The Average and Incapable Oz

Disney's "Oz the Great and Powerful" opened with a strong weekend, making upwards of $80 million. That's the important thing, really. Not if it was a quality film or if it stunk, not any of the politics behind it, just if it makes money. A quality film would indeed be a good thing, but a film that makes money is the best thing, or else we might not see any investment in the parks for a while.

As a Disney die-hard, hopefully you enjoyed some aspect of "Oz", because it's going to be around for a while (and it's probably going to be the thing in the parks they invest money in). Disney's strategy is to put tons of money into a select few films that it can then turn into brands and make gazillions off of in synergy, from rides, to toys, to sequels and more. They wanted to do that with "John Carter." It didn't work.

"Oz" didn't break the coveted $100 million mark, but it did have the "best release of 2013," as the headlines say (a title that fits into the category I like to call "the tallest midget awards").

As things go, that which is popular is rarely high in quality (Cars 2). Thus is the case with "Oz." You can feel the attempt to appeal to the masses at every turn with the movie trying to be many things at once. When you try to please everyone, you dissapoint all.

"Oz" has its moments. I audibly laughed just once, but that's pretty good, considering I'm jaded in that department. I saw it in IMAX 3D (so, anyone want to pitch in a couple bucks for my rent this month?), and thought paying the extra for 3D was worth it (not the "IMAX" though. They need to have universal standards on screen size). This movie actually used the 3D to both add depth and pop things out at you like spears and hats and such. Sometimes it was gimicky, but it overall wasn't too distracting.

James Franco, who plays the title chracter, does an OK job, but you can feel that his heart isn't into it. Rachel Weiz as Evanora is OK, until she tries to be dramatic about something, and it doesn't quite come off the right way. Mila Kunis as Theodora is great at the beginning, but then, something happens to her character, and her whole performance would seem corny even on a daytime soap. The witch that truly shines is Michelle Willams as Glinda the Good Witch, who immediately sees through Oz's shenanigans, yet keeps her faith in him. Her performance is engaging and she's pulls off being convincing and cute at the same time.

Just like in the original film adaptation of the L. Frank Baum novels, the characters that exist in Kansas also inhabit Oz. Glinda is the lost love of Oz from back home and Zach Braff, who plays Oz's under-loved assistant in Kansas, shows up as a flying monkey (sans fangs and bloodlust) in a bellhop uniform, whom Oz learns to love. He provides some comic relief by keeping Oz honest, and didn't bother me much. The other character that goes along the for the journey with Oz and appears in Kansas as a crippled girl who asks Oz to grant her the ability to walk, is the China Girl. She's cute enough for being a completely CG'ed character, but does little to advance the plot beside helping Oz to realize his faults.

The movie is no doubt gorgeous, but some odd casting decisions as well as an uneven script leaves one wanting. Disney put itself in a tough place in terms of critical acceptance, as its predecessor is one of the most beloved films. They did an OK job with this one, with its greatest weakness being uneveness. That's OK though, because they'll get the chance to make it better with the second, third, fourth, fifth and six itterations. Because "Cars 2" and "Pirates 4" were such critical darilings. Right...

Posted with Blogsy

One Less Magic Hour

In publishing early 2013 operational calendars, The Walt Disney World resort quietly announced that it will be reducing Extra Magic Hours, special hours, either before park opening or after park closing, where select parks are only open to guests staying in Disney hotels and resorts.

The Magic Kingdom, probably during Extra Magic Hours

Many are decrying this move, accusing Disney of being motivated by financial reasons to save on operational costs. Those people are right. 

As an "intern" in the Disney college program, I worked many an Extra Magic Hour (or Extra Tragic Hour, as we called them) at the Magic Kingdom, which often lasted until 3 AM. For the most part, I did very little work, the hardest thing was staying awake. I often asked myself "What is the point of me being here? No one else is." 

I even attempted to attend the Magic Kingdom's Extra Magic Hours when my girlfriend visited, and only stayed until 1 AM, a third of the allotted time. We didn't need much more as we were tired out from what was already a long, productive day. 

I did Extra Magic Hours at Epcot one night, and it saved me absolutely no time. The lines were still gigantic an hour in to Extra Magic Hours. 

