The Movie Based on the Attraction or the Attraction Based on the Movie?

There are some questions that may never be answered, like whether the chicken or the egg came first. Other questions may have similar themes, yet definite answers.

Such is the case with the many iterations of "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Ride Disney Thinks People Won't Ride If They Don't Constantly Change It."

Wait...Where's Jack Sparrow?

No, wait... It's just called "Pirate of the Caribbean." My mistake.

In a more literal world, the ride would have that snarky title. In the actual world, it just lives up to it.

Today, on the Disney Parks Blog, it was announced that the Florida version of the attraction will be undergoing minor tweaks, adding some things from the most recent film, “Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides," because that was such a critical darling.

I understand what Disney is shooting for with these changes. Sometimes, I appreciate them. I feel they inserted Captain Jack Sparrow into the ride subtly enough, at least in terms of the scenes.

What I wasn't psyched about was how they altered the story line of the whole ride to adapt to his presence.

The projection of Davy Jones and later Blackbeard, plus the ability to change on the fly are features I'm in support of. Projecting onto fog looks wicked cool.

What I'm not in favor of is the philosophy behind all the changes. (Beware: the curmudgeon side of this 21 year old is about to emerge: proceed with caution.) The ride has been around since 1967, and until the first movie came out in 2003, the only changes they made were because of people whining about how men chasing women is politically incorrect. (By that logic, wouldn't the reverse be true, too? Oh, logic!) Then came the the Cap'n Jack overhaul in 2006, which closed the ride down for months. Suddenly, billboards and advertisements started popping up, advertising the ride with the picture of Johnny Depp as Captain Jack, as if the ride what based on the movie.

Kudos to marketing department for making a classic attraction look new again, but shame on them for skipping history. Those young, skateboarding kids need to know about the classic attraction's history: that it was Walt's last creation and that it came first, that Jack wasn't always popping out of barrels. I'm not saying they should like the movie because they enjoy the ride, but knowing the origin of things is always useful.

So, if you can't tell, this guy right here writing this post: not excited for the "enhancements." Luckily, they're only going to be implemented at the lackluster, abridged version of the ride at Walt Disney World. Always have to look on the bright side of things.

Wi-Fi at Disney World

In the past couple of weeks, both Epcot and Magic Kingdom have rolled out free Wi-Fi throughout the parks.

All I can say is, finally!

Let's hope they turn those spires into Wi-Fi antennas

Some traditionalists may decry that this is the real word encroaching into the fantasy land that exists beyond the gates, especially for Magic Kingdom. With them, I dissagree: a quick connection to the internet has the potential to enhance the fantasy.

Wi-Fi is the first step towards the completion of Disney's NextGen initiative, which will eventually create a more immersive, more convenient experience in the parks, with RFID technology and other technological advancements.

I understand the argument that the internet posses all the fantasy-crushing facts one could ask for, and a Wi-Fi connection will make it that much easier to stay connected to the outside world.

Internet in the park isn't something providing free Wi-Fi has introduced. People have been using their connected devices in the parks since they were first available.

Disney can either force people to waste their expensive data on a slow, overcrowded networks while in the park, or they can work with the technology and use it to their advantage.

In the App store, Disney has had their share of hits, most notably "Where's My Water?", but there are dozens of other Disney apps out there, from the ABC Player, to the Disney Parks app. It's the latter where I see the potential.

Disney could enhance these apps and make them more data-rich, or make new sections of the app for certain locations in the parks. With a reliable, fast connection to the internet, the Disney parks could use your hand-held portal to the outside world into a handheld magic-enhancer.

And then there's the old question of "What would Walt do?" which at times can be dangerous to ask, because the answer is always hypotheical. Disregard the danger: Walt was an innovator to the fullest extent. I feel if was still around (at the age of 111), there would have been Wi-Fi in the parks years ago, and much more park-related content on the App store. But who knows, maybe he would have wanted a digital "burm."

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.     

The First Ten, The Best Ten

Everything good must come to an end.

For Pixar, that fact of life seemed not to apply to its first 10 films. Then they were bought by Disney, John Lasseter took around 30 other jobs on top of his main gig as chief creative officer at the animation studios, and the main vision and values that made the first ten films fantastic was lost in dollar signs and work schedules that wouldn't fit into a 10-day week.

I've written about "Cars 2," and how it ruined the studio's perfect record.  Those with taste can agree that the movie abandoned all of the things that make a Pixar film great (intelligence, wit, originality, lack of pandering). It proved that, maybe after the "Toy Story" franchise, Pixar should avoid sequels (we'll see if they get away with the technicality of making a prequel with "Monster's University").

