By: Gregory Weagle
 

Hey; it's better than Fox & Family Devalued Part Trois isn't it? Okay; I'm probably going to get flamed anyway about that beef I had with Disney a year or two ago; but guess what.....

However; my beef towards Michael Esiner has lessened over the last year. Not because Michael Esiner has in fact done any better but because of Roy Disney continuing whining about Michael Esiner's continuing mismanagement....and while I have no problem with people saying that Esiner should resign at face value; it's just that Roy Disney has failed to realize that he waited one year too late to say enough is enough. Before I was making such dire warning (ABC Family anyone?) Sure; Roy Disney probably did this under good intentions; but the road to hell is paved under good intentions isn't it? Isn't it Roy? The problem with Roy's run to get Michael Esiner out of Disney's famed office is that he's not much better than Esiner when it comes to the creation of sequels (Fantasia 2000 anyone?); so you can see the creditability from him go out the door right there. Sure his cause might me noble and all; but what can he offer as an alternative to Michael Esiner?

Still; considering that Michael Esiner's record is so awful that the question of Roy's creditability might not even matter at this point. The recent box office _live-action_ film "The Alamo" took in only $9 million in ticket sales (as of it's first week's release). That should expose the theory that people do not want to see 2D hand drawn animation for what it is: a complete red letter lie. Home On The Range (The last 2D animated film) did poorly at the box office; but at least it did better in one week than The Alamo did (about $20 million). I should note that the highest grossing film for the Easter weekend (the week of The Alamo release) was Mel Gibson's R-rated film The Passion of the Christ with $17.5 million which was a lackluster showing considering that it grossed $100 million in one week and over $400 million in ticket sales so far as of this writing. I didn't say ultra-violent since it had only 24 scenes of violence compared to the PG-13 movie The Lord of The Rings which had over 90 according to the Christan Science Monitor; and the blood is no more than seen in an unedited version of Dragon Ball Z. When an R-rated film is considered _family-friendly_ even in the loosest sense; you know that Disney is in trouble. Esiner's own peers are showing discontent too; as Esiner's re-election bid showed a 43%+ withheld vote (which is equal to voting No.) and it is increasing. Roy and Goldman are suing Disney for the actual results which are rumored to be much higher (in fact; a recent update from Savedisney.com states that the vote has actually reached 45% withheld now.). The Comcast vote is pretty much dead right now. Now to be perfectly fair to Michael Esiner; international sales of Finding Nemo did do well as expected. However; this also exposes Disney the same way that 4Kids Entertainment is being exposed right now; that they depend on third-party sources to prop themselves up. However; unlike 4Kids Entertainment; Disney has ended it's relationship that kept them even breathing at this point and that is PIXAR!! 4Kids Entertainment at least has good relationships with their third party sources despite the fact that 4Kids has screwed many an anime dub since the faithful Pokemon dub. The Disneyland theme park business hasn't preformed since 9/11 and the quality keeps getting worse (along with the overkill of Political Correctness and revisionist history)...and finally; the ABC Network is fourth (Read: last) place in the ratings which I have to admit is quite strange considering that the quality of ABC's programming is better than the other three....but then again; I say the same thing about Nintendo too...and they haven't exactly been rosy sales-wise (although they are the only ones showing actual growth). I guess the public still believes that mature equals indecent. Please prove me wrong....for goodness sake; prove me wrong!!

Now that I've finished my moral self-rightous indignation of the Disney company again; I started to ask myself this question: Why hasn't anymore talked about the Walt Disney Television Animation Division yet?... Every article I read; it's always about the animation by committee in the feature animation division. It's always been about ABC which shouldn't be put into the same breath as Disney (because it's not independent.) and it's always been about the degradation of the theme parks. Why does everyone seem to forget about the Walt Disney Television Animation Division? Why do they treat it like it doesn't exist?! However; for some odd reason; I believe I know the answer and it is not good for the division. While I give them kudos for creating my favorite show TaleSpin, there is no doubt in my mind that Disney's decline in quality can be linked back to the decision to have the Disney Television Animation do the first movie back in 1995 to direct video....Aladdin: The Return of Jafar. It was in the eyes of Disney fans as the real start of the diluation of the Disney brand...and the beginning of Esiner's downward spiral after the death of Frank Wells. So how could this have happened?