From my limited experience with Extra Magic Hours at Hollywood Studios, Animal Kingdom and Epcot, and my extensive experience with them at the Magic Kingdom, I feel evening Extra Magic Hours are not worth it. People will be better off with one less hour. 

The opportunity to stay three hours after park closing is a hard one to give up when you spend thousands of dollars on a vacation. The extra time you're getting in the park with no lines gives you a sense that you're getting your dollar's worth. But what about the sleep you're losing that night, the fatigue you'll have the next day and likely the rest of the vacation? 

The way to really get you're value is to take advantage of the morning Extra Magic Hours. You're walking into an empty park, unlike in the evening, where you're staying in a park that's already populated, where lines have to die down, and you have to stay up extra late for them to die down. Yes, the AM Extra Magic Hours are only an hour long, but guests generally don't show up until a couple of hours after the park opens to the general population anyways, so in a way, they are equal to the evening Extra Magic Hours. The lines are much shorter, and you're just starting your day out, instead of elongating an already tiring day. 

It all depends on if you're a morning person or night owl, but I've seen what the Magic Kingdom, the most popular park at Walt Disney World, looks like at 2:30 AM, and you weren't there. Neither was anyone else, really. And the people who were there either looked miserable themselves, or were dragging around powerless, miserable children.     

Remaking the Mountain

My Google updates (my secret has been revealed! It's like you've seen my backstage) have been exploding (I've gotten like 6 updates) about the Matterhorn's $1 million refurbishment. 

Many of the articles (at least two) mention the fact that some guests to Disneyland were disappointed to find out upon seeing the mountain dressed in scaffolding that they would not get to ride down the famous 1/100 reproduction of the Swiss peak.


When I was working at Walt Disney World, I showed up in January and in February, Mickey's Toontown Faire was closed to become the double-Dumbo'ed Storybook Circus.

You want to know how many times people asked me where Mickey's house was? (Hint: that was a rhetorical question, with the answer being a large, annoying answer.)

If I was in a smart-alec mood, I would tell them "It's in Anaheim!" If I was in a literal mood, I'd tell them the truth. But always, after the question, I would ask myself "How much money did these people spend to come here, and they didn't figure out pre-visit that Toontown would be a relic of the past?"

The Disneyland monorail passes by the Matterhorn
(Glenn Koenig, Los Angeles Times / February 2, 2012)

So, it's no secret how much sympathy I feel for these people who are surprised about the Matterhorn's status. It's always been my strong held belief to make plans and do your research.  

You know the internet? That thing you're connected to right now. It's a great resource, especially when you're about to drop a couple grand on a vacation and you'd like to know what you're going to get for all that money you spent. Though, if you're reading this, you probably know that, and I just wasted your time. Sorry about that.

Since I will not be missing anything, as I won't be visiting Disneyland between now and June (but my mom will, sorry mom! But I don't get to go so ha! Serves you right for not taking me!), I'm happy that the mountain will be shiny with it's new snow (paint) and its new ride vehicles when my next visit comes!

No More Fastpass Cheating

Looks like all that golden information I gave you all in my "How to Never Wait In Line" is null now.

TouringPlans.com reports that on March 7, that second time printed on you FastPass will actually mean something. No longer are the days of getting a FastPass and only worrying about the first time and showing up after that. It will now be mandatory to show up in the hour window printed if you want your FastPass to save you time instead of saving your page in a book post-vacation.

This seems like a small change, but it's not. My whole strategy for getting a lot done in a Disney park, even on a crowded day, will have to be completely reformulated. Usually, as I discussed on the aforementioned previous post, I stock up on FastPasses and rarely use them in the hour window they suggest.

Logistically, the move makes sense. The whole system works on some type of algorithm or some other big math word that I don't even try to pretend to understand. But simple logic says that if everyone who has FastPasses for a certain attraction on a certain day decides to show up at a certain time, regardless of when they got the FastPass, then the whole system is useless and your FastPass only gets you into a slightly smaller line.

On a macro level (Yeah, macro) it will make things smoother and more functional, but on the micro level, meaning me being selfish, it's a game ruiner.

I'm Going to Disneyland...On My iPad!