Originality is where Pixar thrives (and another things "Cars 2" lacked), and I hoped that with the original story of "Brave," the studio would return to to it's pre "Cars 2" back-to-back original hits, "WALL-E" and "Up" (Toy Story 3, though a sequel, was also extremely original).

I was let down.

"Brave" was great, but as many reviewers wrote, held to Pixar standars, it was average to below average. It has a 69/100 score on MetaCritic, meaning the majority of its review are positive. "Toy Story" has a 92. The only Pixar film to have scored lower than "Brave" is, you guessed it, "Cars 2."

The same things that made "Cars 2" a failure also made "Brave" below average. All the hype about "Brave" centered around the fact that it is Pixar's first film with a woman in the lead role. You couldn't escape the comparison's to "The Hunger Game's" Katniss Everdeen . Disney princesses have always taken heat for being damsels in distress who need men to complete them (by people who have too much time to analyze entertainment. To blame a lack of feminine power on Disney is lazy and insulting to women. Independent thought it not exclusively a male trait.) so it started to feel like the story was engineered to create PR buzz. 


When you get down to brass tacks, every Pixar film has the exact same story line. Things are good, a conflict is presented, the characters must go on an adventure, there's a chase scene,  the good guys just barely win, and things end up hunky-dory (The three "Toy Story" films have literally the exact same plot). It's the nuances in both the characters and stories that make the films great, and "Brave" lacked those just as "Cars 2" did before it.

"Cars 2" was made because young boys everywhere eat up "Cars" merchandise like it's free candy laced with nicotine. Then Disney has Pixar make a film with a female princess that can sell merchandise to the other half of the adolescent world? Seems suspicious. And most of all, it seems more like a reaction to criticism than pure innovation that's unaffected by what studio heads feel is popular.


I will now turn to the upcoming (hopefully) original films Pixar will be releasing in the near future: The Good Dinosaur and The Untitled Pixar Movie That Takes You Inside the Mind, along with the 2015 Lee Unkrich film inspired by Die de los Muertos. If they are made without pandering and without consideration of how merchadise will sell, they will be great. If not, they'll still be good, but they won't be truly be Pixar.

Testing a New Track

Walt as a Character

Ever since French Artist Pascal Witaszek posted his faux-film poster of a Walt Disney biopic, the inter web has been ablaze with praise over how real the poster looked, and how people really wanted it to be real. For real.

I am one of those people, with Ryan Gosling being one of my favorite contemporary actors, and Walt Disney being just about my favorite person of all time and with film being one of my favorite things to watch, it would combine a lot of my scattered favorites into one lovely thing. One of my other favorite things: run on sentences.

But 'twas a fake, and the Disney studios have not announced any plans to release a feature about their founder. Yet. It will happen. No icon makes it this long without a biopic.

But much like Marilyn Monroe in "My Week With Marilyn," Walt may show up in a movie that's focuses on a part of his life instead of the whole thing.

The film, which will be titled "Saving Mr. Banks," is proposed to follow Walt through his 14-year long struggle to turn the pages of Mary Poppins into a motion picture. It's a little-known story that should make for a well-reviewed film. The Australian author of the Mary Poppins series, PL Travers, will be likely be played by Emma Thompson. Travers was unhappy with the outcome of the Academy Award winning film adaption of her book. She was about the only one.

So, it's not Ryan Gosling. Walt was too old during this time of his life to be played by Gosling (who, later in life from the aged make-up job he had in "All Good Things," doesn't quite look like Walt). The actor rumored to be playing Mr. Disney: Tom Hanks: my favorite actor. So I guess it will work out for my preferences.

Hanks, the voice of Woody in the three Toy Story films and yet-to-be-determined-number of shorts, will do Walt quite a justice. He's a two-time best picture winner, and seems to be just a great all around, funny guy.

But this doesn't satiate my desire for the Gosling-as-Walt biopic to be made. Get on that, Disney.

What People Are Saying About: AVENGErail

This will be the first in a new series where I mine the twitterverse and bring to you what people are saying about current items of Disney news.

My Favorite Sherman Brothers Song

Today, the Disney community has learned of the sad news that Robert B. Sherman passed away. The man lived a long, productive life, and provided a great amount of joy to many people (and agony to some when they got a song of his stuck in their head, which in a way is a compliment to his talent).
There's a great documentary, which I have reviewd on Robert and his brother Richard, and I highly reccomend it. There's a great story behind their great music.


I wanted to focus on Robert's legacy, which of course, is music. Though I find most of the Sherman brother's music throughly entertaining, there is one song I favor particularily.


I'll give you a hint: it's about bird who sings words and crooning flowers.



It's the best Sherman brothers song that you can find in a Disney park. Considering its comptition is "it's a small world," that may not be saying much (Though, "it's a small world (after all)" is a genius song, both in concept and the catchiness factor that so many detest).

