Hell-bent on killing the golden goose

[Mike Blakesley]

Here's what will happen: Eventually, more and more entertainment will be animated, and more and more "celebrities" will be artificial. The celebrities are forcing this to happen. After all, who cares about today's "stars?" They are all steadily working themselves into oblivion anyway, what with all their political talk and general misbehavior. People used to look up to them, but no longer. With today's ever-improving animation, making credible, photo-realistic "actors" will be doable. You won't be able to tell that it's animated. Then, just add a voice and a "personality" (using AI, of course), make a movie starring this new creation, and if it's a hit, BOOM now you've got a new celebrity that can be marketed for eternity without ever growing old. It's like Bugs Bunny, but with imitation people that aren't distinguishable from real humans.

I'm like Frank. I think this kind of future looks horrible, but it's probably going to go down something like the above. I mean, how you gonna stop it? Certainly not by going on strike.

[Frank Cox]

https://vocaloid.fandom.com/wiki/Hatsune_Miku

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhl5afLEKdo

[Bobby Henderson]

This AI shit is going to be another slice on the throats of major Hollywood studios as they try to decapitate themselves. It's going to be yet another thing that literally de-values movies.

If a movie is made with AI versions of actors why should I, as the customer, see any value in buying that product? Why am I going to want to pay money to see it, much less want to waste hours of my life watching it? It's bad enough so much of what we see on screen anymore is a contrivance of "digital back lot" work. Hell, when I'm watching a cartoon at least I know the voices are real. That won't be the case where this AI stuff is heading.

I think it's pretty funny The Mouse House is reeling lately. They price-gouged the hell out of theme park customers for a little too long. The combination of that and mis-steps in the "culture wars" have caused a big drop-off in customer traffic. Even worse: Disney shot themselves in the face with their Disney+ "strategy." Lots of Americans are struggling financially, families in particular. It costs a lot of money for a family to visit a cinema. The thing the short release windows have done is train families to stay home. There is hardly any wait at all for a new Disney-Pixar-Marvel-Star Wars movie to show up on TV. It's not like they have to wait a year or two. And the digital picture quality on the TV is going to be about the same as it is in the theater. So the families stay home to save a buck. And they also stay home because the product from The Mouse House lately has not been so good. People are getting worn out on studios releasing the same old shit.

I'd like to see writers and actors get treated fairly in this environment, but I get the feeling they're on a sinking ship. Series TV may live on in some form, although I hardly ever want to watch cable or broadcast TV due to all the shit they show. For crying out loud, they're showing fucking game shows in prime time now on broadcast TV. That and multiple nights of "The Bachelor." Live sports is about the only thing that interests me on TV now, and that's only to a limited extent. I seem to be spending more and more hours of my evening listening to music on my ear buds while I lift weights at the gym.

[Mike Blakesley]

They price-gouged the hell out of theme park customers for a little too long.

I'd say hardly anyone is staying out of the parks due to the prices. People have been griping about Disney park prices forever, but they still go to the parks -- but Disney is having a down summer THIS year. It's mainly due to:

1. Universal stepping up their game (and Seaworld, and Legoland, to a lesser extent)
2. Disney's recent movie product just not being that good
3. The political crap -- they should have just done what they wanted to do without crowing about it
4. Inflation overall, not just at Disney -- people don't have the money for travel like they usually do

Theme park owners are in a bit of a quandary. It costs more and more to develop ever-more-amazing attractions, while wages and cost-of-ownership keep rising, yet people complain about the prices going up. You (Bobby) have said that you haven't been to Disney World lately (or maybe ever), so you literally don't know what you're talking about. I'd challenge you to go there and ride Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind, Star Wars Rise of the Resistance, Tron Lightcycle Run, Remy's Ratatouille Adventure, Mickey and Minnie's Runaway Railway, and Avatar Flight of Passage, and then come back and tell me that it's not worth every nickel you spent. And those are only the latest ones. There's plenty of "classics" too. If a person goes to Disney World and doesn't get their money's worth, it's not Disney's fault.

[Martin McCaffery]

what with all their political talk and general misbehavior. People used to look up to them, but no longer.

Stars/Celebrities have been talking politics and misbehaving since before there was Hollywood. Sometimes it brings them down, many times it just gets them more publicity.
Some people used to "look up to them," but then they aged out of grade school.

[Bobby Henderson]

I'd say hardly anyone is staying out of the parks due to the prices.

Prices very much indeed are a factor. BTW, attendance at Universal's parks is down too. What I said earlier about rising credit card debt levels and evaporating saving accounts is 100% fact.

I'm sure Disney was hurt with the political crap too. But the fallout on that controversy appears to be cutting both ways; the main guy driving that controversy has been watching his polling numbers crater.

You (Bobby) have said that you haven't been to Disney World lately (or maybe ever), so you literally don't know what you're talking about.

What I'm talking about is in the news. I'm not making up this shit. But go ahead and make the argument about me. I'm not wrong that it costs a lot of money for a family to take a trip to a Disney park. It's just that you and I must have different ideas on what qualifies as a lot of money. Not that it matters. When a family is barely getting by financially they're not going to be eating out or going to a cinema, much less visiting damned theme park 2000 miles away.