Mickey and His Magical New Space

"Where's that place with Mickey and Minnie's houses where you can meet them and stuff?"

That's a question I frequently get, still, even though the Magic Kingdom's Toontown shut down mid-February. It's always a great opportunity to make some type of economy-related joke about Mickey losing his house, though a huge void has been left ever since: an official place to meet Mickey. It gave Mr. Mouse a great opportunity to dust off some outfits in his wardrobe, such as his colonial garb for his meet and greets in the Hall of President's lobby, and his farm-attire when he was near Splash Mountain. 

When you experience an event as monumental as meeting "The Mouse that Started It All,"having it happen behind Space Mountain, or under Splash  just lacks that extra special feeling. The location has a lot to do with it, it's kind of like realty, except less boring. 

No longer is Mickey a transient mouse, as his new meet-and-greet spot officially opened in exposition hall on April 1. Many new features are included in Mickey's new space, such as interactive art and the first ever Fastpass option for meeting a character. My frequent observation has shown that the Princesses always have a longer line than Mickey, which I find a little odd as meeting them is not as essential to a trip to Disney World. I guess that justifies, only a little bit, why it was decided to tear out a classic attraction in "Snow White's Scary Adventure" to make room for essentially a room to meet the princesses. 

We're a very cute trio

When I went to go visit Mickey in his new space, the stand-by wait time was posted as only being 10  minutes, so I waited, checking out the interactive art and queue overall being pretty underwhelmed with the whole queue experience. Mostly, with the queue, there was just a ton of red-velvet rope, and a couple pictures here and there. If there was an actual wait, it would have been a pretty boring time. And a closer examination of the interactive art revealed that some of the components of the image were pixelated. Pixelation is one of my biggest pet-peeves, it's almost the epitome of lack of attention to detail.  

Once inside Magician Mickey's dressing room, I also felt like it was lacking something. Maybe it was just too small, but I'll get off the negative train at this station. 

I did greatly enjoy all the innuendo's and references to Disney classic that occupied the space in Magician Mickey's dressing room. From the punny titles of the books laying around, to Madame Leota's crystal ball sitting on the shelf, glowing and making noise, to the notes posted on the bulletin board, a high level of attention to detail was paid on the whole room. A lot of it was what I feel is essential "Disney," a mixture of clever wit and magic. 

Boo! The new Haunted Mansion Queue

I've talked about my admiration of the classic Haunted Mansion attraction before, how I love it's mixture of campy fun, great storytelling and Disney magic.

Generally, when I talk about how I love just about anything Disney Parks, I'm talking about the Disneyland version. Well, lucky for me, Liberty Square's Haunted Mansion was built at just about the same time as New Orleans Square's, and the attractions are virtually the same. I may go as far as to say the World's version is slightly better, with it's haunted stair case scene. Now that it has the new hitchhiking ghosts and interactive queue, it's almost definitely the superior of the two manors.



Yesterday, I finally had some time off from my job at the Magic Kingdom, so what did I do? I went back to the Magic Kingdom. They've been getting quite the array of new features, so it made the most sense to go back to the place I spend 40+ hours a week.

First off, I went to visit Magician Mickey. More on that later.

Then, I went over to Liberty Square to visit the Haunted Mansion. Along with half the park.

One of the criticisms of the new interactive queue is that there's hardly anyone ever in the queue for the Mansion, seeing as it has an omnimover system, thus resulting in an extremely high rider capacity. Not the day I went. The stand-by wait time was posted at 50 minutes, which I ignored, because as the future often proves, it was a little exaggerated.

The Captain

Once I got up to the new and exciting features I came to, I was surprised to find that it was an optional part of the line. You could either go through and experience the new features, or go straight into the foyer and then the stretching room. I obviously didn't do the former.

What I found in the interactive queue was great. The touch-and-play instruments, the misty organ, the bookcase and the interactive poetry were great. Also, Madam Leota's living tombstone was very creepy, and thus fantastic.

My only negatives words on the subject would be that it was really more of an area than a queue. It was nice seeing everything in one fell swoop, but it would have been nice to see it while I was actually waiting in line, like "Space Mountain's: and "Soarin's" games. There was a tone of boring, chain-linked queue as a predecessor to the interactive part that could have been livened up.