Unlike "it's a small world," with it's elaborate sets and scenes, the "Tiki Room" theme is the attraction, especially viewed by today's standards. The singing audioanimatronics were extremely innovative when the attraction debuted, but as with all technology, it has become dated. The music, though, is timeless, and is a pleasure to have stuck in your head.

What's your favorite Sherman brothers song? Winnie the Pooh? Chiti Chiti Bang Bang? Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious? Comment with your pick!

Is "One More Disney Day" Worth It?

Nothing is better than walking around Disneyland in a state of severe sleep deprivation, right?
Wrong. I don’t know about you, but I’m a guy who appreciates a good, full night of sleep so I can tackle the next day at 100 percent.

Now, not all people are like this, especially my age, and Disney knows this. That’s why, during the busy seasons, the Magic Kingdom is sometimes open until three in the morning.

I’ve seen it, and sometimes when I was working those late hours, I would wonder what these people were going to do for the remainder of their vacation. The best way to do a park is to get there when it opens, which is impossible when that’s the time you get home from your hotel. Often, these groups were with small children, who wake up with the sunrise.

When my girlfriend came to visit while I was doing the College Program, we tried to do a late night, but didn’t last and instead decided to go back and sleep, hoping our foresight would make the next day better.

Which brings me to my topic for this post, buried in the fourth paragraph: Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom’s upcoming “One More Disney Day!” event coming up on Feb. 29, better known as leap day. On this day, the two parks will be open for 24 hours straight. (Boy, am I glad I don’t work at the Magic Kingdom right now. That’s gonna be tough.)

The event, in theory, sounds like a great promotion. It’s innovative and buzz worthy from a marketing viewpoint, but that is about the only purpose it serves. No one is going to enjoy a 22, 23, or 24 straight hour at Disneyland. There’s a lot to do, but not that much, and even if there was, nothing is fun when every step takes that much more effort.

With admission prices being as high as they are, many will try to squeeze every minute out of this special offer. Though, with the money they will no doubt spend on coffee and Five Hour Energy and the harsh, probably incomprehensible words sure to be yelled at each other in the 23rd hour, will it be worth it?

Cars 2: My Belated Thoughts

Pixar means many things. Most obviously it's the name of the pioneering film studio in Emeryville, Ca.

 For me, Pixar means much more: quality, excitement, entertainment, wonder, thrill, joy.

And, for the first time ever, it means disappointment. It had to happen, the law of averages tells me. To be fair, I saw it coming, but now that it's here, my acute foresight does not make the pain of seeing an average film that is of the Pixar brand any less searing.

The motifs, the morals and the jokes of the film lead me to believe that the movie is more Disney than it is Pixar. The $10 billion in projected merchandise sales also leads me to this conclusion, as does the special toy sections in Target and Ride Makerz, or anywhere else where money be be exchanged for goods.

Pixar's productions, as with most Disney related films, are about overcoming a difference or obstacle. In "UP," Carl faced living a life without his wife and an unfulfilled dream weighing down on him, "Ratatoullie," a rat that loved to cook; "WALL-E," a robot that could love. With "Cars 2," it’s a red neck truck that gets mistaken as a spy, and in the process, gets rejected by his friend, who wants him to change.

I wanted Mater to change, too. Next time, be a little less of a push over, Lightning! I'm not endorsing rejecting who you are, but if who you are is as unfunny and bland as Tow Mater, change might not be a bad thing. Especially if you're that kind of person/car and you happen to be starring in a movie produced by my favorite studio. In that case, change, and change quickly, preferably into a new, original character that has nothing to do with a sequel. Like say, a red-headed scottish girl. That sounds like a good idea. A one eyed green walking sphere? Don't change into that.

"Cars 2" could have been made by any studio. That emotion that Pixar films elicit, that connection that is made with the characters, the excitement the plots bring, it's always magical. None of that exists in "Cars 2." It's just one stupid, fart/red-neck/ignorant joke after another. There are some hints of humor that remind you that what you're watching, at one point (the PS, and the PPS from Mater, that was funny), had The Business’s most original minds behind it, but the rest of it makes apparent you that they had to hand their baby over at some point to Rumpel Stiltsken. Those 11 films of spun gold had to be paid for. "Toy Story 2" took the necklace, "3" the ring.            

It's a movie made for a specific audience, something that has not been done by Pixar: that's how I see it. Obviously, Lasseter and Co. want to make movies that people enjoy, and have been successful in doing so.  But the secret to that success is that the movies were made for self satisfaction.They're huge film fans making movies that they would like, which seems like an obvious way to make a film. And it's what they did, until Disney took over, made them release the film a year early, and slowly stripped them of their artistic integrity. When I visited the studios late last year, I was informed that the people in the rooms around me were a little peeved, having been forced to put the film out a year early. Their frustration shows. It also lives in me and all others who truly and devotedly love what they do at Pixar.