And, yeah, list all those rides to illustrate what a "great value" that trip is. How many freaking hours of waiting in line do you have to do to ride all those rides? Or do you just need to pony up some extra premium cash to line cut or schedule ride times?

[Mike Blakesley]

But the fallout on that controversy appears to be cutting both ways; the main guy driving that controversy has been watching his polling numbers crater.

I never denied that, did I? The thing is, if Disney had stayed out of that argument, the gov'ner wouldn't have gone to war with them, and people from both sides of the aisle wouldn't be pissed off.

I'm not wrong that it costs a lot of money for a family to take a trip to a Disney park. It's just that you and I must have different ideas on what qualifies as a lot of money.

I never said it was cheap to go there, either. I'll say one thing for you, you're an expert at putting words in other people's mouths.

What I was getting at is VALUE for the dollar spent. When you go to a Disney park you get your money's worth, is what I was driving at. Because most of those attractions I listed cost $200 million or so to create. They have to make money to stay in business, as you know. And, "what you're talking about" might be in the news, but the news doesn't always give the whole story. They only tell you what will get you stirred up. For example, if the news said "Disney's ticket prices are going up this year, but that announcement comes on the heels of another announcement that they are planning $17 billion in new attraction and infrastructure investments over the next ten years, and will create over 13,000 new jobs in the process -- jobs that have a starting wage of $20 or more per hour," that wouldn't make you as angry, would it? But it might make you understand why tickets cost what they do.

People complaining about theme park prices are the same as the ones who complain about movie ticket prices. They never say what they think the charge should be. I can't imagine going to any of those Disney parks and thinking it cost more than it's worth. It just doesn't, that's all.

How many freaking hours of waiting in line do you have to do to ride all those rides? Or do you just need to pony up some extra premium cash to line cut or schedule ride times?

You have to spend some time waiting in line, it's true. That's true of any public attraction that is good quality. And if you sleep till noon, and arrive mid-day during spring break or Christmas, yes, you will wait in long lines. But if you plan ahead, arrive at the park early in the day, and go at a time of year when school's not out, you can cut waiting time to a minimum. The last time we were there, most of our waits were 15 or 20 minutes -- I don't think we ever waited more than 30 minutes for anything, and that includes most of the rides in my list above. And no, we did not "pony up extra cash." Besides, waiting in line isn't necessarily a bad thing. You can visit with your line-mates, people-watch, plan your next move, talk about where to eat, etc. and some of the attractions have "things to do" (games and such) built into the queue areas.

When a family is barely getting by financially they're not going to be eating out or going to a cinema, much less visiting damned theme park 2000 miles away.

Well, that's true for sure. That's always been true. That's why I never saw a Disney park until I was 20. My parents worked hard, saved money, and waited for a good opportunity to take the family. (They got a great deal on the trip through my dad's job...and since I was an adult, I had to pay my own way, which I saved for six months to do.) These days, some people think they have to get there while their kids are still in diapers so they can get those all-important pictures. They think they MUST go there. They feel like they've failed their kids if they don't get them to Disney. You have to hand it to Disney's marketing team for that one.

[Bobby Henderson]

You have to spend some time waiting in line, it's true. That's true of any public attraction that is good quality. And if you sleep till noon, and arrive mid-day during spring break or Christmas, yes, you will wait in long lines.

All the times I've visited amusement parks I've always arrived before the park opened. My parents knew well enough to do that when I was a kid. As an adult I'd do things like take a personal day off during the week to drive down to DFW to visit Six Flags (and get there early). That strategy would work okay until noon or so when the park would fill up even on a weekday.

Now these theme parks have adopted various premium priced "flash pass" systems. Spend some extra money and they'll at least hold your place in line while you do other things (like buy their food and drinks). In some cases they'll let you cut in line. If a customer doesn't want to spend those "flash pass" premiums he's going to be waiting in line even longer. I wish the "flash pass" factor was the only premium customers had to worry about. Parking prices are crazy for instance.

What I was getting at is VALUE for the dollar spent. When you go to a Disney park you get your money's worth, is what I was driving at. Because most of those attractions I listed cost $200 million or so to create.

Disney, like anyone else, should be building these experiences with some realistic ideas on what their intended customer base can handle. I think they know only so many American families can afford to visit, which is why they do a lot of work trying to attract international tourists.

Once every few years I'll go out to Las Vegas, usually for the International Sign Association world expo. The annual expo usually alternates between Orlando and Las Vegas. Visiting Vegas cost a lot less (if you don't gamble). Construction is getting into the final phases on MSG Entertainment's Sphere, a 17,000+ seat special venue/concert arena that costs more than any NFL stadium to build (over $2 billion). It's a pretty risky venture, but Vegas is a global tourism draw. They're planning a 2nd Sphere in London, but they have to see how the first one performs.

