning out over larger ambiance or experience in some cases, and this in some ways is a development of that mindset (find your favorite Disney characters in Small World!).

But moreso, it is also a shift in priority from letting the future developments win you over by themselves, via being filled with ambiance or detail, and the guests discovering them in person and 'uncovering' all the secrets to marketing the whole project with basic 100 percent clarity from the word go. When Fantasmic! and Indiana Jones Adventure debuted, there was concept art, sure, and teases of the attractions: comparatively, basically the whole structure of Little Mermaid and World of Color were explicitly laid out in advance, right down to a listing of show scenes and extensive video coverage of infrastructure being built/finalized AA figures being installed. Carsland and Radiator Springs Racers does seem to be an exception to this, with lots of ambiance carrying the area and the ride itself basically not being 'spoiled' in advance, which I am very grateful for.

I personally take this as being far beyond mere 'excitement' and desire to show something the designers love and want folks to see: it’s all very calculated and goes for a vibe of “We’ll tell you everything about every project and cram it with inside references!” rather than leaving anything to be discovered or letting ambiance carry the finished product as in the old days.

The same goes for the Buena Vista Street expansion. I have no doubt the finished product will be high quality and evocative, fun to explore. But the practice of talking about every single store name and significance, beating the customer over the head with details and how they relate to the company's past, backstory...to me, that all feels very forced and trying too hard to show the company is enthusiastic, while coming off as a slightly clueless push to win over the niche audience by sheer volume of advance material available. I do not for a minute think this desire to share is bad, or don't wish to see any hints of what is to come: I am grateful for seeing some glimpses of the process behind the scenes. Merely, sometimes, less truly is more…but modern park management and the upper levels don't seem to understand the concept of 'less' or not treating everything like a hard sell to more dedicated fans, designed to demonstrate exactly how much the upcoming additions revere the past, while concurrently promoting it like a t-shirt or limited-edition collectible they want to sell you.


Just my own thoughts on the whole thing, at any rate...folks more than welcome to have differing opinions.

[Mr Wiggins]

^ Absolutely excellent post.

[whitestrat]

I absolutely agree^^

It went from one man's dream and personal passion, to a publicly traded company with no real concerned hand at the helm. (I'm symplifying of course)

[lazyboy97O]

The Walt Disney Company has lost much of its institutional history. So many within no longer see Disney as a career, just a stepping stone and another job. The enthusiasm reads as feigned because, in so many circumstances, that is exactly what is happening. Instead of carrying on the traditions and processes, which they barely understand, they overload on what has already been established as "Disney" and make it the emphasis.

I know I may be starting to sound like a broken record, but just look at Buena Vista Street. All of this research and effort put into creating this 1920s/1930s Los Angeles environment that is being overlaid with an anachronistic set of Disney history references. And for what purpose? So that Disney can make blog posts for fans about how into Disney history they [Disney] are, just like the fans. I do not at all believe that Buena Vista Street was conceived from its beginning to include these references.

This is also why Disney is any ways felt the need to create D23. For years there had been even small things like Vault Disney and small park policies that carried on the history and tradition of the Company. Now we have Disney produced videos and magazines featuring Disney employees writing about how they too are fans. People did not need to be convinced that Disney employees were fans, it was read in the results of their labors.

What bothers me the most however is the degree to which too many fans just eat it all up. In too many instances it seems to me that it has ceased to be about learning about an interest for one's own love and passion, but in order to out do others. It is an unearned and arrogant knowledge by which one boasts to others because he knows where the Hidden Mickey's are located, for whom the shop is named, how that shade of blue is the same Pantone color code from this old short, etc. It is not an understanding of design and socio-cultural theory, themes of history or anything else that would have a substantive value, just a massing of bits from which one can grab to show off Disney knowledge and claim superiority to other fans.