Here's to waiting for their next original film, "Brave."

Do You See This Every Night?

Yes. I see "Wishes," "The Magic, The Memories and You," "The Main Street Electrical Parade" and the "Celebrate A Dream Come True Parade" just about every day I work. Not all of them in the same day, but almost always at least one of them.

For many people, experiencing something in such a repetitive manner could cause complete disgust and disdain for whatever that reoccurring thing is.

The Main Street Electrical Parade

Often times, I am that person who is seriously annoyed by the same thing. Some examples of this might be: the horrible music they play in the Utilidoor. Apparently, Sirius XM's stations have a 12 song playlist they stick to religiously. Or maybe the music in Tomorrowland. Or maybe people asking me what I have at my wagon right after they walked by the menu. That stuff can get annoying. But that stuff doesn't blow up, glow, shimmer, or transform a castle into a number of fantastical things.

Sure, the shows aren't as spectacular to me the fifth time as they were the first time, but they still have that shimmer of magic that only Disney can provide.

Wishes

One of the more fun things of seeing the shows dozens of times is that you slowly start to memorize the entire thing. For instance, I can tell what part of the "Wishes" is happening from the Westclock bus stop, located behind where the fireworks go off, just from what particular firework is going on that that moment. Or I can wave an imaginary wand and turn off all the lights in the park at the beginning of the Main Street Electrical parade, or say along with Walt "To all who come to this happy place, welcome" at the end of "The Magic, The Memories, and You" without even looking at the castle.

The fact that in a small way, all this makes me feel cool, is a little questionable, but that's ok. I'm a Disney nerd, I mean, you are reading my blog about Disney right now, so what do you expect?

California Adventure in California. Why? Because.

Yesterday, the big cement CALIFORNIA letters were removed from the entrance of California Adventure, beginning the remodeling of the California Adventure entrance. 

A sketch of the future entrance at California Adventure 

So, what did the imagineers think to change the entrance to? A retro, 1920's look.

Apparently, Hollywood Studios over at Walt Disney World exists in a 1920's bubble, because California Adventure's proposed entrance looks identical to the one in Orlando.

Which brings up a bigger issue, in that California Adventure is like Hollywood Studios in more than just that one way. Both parks have a "Tower of Terror" attraction, "Toy Story Midway Mania," "Playhouse Disney—Live on Stage!" (soon to be some Disney Jr attraction) and "Muppet Vision 3D." That's quite a few attractions for two parks that are supposed to be different.

The current entrance at Hollywood Studios in Orlando

Now, the two parks do differ in quite a bit of ways, having different landmarks designating each park, but that would detract from my point.

If you've looked through my past posts, I'm not the biggest fan of California Adventure. I've always though that it's like been the U.S. pavillion at EPCOT, just on a full-size park scale with a billion dollar price tag. If people want to see California in California, then they'll take a drive around the state they're already in. And the things that intrinsically make California Adventure what it is are either run of the mill (Grizzly River Run), or the opposite of what should be in a Disney park (Paradise Pier in general).

So what are the best parts about California Adventure? The things that are most like Hollywood Studios. "Tower of Terror" is the most thrilling ride at both parks in Anaheim, the new entrance is going to be fantastic, and "Midway Mania" always has the longest line in the park.

Besides that, nearly everything that's going into the re-theming of California adventure that isn't Cars Land (Which is also rumored to be moving into Hollywood Studios in the near future) is to make it looks like a 1920's Hollywood. HOLLYWOOD. The park wants to be Hollywood Studios, as it should be (a Rockin' Roller Coaster in CA wouldn't hurt). So just let it.

DCA's Version

When Disney and MGM split ways, Disney missed a great opportunity, because at that point, they could have switched the names of the two parks, "MGM Studios" being renamed "California Adventure," and "California Adventure" becoming "Hollywood Studios." The park in Florida could have expanded, making it more than just a half day park, and the one in California would have a less specific theme to work with, giving it more freedom and making it a better all around park.

But alas, they didn't, and it probably would have cost a lot if they had, seeing as at California Adventure they'd probably have to take out Grizzly River run (shucks) and retooled all the other California inspired areas of the park.

WDW's version

But one thing still rings true: the Hollywood part of California Adventure seems to be taking over the rest of the park, and rightfully so. It's got the most potential and one of the best rides. And if, as an LA Times article discussed, phase one of the California Adventure upgrade/expansion is successful, phase two will go into effect, making the Hollywood portion of the park even bigger, with a Hollywoodland era around the "Tower of Terror" speculated to be built along with a  Club 33-esque Carthay Circle Theater club.