They lit up the exterior of Sphere (aka the "exosphere") on July 4. The specs on the interior LED dome screen seem incredible (over 500' wide, 16K resolution). I'm hoping it's not going to cost ridiculous amounts of money just to watch a pre-recorded IMAX-like movie there. I would expect to pay more than the $18-$25 standard Lie-MAX theaters are charging per ticket. If they're wanting $100 or more per ticket just to watch a movie that might be a bit too much. Hopefully 17,000 seats balanced against several shows a day would equal a ticket price not too awful much higher than IMAX.

Disney's movies are a tougher value to sell lately. It's not like they're rolling out Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King and Toy Story for the first time these days. Too often they keep going back to the same well and re-packaging the same old ideas. The lackluster performance of Elemental is not scientific proof that cinema audiences aren't interested in new ideas. I don't think Elemental looked all that appealing. It's likely potential customers saw the previews and thought, "meh, maybe we'll watch it when it comes on Disney+ in a month."

I think concerts are the biggest rip-offs in entertainment currently (thank you TicketMaster and LiveNation). Hell, even here in Lawton the prices to watch a dinosaur band with one or zero original members can start at $70 for crappy seats and go way up from there. To see any current name rock/pop band it typically costs hundreds of dollars per ticket if not more. There's newer bands I'd like to see live, but I don't like them enough to pay those kinds of prices.

[Allan Young]

I'd challenge you to go there and ride Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind, Star Wars Rise of the Resistance, Tron Lightcycle Run, Remy's Ratatouille Adventure, Mickey and Minnie's Runaway Railway, and Avatar Flight of Passage, and then come back and tell me that it's not worth every nickel you spent.

I'm not entirely convinced. For starters, you've cherry picked the best rides in four different parks. I was planning a trip to Orlando a couple of months back and was looking at north of $1200 for a 7-day pass to all four for the wife and me. That's before parking charges of $100 or so. And if you wanted to visit more than one park per day, you'd have to pay even more.

In comparison, last August we went on a theme park road trip and it set us back $1550 to visit 15 parks, including parking. Admittedly the per-park figure was brought down somewhat by having season passes for Cedar Fair and Six Flags, but it still demonstrates how ridiculously expensive the Disney parks are.

And in terms of roller coasters at least, some of those parks have as good or even better rides than anything at Disney (Cedar Point, Hersheypark and Kings Island especially spring to mind).

[Marcel Birgelen]

Full Disclosure: I'm a Disney shareholder and I've done contractual work for the Imagineering department of TWDC. I may be a bit biassed...

I don't think you can compare Disney parks and attractions to anything other than maybe the latest iteration of Universal Studios attractions and experiences. On a world-wide scale, there may be just a handful of parks that come even close to the level of theming and sophistication compared to a Disney park (I'd say an attraction like Symbolica in the Efteling (NL) may be an example of a dark ride that comes close to what Disney has to offer, both in technology and theming).

Comparing Disney with your average Six Flags or Cedar Fair park is like comparing a David Copperfield magic show with the traveling circus magician. Don't get me wrong, both can be great fun and the one isn't necessarily worse or better than the other, but there is a difference in sophistication and also costs to build such a thing. Many people may not really give about those things, but there also sufficient people that do and I'm one of them.

While I absolutely adore a park like Dollywood, Knoebels or Kennywood, I'm visiting those parks in a different mood than your average Disney park. A Disney park should be about pure escapism. Once you walk through the gate, the world on the other side of the berm dissapaers for a while. It's actually quite comparable to watching a good movie, only even more immersive. It's this kind of "magic" that I expect from a Disney park and I'm prepared to pay an extra fee for that.

That being said, I think Disney's "price gouging" at their theme parks may have gone way too far over the last few years and turning the free Fast Past service into a horridly overpriced skip-the-line service has not only angered the most hardcore fans, but also many families who simply can't afford such services.

While a lot of people seemingly needed to get their fix after about a year or two of "Pandemic induced abstention", it's looking like they've hit a breaking point for many people and as it is looking now, the numbers are slowly starting to reflect it. The recent closing of their highly-overpriced Star Wars "cruise-hotel", within a year of opening it, is a clear sign how out-of-touch Disney seems to be with reality those days. This isn't just showing in the parks, but also when I hear Iger's recent comments on this very strike...

[Bobby Henderson]

I doubt if Robert Iger and other millionaire executives like him ever bother to set foot in a regular commercial cinema. Their business strategy sure as hell doesn't reflect any concern for the cinema platform. Playing sneaky games against the interests of writers and actors ("let's rely on AI for both") is yet another self-destructive factor. We already have next to nothing in terms of a theatrical release window. We have too many movies based on previous movies. Letter-boxed movies in a cinema look no different than a letter-boxed movie on HDTV at home. Hell, TV shows are being shot with anamorphic lenses. These idiots don't realize they have set the movie industry on a path to transform into something less than a TV network.

Mainstream movies may not be "art," but they at least have a high level of craft on display. Business people are all obsessed about turning AI into some money making scheme (mainly a scheme to increase profits by killing jobs). AI isn't all that smart or creative. I think audiences will be able to smell an AI-generated movie having no soul. Even if the studios can generate a fake-movie that looks slick enough why will people give a damn about paying money to see it if nothing in it is real and nothing that went into making it is real?