Then, there was the other part of the Haunted Mansion that I came for, at the exact opposite end of the attraction: the new hitchhiking ghosts. I'll get to the point: they're amazing. I've always pantomimed petting or elbowing the previous, static hitchhiking ghosts, and now they do the same (kind of) thing to me! I went on a tour of the mansion twice, and I was a little annoyed that both times I got the bearded ghost, who both times put his beard on my face. The other ghosts seem to switch the heads of the guests it sits in between, and I don't know what the third one did. But it was cool, whatever it did.

People were raving about both the queue and the new hitchhiking ghosts, both seeming to be a huge hit. I though the imagineers did a great job enhancing a classic without changing it too much and respecting its legacy.

Have you been in the new queue or been in the company of a new hitchhiking ghost? How was your experience?

It All Started With a Mouse...That is No Longer Recognizable

Last week, on the anniversary of Mickey Mouses's 82 birthday, I decided that I'd finally rip off the cellophane encasing my Vintage Mickey DVD, and revisit the original Mickey Mouse cartoons.

The original Mickey Mouse. Don't let the smile fool you

It was revealed to me that Mickey Mouse has lived two different lives. I know that he was mischievous in his early days, geting himself into comic situations in a Chaplin-esque fashion, but my first-hand knowledge came from basically only Plane Crazy and Steamboat Willie. Obviously, I knew there were more than just two classic Mickey cartoons, but the others are much harder to find and less well known.

On Vintage Mickey, there are 7 other Mickey cartoons: The Karnival Kid, The Birthday Party, The Castaway, Mickey's Orphans, Mickey's Revue, Building a Building and Mickey's Streamroller. They all portray Mickey as a misbehaving, womanizing trickster. He's a completely different Mickey than I or anyone who didn't grow up in the late 20's 30's did. He was much more daring back in the old days, as exemplified in Plane Crazy when he grabbed Minnie and kissed her against her will. Things of that nature would not fly (even while in a plane) with today's standards of political correctness.

Mickey's New Image

So, over the time, Mickey's rough edges were smoothed out so he became a flat, dimensionless shell of a character. The Modern Mickey is known more for his costumed character at the Disney parks than he is for being an actual character. The company has tried to bring him back with shows like Mickey Mouse Clubhousebut nothing has really caught on.

Soon, Epic Mickey will be out, revealing a darker side of Mickey, a Mickey with actual character traits, a personality that may reinvigorate the classic character with something actually memorable.

Many have decried Mickey's image makeover, but really, if they knew anything about his original self, they'd know that Mickey having a dark side is nothing new. He started out as a little daring, a little left of center, a little clever and he's returning to that in a way.

Mickey has always been emblematic of the curent generation, so maybe this new Mickey in Epic Mickey says something about us. It's anything than a complete makeover, though, Mickey evolves and adapts, just like everything around us. If he was static, he'd have gone the way of his earliest competitors, like... well, I don't really remember.

Whimsy returns to Winnie the Pooh

A lot has been floating around the blogosphere about the new "Winnie the Pooh" film. At first, I thought nothing of it. With the last "Pooh" inspired film, 2005's "Pooh's Heffalump Movie," a film I didn't even bother to see, I assumed that this new film would be more of the same: thoughtless material released to sell some merchandise and appease Disney's younger audience. Any Disney film that is worth mentioning appeals to every age group, whether those age groups want to admit it or not.

Then, last night, I watched the first trailer for the new "Winnie the Pooh" film, and I ate my words like a pot of golden honey.

As a child, I was a huge fan of 1977's "The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh," watching the series of vignettes repeatedly. Winnie the Pooh and the Blustery Day would have to be my favorite, but all three combined to be one my favorite childhood Disney films. Since that film, it's been downhill for Pooh, Christopher Robin and the other inhabitant of the 100 Acre wood. Exhibit A and B: The Tigger Movie and Piglet's Big Movie. I'm sure there are reasons to be fond of the films, but they failed to capture the magic of "The Many Adventures."

But the magic has been recaptured with the the new "Winnie the Pooh" film, set to be released in 2011. They've brought back the classic look, with 2D animation and a glow that brings back fond memories of the classic original. Best of all, they brought in the best thing to ever happen to the modern Disney film studios: John Lasseter. He'll be overseeing production, meaning he doesn't have a huge influence, but he's got some, and that counts.