I'm not complaining that California Adventure is becoming a Hollywood Studios West (even though Hollywood is in the West), in fact my feelings are the opposite. If the California Adventure is going to copy Hollywood Studios with such dedication, it should just pull a Magic Kingdom and do a blatant loose interpretation of it. I don't think anyone would be sad to see the park stop going along with an uncreative theme thought up by a money crazed, cheap CEO who is remembered in such a negative light.

So, Explain this Disney University Thing

Today is January the 4th, 2011. That means it’s 14 days, or exactly two weeks before I get on a plane at Sacramento International, and then 8 or so hours later, get off in Orlando (I get to stop in Denver first, just to feel what freezing is like before I head off to the tropics.) Then, one day later, or 15 days from today for those of you who are doing the math and are having trouble adding that 1 to 14, I start one of the most important experiences of my life: The Disney College Program.

The original plan for EPCOT: Want to hear about it?

I’ve talked a bit about my upcoming experience, but now that it’s so close, I’ve got a completely different perspective on it.

Having come back home, I encounter people almost on a daily basis who are curious about the program, making me a sort of ambassador for the program, which thus far I’ve only been accepted into, having not experienced a day of the actual thing.

My most bare-boned response to their inquiry: “It’s a work study program, emphasis on the work.” I feel like a chump explaining it to people, because I only know what I’ve read, so I’m sort of giving them a cocktail of plagiarism and summarization.

I’ve also found that people have a preconceived idea about the program, that it’s more exclusive than it is, that there’s more “college” involved in the College Program, that it’s in Disneyland, even after I’ve said “It’s at Walt Disney World” a dozen times, or that for some reason, I’m going to ditch the resort first thing and head over to the Wizarding World of Harry Potter as soon as I can, because allegiance means nothing.

Eventually I explain to my lucky listeners everything I know about what it entails, to which they usually exclaim “that sounds amazing!” or “that’s so you!” and I say “Yes it does/is,” because I’m a little literal and extremely sarcastic, but I try to sound sincere (I swear, I can turn it off for on the job customer service).

If my audience is fortunate, I then will go on to either explain the history of EPCOT, or discuss with myself how it’s a stepping stone on my career path with Disney.

What all this has helped me discovered about myself is that I’m tired of explaining the program from the perspective of a prospective cast member. I want to do this, and I want it bad.

As with every thing, the closer the day comes, the further away it seems. But it really isn’t that far away, and when I think about it, there’s quite a bit to do before the important day of the 18, like say, booking my hotel room for the night before.

Better get on that.

Seeing Old Movies in New Way: The Commentary

Christmas is the time of giving and receiving, and I did a bit of both. What I gave isn't that important. I could mention how my gifts are all practical yet thoughtful and fun, but I don't want to brag. Plus, this post is more about what I received.

The "Toy Story" Box Set

Specifically, it's about the trio of "Toy Story" Blu-Ray's I got. Now, I've seen all three films about as many times and as many ways as possible. In 3D, in 2D, on DVD, Sneak Previews, re-releases. Just about every format they've released the films in, I've seen it in. So, the Blu-Ray format was great, but I've seen the films so many times, I could act out just about every scene at this point. But, I had these new shiny discs in this fancy format, so I had to find a way to watch these classic, familiar films that would excite me. 

Now, I know I'm not the first to discover the new-fangled director's commentary bonus feature, yet I've found something new in something old.

Like I said, I've seen each of the "Toy Story" films enough to have memorized most of the lines from all three films. I'm not someone who typically likes to view a movie multiple times. So, when getting these new Blu-Ray copies of the movies, I decided to turn on the commentary for the first time and see what the people who made the films have to say about them. 

Well, it turns out they have quite a bit to say, and all of it is superbly fascinating. On the orignal "Toy Story," the commentary features not just the Director John Lasster, but also Co-Writer Andrew Stanton, Supervising Animator Pete Docter, Art Director Ralph Eggleston, Supervising Technical Director Bill Reeves and Producers Ralph Guggenheim and Bonnie Arnold. That may seem like one too many cooks in the kitchen, but the group makes it work. Having been the first feature length film from Pixar, its brightest minds worked on the film, and it's a real treat listening to them discuss the obstacles overcome to making the first full length computer animated film. Think of if we could watch "Snow White" with a commentary by Walt Disney. It's not the same, but it's close. 

With "Toy Story 2," the commentary is provided by Director John Lasseter, Co-Directors Lee Unkrich & Ash Bannon and Co-Writer Andrew Stanton, once again giving you insight from the top talent at Pixar. Since "Toy Story 2" was the studios third film, they often discuses the different computer models their recycled from "A Bug's Life" and the original "Toy Story." Pixar is also known for its easter eggs, many of which are pointed out in the commentary. 