In order to understand why the division has become the allagory of hatered from Disney fans; we must go back in time and recall the history of the Walt Disney Television Division. The division all began in 1984 under the helm of Gary Krisel as a response to the efforts of Hanna Barbera and other developers like Sony, Marvel, Claster and Filmnation onto the television stage of animation....Although HB is hardly a king for anything animated when it comes to quality; they were very popular with the kids though and that's what counts, I guess. Anyhow; Disney's first production under that division was The Wuzzles which was a show about fused animal beast living in a village called Wuz. It was also the debut of Ken Koonce and David Weimers as staff writers when they were actually good writers. (Read: David Weimers has since retired to the UK while Ken sadly went to work with the creators of The Cramp Twins. As much as I think that The Cramp Twins is the worst show on earth; I don't blame Ken Koonce for that. Blame it on 4Kids for buying this piece of trash.) Sadly; the show has become an allagory for hatered of kiddie shows, because otherwise there were a lot of great ideas presented and the execution was decent enough in the 13 episodes that it was in. Hey; it was their first series and it would get a lot better in the next year when Disney vaulted to number one with Adventures of The Gummi Bears. This show took place in midevil times and features a bunch of colorful bouncing bears who bounced after drinking an elixir known as Gummiberry Juice. The show also debuted the work of Art Vellito (who has since moved out of Disney after this) and Jymn Magon (who created TaleSpin) who were trying to outdo each other and the result was a great series that did very well on boardcast television and got Disney noticed as a great television series animation machine. That started a trend of great animation which the family actually enjoyed with Carl Barks/Don Rosa's comic book series coming to television in the form of Ducktales in 1987 (which went 100 episodes); Winnie The Pooh went from the big screen to the television screen in 1988 and both Chip & Dale went from the Donald and Pluto Disney shorts to a spin-off P.I. series known as Rescue Rangers in 1989. These programs did very well and brought some actual quality that Disney was looking for and was lacking everywhere else. Sure it is true that the animation was outsourced; but when compared to the animation of American made animation of HB and Filmation, it was actually slightly better. Interestly enough; Disney's only apparent failure was a 1987 series called Fluppy Dogs which was based on the Care Bears and that didn't make it past the pilot stage. Then came 1990 and Disney then had enough good shows to create a block of animation which was going into syndication. So Disney did the next logical step; they created an animation block called The Disney Afternoon and centered it around their next Disney production: A little action/adventure/drama/flying series called TaleSpin which was created by Jymn Magon (Gummi Bears) and Mark Zaslove (Winnie The Pooh). It was not only a monster hit in syndication (If you believe the numbers; it even beat out newcomer Tiny Toon Adventures); it was the also considered as the only Disney show not to have a bad episode in terms of quality. It also had the honor of not only be the biggest example of overuse of freelancing artists; it was also one which caused disgust among Disney purists since TaleSpin was the first show to actually use character from the Feature Animation Division (The Jungle Book.) I'll talk about that later. Disney then continued to build on the formula of diversity and quality with their next Disney Afternoon release which was the comedy/crime-fighting series Darkwing Duck and that was a monster hit in syndication as well. Things were looking up for Disney Television Animation until something happened at around this time.....

It was around 1990 that Walt Disney Television Animation decided that it was ready to actually take on a Feature Presentation. So with the help of Walt Disney Animation France (who also did the first two acts of TaleSpin's Plunder and Lightning) they released a Ducktales movie. While the quality wasn't as high as the television series in terms of storyline; the overall presentation was good enough that the experiment would be considered something that Disney would do...and that's when the problems of the Disney Television Animation started to rear it's ugly head. In 1992; Disney continued to diversify and created the sitcom-type series starring Goofy called Goof Troop which was popular due to Home Improvement; followed by the Roger Rabbit-type series Bonkers and the Disney Short-type series Raw Toonage. However; despite these new ideas, these shows didn't do so well and the quality suffered greatly. I've already explained the problems behind this in: Kim Possible Does The Impossible & Other Things editorial. In the case of Bonkers there was a change in the overall direction of the series for no reason whatsoever (Duane Capizzi left in midstream and Robert Taylor (Goof Troop) took over.) and that upset the entire show and turned it into garbage as a result. Compare that to TaleSpin where there was little doubt where it was going and you can see the difference. In Raw Toonage's case; someone forgot to tell the creators that one of the characters was in fact a direct rip-off, which caused a massive lawsuit to occur as a result. I think the original creators of the character won that because that character is never talked about by the Disney staffers ever again. At any rate; the end result was that Disney panicked as Warner Brothers was overtaking Disney share with Batman: The Animated Series (the other show without a bad episode) and Animanics. Can you say response to TaleSpin and Darkwing Duck folks? Then Disney Television Animation made the big mistake; instead of looking from within and realizing that they made the mistake of not giving their mealtickets (TS and DW) their due they looked at the Feature Department and saw that it was doing very well with The Lion King, Aladdin and The Little Mermaid. So they decided to take the features of Aladdin & The Little Mermaid and create television series out of them. The ratings started to stablize along with the quality; but that was mostly due to the high quality of the Feature Division. That's when there was concern by critics and Disney fans alike that this was a sign that the division was running out of ideas.....