According to Fused Film, the new film will feature voices of Craig Ferguson, Tom Kenny (“SpongeBob SquarePants”) and Bud Luckey. Actress/musician/singer/songwriter Zooey Deschanel will provide the vocals for a special rendition of the beloved “Winnie the Pooh” theme song. I don't know how I feel about that last part: modern renditions of classic Disney songs by currently popular artists generally fall flat and are frustratingly annoying.

The trailer was masterfully done, with the perfect musical choice of Keane's "Somewhere Only We Know," whose lyrics perfectly depict the story of the trailer. It really grasp your emotions, a great marketing tool, because there is now way anyone who loved "The Many Adventures" will not want to see this film.

And now the countdown to July 15, 2011 begins.  

Toy Story 3: Deserving of 2010 Best Picture Oscar

November has begun, which means many things for us Disney devotees. Christmas decorations will start to go up at Disneyland, Thanksgiving pins are up for trading, and a third thing that Disney doesn't usually participate in, Oscar Season, begins.

Now that Disney has shed its more art-influenced studio, Miramax, the Oscars has been something that the studio has little to do with. Anything distributed directly by the Disney studios–generally PG and G films centered around more child-centric themes–don't even register on the Academy's radar.

On the rare occasion, there's a nomination like Johnny Depp as Capt. Jack Sparrow with Best Actor in a Leading Role nomination for "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl." Or the 1991 Best Picture nomination for "Beauty and the Beast."

More often, Disney movies win the less glamourous technical awards. Though, during Walt's tenure, the studio won a gaggle of Golden nude men.

Recently, with the Best Picture category expanding to 10 nominees from five, Pixar films have been getting a little more attention from the Academy. Their shorts have won a number of Oscars, and their features have won the Best Animated Feature statues, but the big one has eluded them, despite their near-perfect record with the critics.

"WALL-E," with it's silent filme-esque opening 20 minutes, was by far one of the best pictures of 2008, but the bias The Academy has towards animated "children's films" left it out of the party. Also, many actors, who make up a large part of The Academy feel computer animation threatens their livelihood. Ahh, ignorance.

"Up" was nominated last year, but lost to "The Hurt Locker." Predicable: yes. Fair: nope.

This year though, according to the Financial Times, Disney is launching a huge Oscar campaign for "Toy Story 3." I find it a little ridiculous that you have to campaign for a film to win Best Picture, the best film should win because it's the best, but alas, that is the process.

I'm glad Disney has realized that Pixar is producing some the best films of our time, animated or live action. "WALL-E" and "Up" were both good enough to win Best Picture, and "Toy Story 3," with its dark, dramatic themes and tear-inducing ending, has all the elements of a Best Picture. Some have speculated that it could win the Oscar, not only because it's a great film, but because its two predecessors were also Oscar worthy, a body of work Oscar. If it wins, it will be the one of three sequels to win Best Picture. The others: "The Godfather: Part II", and "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King," which won, most likely, for the Lord of the Rings body of work.

Maybe a high profile Oscar campaign will give the film the extra boost it needs. Hopefully The Academy will pull its head out of its live action behind and give the Best Picture Oscar to the film that is indeed Best Picture, no politics involved.

Out of "Toy Story 3," "WALL-E" and "UP," which film would you give the Best Picture Oscar to?

The Different Lands and What Makes Them Magic

Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom at Walt Disney World each are one central park, but within those parks, the different lands enable you to go from turn-of-the century America, take a couple of steps, and enter the future.

Fantasyland Popcorn, brought to you by the Abominable Snowman 

I'm talking about going from Main Street U.S.A. into Tomorrowland, of course. The most blatant signs of entering the new lands are of course the signs and drastic changes in architecture, but Disney does so much more to ensure those couple of steps transport you into a different world, or land, technically.

My personal favorite, something that I've loved since a child, are the different characters that are turning the popcorn machines at the popcorn stands, by the Matterhorn it's the Abominable Snowman.