"Toy Story 3" takes a different approach, leaving out Director Lee Unkrich, this time featuring Supervising Animator Bobby Podesta, Supervising Animator Mike Venturini, Production Designer

Bob Pauley,  Head of Story Jason Katz and Supervising Technical Director Guido Quaroni. And, with the Blu-Ray, it's on the Bonus Features disk, instead of accompanying the film on the feature disk. That took a couple of Google searches and a argument (Which I lost) with my mom to find out. After watching the first two films with relatively the same people talking about similar things, it was great getting a different perspective on how the film is made. Being the most modern Pixar film,  and having come 11ish years after "Toy Story 2," the advancements in technology have been tremendous, and there's really no one better to talk about that occurrence than the people so heavily involved. Despite being people who work in front of computers fulltime, they've all got a great sense of humor, and are a joy to listen to.

Overall, all three of the films have a very unique commentary, and all three are very enlightening. They probably aren't very interesting to someone who is only watching the films for the second or third time, but for a Pixar veteran, they're a great way to give new light to a classic film.  

Next up: The "WALL-E" Blu-Ray coming from Netfilx, so I can get the commentary on Blu-Ray without having to make my mom buy it. I can't wait!

Revisiting "Beauty and the Beast" and its Diamond Edition Extras

Confession: it's been a long time since I've seen "Beauty and the Beast." By a long while, I mean at least five years, probably more. I never remember loving it as a kid (it's not the most appealing story to a young boy), so there was not a whole lot of motivation for me to see it again.

Now that I'm on vacation, free time is abundant and lucky for me, we had the new Blu-Ray Diamond Edition Super Spectacular, soon-to-be-back-in-Disney's vault version of the film waiting to be opened and watched. I figured I'd pop it in and see what it looks like on our beautiful semi-new HDTV, especially now that "Beauty" has been remastered.

All I have to say is: "Damn!" I have been missing out on a lot. I know that "Beauty and the Beast" was the first animated feature to get a best picture Oscar nomination, and it won a handful of other awards, including the Golden Globe for best picture, but I guess I just took it all for granted.

The animation itself was gorgeous. Having just seen "Tangled," which was made 19 years after "Beauty," I felt that the older film held its own and then some concerning the art department. You can definitely tell how much using computers enhanced the beauty of animation. That was then though, and only Pixar and Disney's Animation Studios use computers to make things better, everyone else just uses them to make money.

On the BluRay, there is a great little featurette about how the film nearly never made it to the public.  It was a great little documentary, exploring the different obstacles that were overcome to make the film. From getting kicked off the Burbank lot and out of the building Walt built specifically for animation, to how the film had it's original first 20 minutes, which were already fully animated, scrapped. It discusses the issue of Katzenberg and the attitude that eventually got him booted, leading him to create the inferior-to-Pixar Dreamworks SKG.



A couple days later, I received "Waking Sleeping Beauty," which chronicles the animation rejuvenation at the Walt Disney Studios that started with "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" and "Making Beauty and the Beast" was very much like a companion piece to the film, focussing on just one of the films mentioned in "Waking." Some sound bytes were used in both films, but both are fascinating and educational in their own right. I recommend viewing both; you can never learn too much about Disney's history.

Music: the Backbone of Disney, and a Fascinating Story

It's been a good year if you're someone who's fascinated by the history and lore of the Walt Disney company. Three films were released for home viewing in 2010: "The Boys: The Sherman Brothers' Story," "Waking Sleeping Beauty" and "Walt and El Grupo," two of which I have had the privilege of seeing so far. "Waking Sleeping Beauty" is next on my Netlfix que.

"The Boys," lucky for me (and anyone else with a Netflix subscription), is available instantly via Netflix's online service, a surprise I discovered and then immediately took advantage of.

"The Boys," a great documentary, made by the sons of Bob and Richard in hopes of getting their fathers back together, tells the gripping story of two of the most iconic songwriters of all time. Their works include the score for "Mary Poppins," the "it's a small world after all" theme, the "Winnie the Pooh" score, and many other songs, who sheer volume and notoriety is surprising even to someone familiar with their work.

Even more intriguing is the brothers' story itself. Robert, the older brother, served in WWII and was one of one of the first American soldiers to discvoer the Dachau concentration camp, and was wounded in the knee during his service. His temperament proved to be, as Roy E. Disney put it, the "Feed the Birds" to his younger brother, Richard's "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious." The two contrasting personalities proved to be extremely different, and that contrast helped create some of the most memorable music that has ever been written.

The pair also proved to be one of Walt's closer acquaintances, having written Walt's favorite song, "Feed the Birds," in their first film score for "Marry Poppins." "The Boys" provides a unique view of Mr. Disney, one where he his not the focal point, but seen through the eyes of two friends who worked for him.

