Does Disney need to be fixed?

Not the actual company- just some of the people running it- is what needs to be fixed.

well, considering that Disney had first crack at the LOTR series and TURNED IT DOWN, its no wonder that Miramax wants out and that shareholders are mad. they could have had 3 BILLION dollars in sales there! what would the stock be worth then??

apparently, LOTR was not "proper" Disney material. what...no cute cuddly characters to base things on?? the only castles that matter are Cinderella's Castle??

laugh if you want, but this, under the surface, is NOT exactly a little thing. those who know about it are PLENTY mad.

Eisner does it again, eh??

Lord of the Rings was a gamble. No one really predicted it was going to do as well as it did and New Line took a big risk with that. Looks like a mistake in hindsight, but on paper it was expensive and not a sure thing.

Kind of like the big Hollywood studios passing on Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ".

You know they are kicking themselves now. :)

Even non-enthusiasts appear to be against Eisner:

http://www.graphxpress.com/cgi-bin/wcotp.cgi?date=20040307

sure LOTR was an expensive gamble. but New Line was gambling thier very EXISTENCE on it. had it flopped, no more New Line. Disney had the bucks and the name-assurance there. THAT'S why Harvey Weinstien went to them with it...

but considering the MILLIONS of Tolkien-geeks out there who have been waiting their whole LIVES for this, it was bound to be at least a modest success.

of course, Disney took a HUGE risk with "Pirates" considering how badly pirate movies have fared in the past.

but one risk taken and one hit made do NOT exonerate Eisner IMO...

there was no way that "Finding Nemo" was gonna flop...

it just makes me laugh, is all...all this backpedaling and trying to make it seem like theres nothing wrong. when clearly there IS something wrong.

Hate to break it to you, but millions of "Tolkien-geeks" out there doesn't translate to the sort of box office success that the films have had. Hindsight is such a useful and valid form of criticism. I highly doubt that the only reasons for rejecting the offer for the LOTR films was a bit more than they're not proper Disney material.

Fact is, they were a huge gamble, they really aren't proper Disney material (not that this is a concern with Miramax pouring out Kill Bills and the like) and it is ridiculous to say that the success of the films was equates to Disney making a bad decision. Heck, I'm still kicking myself for not taking on the LOTR franchise - I'd be a billionaire by now!!

There are problems with Disney, I don't think anyone's really doubting that. However, I think that Eisner's taking too much of the blame from enthusiasts and the greater community. I don't think he's the best thing for the company, but they're doing pretty well right now and the state of the US economy, 9-11 and all that did have a genuine and virtually unavoidable effect on theme parks worldwide.

As for films, well they've had a bad few years, but last year clealy picked up. Whether this is just a once-off thing or not is yet to be determined. I don't know much about ABC, but I do know that when I was in America I don't think I watched ABC once, despite watching a few hours of TV every night for six weeks. From what I gather, my hotel rooms were like a microcosm for the rest of America.