[RegionsBeyond]

Good post, lazyboy. I do admit some of the material they offer is good...concept art, interviews with front of line designers and etc. But the use of it as a tool to know 'insider secrets' instead of letting things be discovered, I agree, is quite a step downwards in quality of delivery.

I understand why it folded, of course...and personal reasons certainly honorable, but to me, The E-Ticket magazine was a better, more truthful, loving and worthwhile publication than anything Disney has ever published in-house just as an example. D23 magazine simply can't compare.

[lazyboy97O]

I unfortunately have never read an issue of The E-Ticket.

[RegionsBeyond]

I unfortunately have never read an issue of The E-Ticket.

Ah, I am sorry to hear it...truly a quality publication which unfortunately ceased being published after the untimely death of one of the brothers who put it together. It is still available through the Walt Disney Family Museum via some back issues and CD-ROM collections of content.

[WED]

Nicely thought out and expressed.

All of this stuff is subjective, of course, so nobody is wrong per se. That said, I'm mention a few things:

1) The "spoiling details" mentality isn't a Disney phenomenon so much as a world/internet phenomenon. Look at how movies are marketed now vs. 30 years ago. Look at sites like "Ain't it Cool News" where fans willingly ruin almost every detail of a new film. This doesn't make it "right" for Disney to do, of course, but I think this phenomenon is a much larger issue.

2) If Disney did the same TV style presentation as the one you highlight from 1965, it wouldn't mean the same thing today. TV is still #1 but it means less, in general. Multi-faceted approaches focusing on online, print, and social (think conventions) are considered more effective. You didn't think D23 being born while the Disney channel is basically ignored as a promotional arm was a coincidence, did you.

I'm not sure what the 2012 marketing equivalent of that 1965 one-hour TV special would be these days, but it wouldn't be a one hour TV special.

3) I think D23 the magazine is actually pretty great. The content is usually pretty good with a minimum of "hot new thing" pandering, its insanely well-produced, and at 4 times a year the frequency is just right to not feel left wanting or overwhelmed. I think D23 the magazine gets unfairly lumped in with other D23 complaints, honestly. It's not "E-ticket", but that's for both good and bad.

Any conversation about Disney marketing needs to recognize that Disney's formerly "general" marketing died long ago and became a collection of targeted marketing. Instead of trying to hit everybody with one ad, attraction, or restaurant, they now try to target certain things and certain crowds. D23 was their recognition and response to the "Disney fan" market. Disney didn't really ever acknowledge there was such a thing as a "Disney fan" until recently. This has had benefits, but also may have led to some heavy handedness.

[RegionsBeyond]

Good points, WED, thank you. You are correct of the spoiler details being a larger phenomenon with TV shows, movies, etc....it just is a shame it has infiltrated the Disney parks marketing mindset too, to me...given the fact I rate a good theme park experience/new ride or area likely higher in repeat value or appeal than a TV show. But that is, as you say, rather subjective

Regarding the D23 magazine...I wouldn't by any means call it 'bad', myself. I rather liked the Haunted Mansion special dedicated article in the 40th Anniversary issue. But it is not one (as a non-member) I've been compelled to buy past the first issue and the HM special, just due to it covering things that come off as 'fluff pieces' to me. The old Disney News was admittedly about the same ratio of interesting park bits to promotions for TV shows/movies I wasn't interested in, so that's nothing new in my case...

[toonaspie]

The Walt Disney Company has lost much of its institutional history. So many within no longer see Disney as a career, just a stepping stone and another job. The enthusiasm reads as feigned because, in so many circumstances, that is exactly what is happening. Instead of carrying on the traditions and processes, which they barely understand, they overload on what has already been established as "Disney" and make it the emphasis.

I know I may be starting to sound like a broken record, but just look at Buena Vista Street. All of this research and effort put into creating this 1920s/1930s Los Angeles environment that is being overlaid with an anachronistic set of Disney history references. And for what purpose? So that Disney can make blog posts for fans about how into Disney history they [Disney] are, just like the fans. I do not at all believe that Buena Vista Street was conceived from its beginning to include these references.