It's both an intriguing story and a great history lesson on the Walt Disney Company and the United States. But most of all, it's a great look into two of the most fascinating, and contrasting, personalities behind some great music. Even more so because they were behind it all, their work being much more famous than themselves.

So if you've got a Netflix subscription, pull up "The Boys: The Sherman Brothers' Story," and enlighten yourself, then maybe go fly a kite, sweep a chimney, or explore the Hundred Acre Wood.

Believe...That the Holiday Fireworks Show Could Have Been Better

It's that time of the year again, and all that other cliched jazz. Not that you'd be able to tell in Southern California right now. Disneyland has quite a bit of work for them the day after Thanksgiving, getting the park to look like it's located in some inhospitable midwestern location that's appealing for about 25 days of the year.

It really is one of the most wonderful times to visit the park. With its gigantic christmas tree, nightly fallings of fake snow, wreaths, hand made candy canes, and hundres of other little things that make Disneyland one of the most festive places during the holiday season.

The show

Yet not everything about the holiday overlays makes me jolly. As I previously discussed, the holiday overlay at the Haunted Mansion spooks me, but not in the right way. In short, some things about the Christmas time at Disneyland are an improvement, and some aren't.

Under the category of going from great to good would have to be the holiday fireworks show, "Believe...In Holiday Magic." After waiting for over an hour, so we could views the show from the perfect spot, I was sad to find out the fireworks display was not what I expected. In all, the show was too short, and lacked a good story.

Over the years I've been lucky enough to view "Remember... Dreams Come True" a couple of times, and unfortunately for all other firework displays following it, it's the standard I use to evaluate. This means that I'm disappointed by just about every local fireworks show, but being dissatisfied with a Disneyland show, that was something new.

Disney, having made the standard for telling stories with fireworks, achieved near perfection with "Remember," using Julie Andrew's narration, the "E-Tickets in the Sky" segment, it was so much more than just fireworks, even with the fireworks. There was fire, lasers and more. With "Holiday Magic," I was honestly just as thrilled with the lighting of Cinderella's castle. The fireworks show left me wanting so much more. I actually waited for a while in front of Sleeping Beauty's castle, just to make sure it was actually over. Unfortunately, it was, and I was left with a kind of void.

I guess even Disney can't bat 1000. They're no Pixar.

What's been your favorite fireworks show of the past? Does any part of the holiday overlay at the Disney parks leave you disappointed?

Tron: Legacy, and Why Big Box Office is Important

So the numbers are in, and it looks like "TRON: Legacy" will win this weekend's box office. It is projected to beat "Yogi Bear," and "How Do You Know," which really isn't that surprising. Those two films didn't even try to compete with "TRON's" boisterous ad campaign, and even if they had tried, they would have failed.

E-Ticket Light Cycle Attraction? Let's hope so!

People who know things that I don't predict that TRON will take in north of $40 million this weekend, which is a good amount of money, but not spectacular. Good money is really all that matters though, and it's not just this weekend that's impoartant. The long run will really prove how strong the film is, hopefully making upwards of $100 million domestically.

So what does this mean for us Disney enthusiasts? Quite a bit. First off, there will almost definitely be a sequel, which we'll only know to be a good or bad thing when that film comes out. It also means that Disney has a new successful franchise on their hands, meaning more merchandise sales and money for the film studios.

That's not the most important part to us Disney devotees. It's another successful movie, good for Disney. But how will this effect our beloved parks? Now that it's a fact the movie is popular and no longer speculation, Disney will hopefully start putting more money into research and development for a TRON: Legacy E-Ticket attraction. There's been some here-say about Disney doing putting some Imagineers on the job of developing an attraction, and now there's TRON's popularity as a motivator.

The ride will no doubt be based on some sort of light-cycle experience. What I hope they do at Disneyland is finally put the money into banking the curbs of the old People Mover (which itself used to have a TRON section when it was running the in 80's) and design a radical new light-cycle vehicle that gives the feeling of riding a motorcycle while it zips around the old track. But I doubt that's what will happen. I'm sure they will start from scratch, building another warehouse-type attraction, like Space Mountain or Indiana Jones.

Speculation aside, one thing is fact: now that TRON: Legacy has proven to be a success, its presence will be much more prevalent at the Disney parks. Hopefully will one day have an attraction that brings the amazing visuals of the film to life. If Disney is smart, they won't ignore an epic concept with TRON's light cycles like they did with "Monster's Inc.'s"door labyrinth.

Retro Disney Creates Nostalgia, Even for the Young

I recently turned the ripe old age of 20, the anti-milestone of milestones: no longer a teen, not yet of drinking age. I'm still a young person, but for some reason I have nostalgia for Disney history that I haven't even been alive to witness, and I don't seem to be the only one.