The Cast Member's costumes change, from classic American styles down Main Street, to jungle wear in Adventureland, to futuristic garb in Tomorrowland. One thing that doesn't change is the food, for the most part. In certain parts of the park there are specialized food vendors, like the Dole Pineapple spears for sale at the Tiki Room entrance, or the Mint julep and Fritters offered in New Orleans Square. You can always find a good Turkey Leg or Mickey Mouse shaped dipped ice cream. It's the vendors that always match the style of the land.

The Haunted Mansion popcorn ghoul

A recent blog post by Chip and Company points out the change in music from land to land. This is even more apparent from attraction to attraction, like Space Mountain's futuristic score to the classic Yodeler's theme at the Matterhorn. A frequent visitor to the park can close their eyes and let their ears tell them where they are. Sometimes when I'm missing the park, I listen to A Musical History of Disneyland, it always puts me right there in the parks, not matter where I am. It also reinforces the idea that music makes the lands.
  
Sometimes I look to my nose to tell me where I am. On Main Street, the Gibson Girl Ice Cream Parlor always smells of waffle cones. From what I hear, they pump out an artificial smell. It doesn't matter to me, as the smell always tastes better than the cone. In New Orleans squares, it's the fritters, by Splash Mountain in Critter country, it's the chlorine from the log flume, near the train stations it's the smell of the train's smoke.

No matter where you are, there's always one sense besides sight that will tell you where you are in the park.

What's your favorite part about your favorite land?

Tron: Legacy: Anything but "Cheesy"

A remake of "Tron," the 1982 film that only made $33 million, is not something people saw coming. From the perspective of most young people, the only way they know of Tron is from the viral videos of Tron Guy.

The new Daft Punk/Tron Legacy poster

But Disney has done a great job reintroducing the movie to a new generation. Its upcoming sequel "Tron: Legacy," looks like one of those franchise reboots that gets people excited. Its initial trailer that ran before "Toy Story 3" this summer was very well done, with the recent ones only heightening the excitement.

 I have never even scene the original "Tron," and I feel like for most people who will see the upcoming "Tron: Legacy," their situation is similar.

Disney knows this, and has pulled out all the stops to make it a non-issue. They've instituted the new ElecTRONinca nightly dance parties at Disney's California Adventure park and have also made a replica of Flynn's arcade. Over at the Hollywood Pictures Backlot at Walt Disney World, the area will be made to mimic the interactive, digital world of Tron.

To get people who may look at "Tron" and go "that's just a cheesy kids movie" to take a closer look, they hired Daft Punk to write the score, and from what I can tell from the first trailer, the French duo have don an excellent job.

Disney got Jeff Bridges to come back, who, back when he made the original film was an up-and-comer, is now an Oscar wining actor. Olivia Wilde, former star of "The O.C" and currently featured on "House" will attract the teen audience, and also makes it more difficult to label the film as "cheesy."

The tone of the film seems to be dark and ominous, which translates to me as epic. It looks to have a triple threat: action, great special effects, and a gripping storyline.

Usually, I'm none too pleased with the film part of the Walt Disney Company (Tangled looks average, Pirates of the Carribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl's style and epic-ness seems similar to what this new "Tron" film will provide, but then they gilded the lilly with the second two) unless it's got a Pixar credit to it. But with this new Tron film, I'm excited.

Does "Tron: Legacy" and its tie-ins to the parks excite you, or is it just another overdone integrated marketing campaign from Disney?

Disneyland Shanghai construction to start soon. Yay?

After all the eminent domain disputes (or whatever they call it in China), and the general complications that come with building an American park in inland China, unidentified sources have revealed that construction on Disneyland Shanghai may begin as soon as November.

If you're like me, you look at this skyline and go "That could really
use a Disneyland."

As of now, no construction can happen until the conclusion of the World Expo on October 31. Though an official spokeswoman for the Disney Company made it seem as if the unidentified source was just spreading rumors and here say.
According to ThemeParkTourist.com, her statement was "Final discussions between Disney and the Shanghai government are not yet complete, and detailed negotiations to produce a final deal will continue for a number of months."

Whenever the construction starts, the 286 acre park will not be completed until 2014 at the earliest, with a more likely estimate being 2015-2016.