However; Greg Weissman was not impressed with this turn of events and has his own ideas in order to rescue the Television Division. That's when he created Gargoyles in 1995 and that show hit another high in terms of quality. It also was a response to show that Disney can be original and be more than just dancing animals (they can kick butt when needed.) and singing. The show won many hearts (they are more organized than Rescues Rangers and TaleSpin); but it made the mistake of sounding like a Batman response. Also; by Disney standards this was a dark, violent and gritty show even though anywhere else it would be very tame. However; it was also around this time that Walt Disney Television Animation decided to take another kick in the can when it came to Feature Animation and developed the first two sequels of Aladdin to Direct-To-Video with The Return of Jafar and The King of Thieves. They did so well after they were released that Michael Esiner give the Television Division the green light which would set in motion the future of the Disney Television Animation Divison. They would be known in the most polite terms as the Disneytoon Movies. To everyone else; it was Disney Crap/Cheap-quel. This brought various sequels such as Lion King 1 1/2 and Lion King 2, Return to Neverland (Peter Pan 2), 101 Dalimations 2: Patch's London Adventure, Jungle Book 2, Cinderella 2, and about ten Winnie The Pooh sequels (although to be fair; Feature did sequels of Winnie long before Disney Television Animation did.) to name just a few. Interestly enough; Fantasia 2000 and The Rescuers Down Under were created by Feature (and were much better in quality) so this wasn't just a Television Division thing that Eisner did. Anyhow; the show of panic from Disney was on as the huge backlash was set in motion by Disney fans. Even the television work by Disney Television Animation was showing a similiar pattern with shows such as Timon & Pumbaa (comedy), Jungle Cubs (prequel to Jungle Book), 101 Dalimations: The Series, Buzz Lightyear of Star Command (of Toy Story fame), Hercules: The Animated Series, Tarzan: The Animated Series & even Lilo & Stitch: The Animated Series. All were directly based on the Feature Animation in the same vein as Aladdin. There also was an animated series based on the live-action movie The Mighty Ducks. Ducktales got a sequel with Quack Pack (which was horrible because Jymn Magon got so disgusted and left in mid-stream; and was replaced by Toby Shelton who clearly had no idea where to go with this series.). Even Mickey Mouse wasn't safe as Mickey's Mouseworks and The House of Mouse were created (giving us the Quackstreet Boys. The less said the better.)... and then things got even worse for Television Animation because they clearly didn't like the FCC three hour education rule that was in place in 1997 when Disney started creating two new block called One Saturday Morning and One Too. Between 1996-2001 Disney released Recess (Hogan's Heroes deadringer), Pepper Ann (most self-centered), The Weekenders (Dull), Teacher's Pet (only good cartoon in that era.), Teamo Surpremo (worst Disney cartoon ever) and shorts such as Genie's Great Minds Think for Themselves (which disgusts me because that's Michael Esiner's excuse to pushing this block in the first place.) This was the lowest point for Disney as the quality hit rock bottom and their handling of school was very poor. All the heart of Disney was gone and replaced with unjustified attitude; which was sad because Disney heart is needed to create a convincing show about school. Despite the hard efforts of Filmore, Kim Possible, Proud Family and even to a lesser extent Dave The Barbarian the flood of sequels wasn't changing hearts enough for Disney fans. The damage was done as the box-office was swelling with Disney Television Animation sequels that just shouldn't be created by them...Walt Disney Television Animation went from being a savior to the cause of all Disney's trouble Post-Frank Wells era. The Television Division was hated like a plague and many purists just wanted to see them cut their losses and kill the Television Division so that the diluation of Disney brans would just stop. Sadly; the Television Division was moving on with Mulan 2, Oliver & Company 2, Bambi 2 and the ultimate insult; a sequel to Walt Disney's juggarnaut of animation Snow White. The backlash was on and has no end in sight....and that's the story of Disney Television Animation up to this point.