This is also why Disney is any ways felt the need to create D23. For years there had been even small things like Vault Disney and small park policies that carried on the history and tradition of the Company. Now we have Disney produced videos and magazines featuring Disney employees writing about how they too are fans. People did not need to be convinced that Disney employees were fans, it was read in the results of their labors.

What bothers me the most however is the degree to which too many fans just eat it all up. In too many instances it seems to me that it has ceased to be about learning about an interest for one's own love and passion, but in order to out do others. It is an unearned and arrogant knowledge by which one boasts to others because he knows where the Hidden Mickey's are located, for whom the shop is named, how that shade of blue is the same Pantone color code from this old short, etc. It is not an understanding of design and socio-cultural theory, themes of history or anything else that would have a substantive value, just a massing of bits from which one can grab to show off Disney knowledge and claim superiority to other fans.

If only this attitude by Disney was lended toward their blurays. Then we would get actual good special features.

Funny how when WWoHP was opening in 2010 they actually had a 30 min TV special devoted to it. I would love to see something similar done with the new DCA if we're lucky.

[RegionsBeyond]

If only this attitude by Disney was lended toward their blurays. Then we would get actual good special features.

Funny how when WWoHP was opening in 2010 they actually had a 30 min TV special devoted to it. I would love to see something similar done with the new DCA if we're lucky.

There was a DCA opening special which I lately re-watched on YouTube. Overall, very awkward and bad with at-the-time ABC program stars...Colin Mochrie was somewhat enjoyable, but doesn't age well at all. A new TV special would be nice, but Disney's newer broadcast TV specials err very heavily on the painful kitsch side....but they could certainly try again without the awkward celebrity hosts being shoehorned into scripted bits.

[Cory Gross]

...but doesn't age well at all. A new TV special would be nice, but Disney's newer broadcast TV specials err very heavily on the painful kitsch side.

As opposed to Kurt Russell and the Osmonds singing Down on the Corner from the double-decker omnibus? ^_~

I might go in the opposite direction from these complaints and say that one of the things that surprises me is how Disney is underutilizing their assets to promote the parks. In Walt's day (spoken like an old man), Expedition Everest would have had at least one full Disneyland episode devoted to it. Unfortunately, Disney has been on the wrong bside of the technological bell curve since Walt and hasn't really figured out how to utilize its resources to the fullest. I mean, my biggest complaint with D23 is that the whole idea of trying to sell a magazine full of press releases as an "official fan club" in an age of social media is ludicrous. On the other hand, I loved VMK even though it was pure advertizing.

I do agree that there is too much "hey we're fans too!"-ism that can lead to bad design choices (i.e.: the contrived storylines of Buena Vista St., the WDW HM queue), but if anything it would be nice to see more creative promotion of the parks.

[RegionsBeyond]

I am all for creative promotion of the park elements, Cory...did you ever see the Travel Channel special with Joe Rohde going to the Himalayas for inspiration? It is pretty much what you describe, and this one exists too:

<br>

There is a difference between these specials and the online snippets of content talking about the park history as you mention, like an added element where it might not be needed to 'reinforce' unneeded design. And yes, there were some really cheesy choices in the old show too....but the charm of a weird musical number integrated with park tour here or there to me is more palatable than say, Raven Symone or the Jonas Brothers overacting their way through one of the parks

[Cory Gross]

That show was great! And leave it to someone not Disney to do it right ^_~

There was definitely a charming cheeseball factor to a lot of those early promo bits on Disneyland/Wonderful World of... Walt's own performance in I Captured the King of the Leprechauns springs to mind. I like what you said about "an added element where it might not be needed to 'reinforce' unneeded design." Way down at the core, a lot of it depends on what it is you're trying to promote anyways.

[DLFreak71]

People did not need to be convinced that Disney employees were fans, it was read in the results of their labors.

I love this!!