Not that it even matters. I've never been to a foreign Disney park (though Florida seems a little foreign to a kid from California), but I've read enough about them. After being to the Magic Kingdom at Walt Disney World and experiencing what a lousy interpretation of Walt's original Disneyland it was, I can only imagine how bad a post-Walt-built-only-for-profit-park-that's-not-even-operated-by-Disney could be. 

Let's look back at the history of international Disney parks. The most notable: Euro Disney, which has since changed its name to Disneyland Paris. Why did it change its name? Because the thing was a bigger flop than a whale being dropped out of a helicopter. It has only recently become profitable, which isn't something that I personally care about, but considering it was built purely for profit and not for anything else (Other countries don't build replicas of their famous attractions and tourist destinations in the US– unless it's part of a Las Vegas Hotel), it was a failure in the greedy eyes of Michael Eisner. At least Disney still maintains full ownership. 

Then there's Hong Kong Disneyland, owned by Hong Kong International Theme Parks. Walt would have loved that. And Tokyo Disneyland, the one that made Disney parks an international operation back in 1983, is run by the Oriental Land Company. Ca-ching!

Come the end of the decade, Shanghai Disneyland will be up and running, making money, and doing what the modern Disney company does so well: stretch the Disney name just a bit to thin.

Are  you excited of dismayed that planet Earth will get to see yet another Disney theme park? 

R2D2 Mickey Mouse ear hats? Yes Please!

Star Wars is a big part of my life that often crosses over into the Disney part of my life. Every time I go to Disneyland, "Star Tours" is always one of my first stops (Except this next trip, because it's closed in prep for Star Tours II. We'll see how that goes).

The new and highly coveted R2D2 ear hat

Last time I was in Anaheim, I got a Yoda backpack, a plush E-wok and Yam Solo. This christmas my mom got me a Yoda flash drive. Back when I was young and nieve, I was Jar-Jar Binks for Halloween (Admittedly, I still don't hate the guy like everyone else did/does). More so than even the plots and story lines of the movies, the characters that inhabit the Star Wars universe fascinate me. 

So earlier today, when I read about the new R2D2 Mickey Mouse ears hats, I was pumped. Apparently, yesterday when they went on sale, everyone at the parks were just as pumped as I was, because they sold out almost immediately. 

I found the design to be a great blend of Vinylmation ingenuity and Star Wars originality while still capturing the classic essence of the ear-hats. 

I've always thought that the Disney parks and Stars Wars were a match made in space heaven. I will miss the old Star Tours, but am excited for the new one. Plus, with the new opening, Disney will no doubt be putting out a steady stream of new Stars Wars inspired merchandise, like the new R2D2 ear hat.

I can't wait until next summer, when I'll be in Orlando for the Disney College Program during the next Stars Wars Weekends. 

Will you be picking up a new R2D2 ear hat on your next stop to any of the Disney parks, and are you excited or on the fence about Star Tours 2? 

Disney Cruise line voted #1 By Readers of Traveler Magazine

I would like to start off by saying Duh. Of course the Disney Cruise line won. It's the best, and I'm not saying this because I'm obviously biased towards anything that's Disney. I'm actually more critical of anything with the Disney name on it than anything else, quite like an older brother who holds his younger sibling to higher standards because he loves him more than anyone else.

I've been on two cruises in my lifetime: a weeklong Carnival cruise I took when I was fourteen, the other a three day Disney cruise when I was 12. Obviously, my 12-year-old perspective differs from my 14-year-old perspective which differs even further from the 19-year-old perspective that I'm writing from now. That doesn't seem to matter much, as even now I look back on my Disney cruise experience with a much higher regard than my Carnival one.

The Disney cruise was much more focused on entertaining the family. It had many more activities that could either be done by the whole family or ones that were designated for just adults, just children or just teens. The ports we stopped at were much more exciting (the Carnival cruise was in Mexico, the Disney in the Bahamas), due for the most part because of the stop at Castaway Cay.

Like everything, Disney had great attention to detail when it came the the nuances. With their new cruise ship, they will have virtual portal holes. Expensive: probably. Worth the money? Definitely.

The thing that separated the two ships the most was the Disney Cruise Line's lack of a casino. What a waste of space dedicated to only one faction of the audience. Carnival felt like it was a ship designated for adults that served as a floating babysitter for the kiddies. Boo. Plus the water slide wasn't even working. Double Boo.