Disney merchandise for rides that no longer exist

Retro, or vintage, Disney is extremely trendy right now. It could be because of the down economy, which some say causes people to look to the past for comfort. This is not the case for me because I have yet to join the workforce and fully realize what a hole we're in, but I still look with admiration towards the things of Disney past, and Disney seems to be quite aware of this. Or it's that Disney also has released some exclusive merchanidse to celebrate their 55th anniversary.

With their Disney gallery, one of the first things you stumble upon when walking under the Disneyland Rail Road's berm, models of the original Disneyland, sketches of past Disneyland attractions are displayed along with paintings of what made Disneyland iconic when it opened in 1955. In the store, you can buy the prints, take them home, put them on your wall, and be constantly reminded of Disneyland past.

Or you can buy the $75 vintage pin/lanyard combo, designed after all the original Disneyland merchandise. Head down to D-street and you can buy retro-Matterhorn, Space Mountain, Haunted Mansion, or Flying Saucer t-shirts.

Maybe you're not at the parks. You could go to the Disney store, where their bags are modeled after the classic versions of Mickey and Minnie Mouse, or pop in one of the Walt Disney Treasures DVD's.  If you've got a Wii, you could play the new Epic Mickey video game, where Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, Mickey's predecessor, is a main character involved in the gameplay. The creator of the game, Warren Spector, laboriously went though the Disney archives while researching the game.

New merchandise, old look

Or you could just wait for the Jon Favreau directed "Magic Kingdom" film, about a family trapped in Disneyland over night that discovers the rides come to life when the sun goes down. In a recent interview with Geek Time Radio, Favereau discussed how he looked to Walt's original Disneyland and vision for inspiration:

"I've got to watch every Disney property. I started with 'Steamboat Willy' working my way all the way up. I really want to focus on the classic stuff like 'Dumbo,' 'Steamboat Willy,' all the early black and white Mickey Mouse cartoons -- all the Fantasyland stuff. I think there was something timeless about what Walt [Disney] did, and I want to explore, not just Disneyland, but Walt’s vision of Disneyland. If you look at his concept art it diverges a little bit from what the park turned into over time; but if you look at his original concept art and really explore what that world is, I think there is something really fun and magical to be done there," Favereau said.

Or you could watch one of Walt's ultimate pet projects: "Fantasia"on BluRay, a format on which it was recently released, or watch the Sherman brother's documentary, "The Boys," also having been recently released for home viewing.

I've never been on the Flying Saucers, nor was I around for Oswald, or the opening of Disneyland. With Disney's new marketing scheme subtlety focusing on the Disneyland of the past, it's left me longing for the old days. Those old days, that for a young person like me, would be completely new.

Tired of Pavement? Try Walking on Ropes: The Redwood Creek Challenge Trail

Let's face it, we all get into a routine when it comes to the Disney parks. Even people who are visiting for the first time have a sort of pre-fab routine planned out for them: do all the big attractions. For more frequent visitors, it's the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" routine, where you visit your favorite attractions, and forget about all the others. Well, at least I have a routine.

The Redwood Creek Challenge trail original sketch

This routine had made it so I only see certain parts of the park every time I visit, and since I like to see myself as well rounded when it comes to all things Disney, on my last visit, I decided the monotony had to end: I was going to do every attraction on the map. I know, I've talked about it before (and thanks for reading more than one of my posts), but it was an instrumental part of the trip, and opened my eyes to many new things.

One of those new things was the Redwood Creek Challenge Trail in the Golden State area of California Adventure. I'd been to it once before, when the park opened, but I skimmed it more than I embraced it.

This last trip, I took some time and really explored the whole Disney's-version-of-a-jungle-gym in full, and guess what? It was great. I've always loved gigantic play structures, probably because that's the only size that has ever been able to accomodate me.

Realistically, anytime anyone thinks about a jungle gym, they think small children and ball pits with hidden surprises. A fair assumption that is...generally. At the Redwood Creek Challenge Trail, there are none of those pesky height, age, or weight limits (unless you want to ride the tire-ziplines, then you're out of luck).

The course

The huge towers with webs or rope connection them and rickety bridges were almost more fun for me than they were for little kids. Running up and down them at top speed (probably a little dangerous), I whisked by many youngsters creeping up the webs with a look of extreme caution on their faces.

It was great being able to let my inner kid out again, having a playground that was big enough for anyone to play on again. And to think, I skipped the area because I thought it was geared towards younger people!

Next time you're in California Adventure, you've got some free time, and you want to experience what it's like to be a kid again in a more first hand point of view, then take a hike down Highway 49, and pull over at The Redwood Creek Challenge trail. Because you know you miss that good ol' playground.