I know that Carnival isn't the only competition for the Disney Cruise Line, but I'm going to go ahead and say that it is a fair representation of what the Disney Cruise Lines have got that the others don't.

So am I psyched for the new Disney Dream? You bet.

What are your favorite nuances of the Disney Cruise Line's ships, new and old?

A quick trip to the Disney Store this past weekend left me with some new water bottles, a pre-ordered copy of “Toy Story 3,” and Buzz Lightyear t-shirt my girlfriend picked up (in a child’s large, they don’t make them for people my age, the original Toy Story fans).

The label showing just how organic
the Disney Store t-shirt really is

We were satisfied with our purchases to say the least, but when we got back to our dorm, my girlfriend made a discovery. Accompanying the size on the printed on tag was a label, certifying the shirt 100% organic cotton, with two paragraphs of explanation below it. Normally, t-shirts only go so far as labeling the material. This shirt took a whole different approach.

The two paragraphs of explanation told us the specifics of the organic nature of the cotton, and directed us to a website: Disneystore.com/track-my-t.

I checked out the website, and it was gorgeous. It had some great animations, and a space where I could put in the unique number the Buzz shirt came with. It had different areas I could explore, each being a part of the process that brought my shirt from a cotton field to my hands. Though, I do feel each explanation was a tad bit too general.

The idea is a great one, and the fact that it’s not highly publicized makes it even better. Obviously, it is very trendy these days to be environmentally friendly and green, and many companies use it as a marketing strategy.

The website the label directed to

Apparently Disney decided not to take this route, even though their idea is better than everyone else’s and their website more enchanting. It’s good looking, informative, and entertaining. The site looks like they put a lot of work into it, even though it’s a website that takes a little digging to get to.

This is just another factor of the Disney company that makes it one of the most innovative, influential companies in the world.

Do you feel that it’ a great, yet subtle marketing camping, or a green gimmick?

Is Epic Mickey Good for Disney's Image?

The Disney company is taking a huge risk with their upcoming video game "Epic Mickey," where they reinvent the most iconic cartoon character, giving him a darker edge.

I was definitely skeptical when I heard that the mouse that started it all would go from a bright pastel color palette to a darker, more goth one.

Now that I've read up on the game, the last thing I am thinking about is the image change. It goes so far beyond that, into a world of old cartoons, attractions and Disney lore.

According to ChipChick.com, Mickey is "stuck in ‘Wasteland’, a world ruled by Oswald the Lucky Rabbit (Mickey’s Predecessor). Wasteland is a grim version of Disneyland, and it’s filled with forgotten characters and attractions." Depending on the actions taken in the game, Mickey can either come out as a purveyor of good or doer of evil.

The world's creator is Yen Sid (based on good ol' Walt), and is based on the theme parks. It takes a huge amount of inspiration from the older work that Walt worked on and labored over. It's full of Disney history and will no doubt reintroduce a new generation to the classic characters that made the Disney company into what it is now.


The Christian Science Monitor posed these questions in a recent article: "Will Disney turn off potential gamers who prefer the Mickey of old? Will the game be dark and intriguing enough to appeal to "core" gaming audiences? And, perhaps most importantly, given flagging interest in the mouse, does Disney have a choice?"

I will answer those questions in order:

1. After enlightening myself on what the game was really about, I do not think the game will turn off "potential gamers who prefer the Mickey of old" as this new Mickey is dark for a purpose, not just for shock value. I'm not even a gamer, and I want to get my hands on this.

2. The game seems to have the right mix of great story telling and intriguing gameplay that it will satisfy experienced gamers.

3. Disney did have a choice, and I think they made the right one. This dark version of Mickey isn't replacing the new one, he's complimenting it.

A recent trip to the Disney store proved this to me. The new bags feature retro Mickeys and Minnies, along with a wide array of new merchandise. Disney knows that the new Mickey makes some Disney enthusiasts uncomfortable, and they are counterbalancing by bringing back the classic Mickey everyone looks fondly upon, and I applaud them for it.

Are you excited by Mickey's new image and accompanying videogame, or is it a step in the wrong direction for one of America's most iconic characters?