Now I'm about to write an eassy that will once again take what you believe; turn it upside down; kick it in the pants and whack it silly until it confesses that it is not what it seems. What I'm saying is that the Disney Television Animation Division doesn't deserve the condemnation that it is getting. Disney Television Animation shouldn't be killed off. This is not a in praise of the Television Division (because it has not earn that; make no mistake); but a mere defense of it. Michael Esiner in my opinion is the culpit behind what I call the degradation of the division and the Disney brand itself with it's misuse of the television division. However; in order to defend Walt Disney Television Animation Division, I must make several statements that will get me into trouble and will cause anger to those Disney purists (who are no better than anime purists I might add); but must be made:

[a.] It is okay to make sequels!
[b.] It is okay to make parodies!
[c.] Walt Disney is NOT the God to end all Gods!

Here; let me explain each point one by one and you will see why Esiner is creating sequels and why Disney purists are pretty much hypocritical now.....

 Yes folks; I'm starting my arguing my point with that famous line. It has been considered a statement to justify hating Disney's recent parade of sequels from the Television Animation Division. While I agree with a lot of things that Walt Disney said for various reason; in this case what Walt Disney said after doing some soul searching of my own and research on him, I can safely say that this statement is full of crap! Now I could show the most clear-minded evidence of this by showing the quality, bliss and box office ticket sales of Toy Story 2 from PIXAR animation to prove what a load of crap that statement is. But I won't... because I can nail you fans out there with the fact that Walt's own statement is vague and abstract. You know what; you can top pigs with pigs...if you know what kind of pig it is. I'v got one question to ask all you Disney fans out there: How good is Walt Disney when it comes to _original_ content? Outside of Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Goofy and the other Disney shorts; when it comes to original, fresh and entertaining content...well; Walt Disney sort of sucks actually. Walt Disney has been at his best in the Feature Animation Division when he uses content from the public domain. So what is the _public domain_ you may ask? It is content that can be used by the public after the copyright expires; more or less (not to be confused with trademark which doesn't expire by the way). The public domain contains such novels as The Jungle Book, Alice In Wonderland, and Snow White....Look at every Walt created film: Alice In Wonderland, Snow White, Jungle Book...see a pattern here? In fact; nearly every single film Walt Disney created was based on material that was created by someone else and yet didn't have the same copyright protection anymore as the most recent original content. All public domain material. Fantasia uses Mickey Mouse as a basis; so it doesn't count as an original film, even if Walt did create Mickey Mouse. While Walt did create new characters such as King Louie (which didn't exist in the Jungle Book novel) and the doorknob from Alice In Wonderland; he wasn't exactly a powerhouse in originality. Now don't get me wrong; I love Walt Disney's work. When it comes to executing his ideas onto various mediums there was no one better (Sorry Mr. Miyamoto). He is a great leader in animation and captures fantasies like no one else can. However; it's time for people to realize that Walt has been topping fairy tales (public domain material) with fairy tales (public domain material) for years on end and thus proving his own analogy false. The real question that should be debated is should you top pigs with pigs? That is a great question; but if the answer is no, that would also put Disney fans in a bind over Walt's use of fairy tales as well. It's a no-win situation here and that why Walt's famous statement shouldn't be used as a mantra anymore.

 Okay; I made that statement up, however the same thing applies here. Basically; it means that you cannot top a fairy tale with a parody of a fairy tale....also known as topping Jungle Book with TaleSpin. Yeah; you knew this debate would be coming in the end and it's time to discuss this. While Walt Disney never said this on the record (maybe because he knew better with Fantasia. ); it has been used to decry the use of the Jungle Book characters in this series. Disney purists believe that TaleSpin is a disgrace to the Jungle Book and was an ill-thought idea. One user (who shall remain nameless to protect the poor user's fragile mind) went further to say that TaleSpin dilutes The Jungle Book (huh?) and that this is an allagory (in a series of them) as to why we should be more disriminate in our taste for animation. In other words; parodies (which are legal under copyright law by the way) are evil in their eyes. That is also full of crap considering that if that statement were true 90% of Walt Disney's material would have to be shunned right there (because he uses material from novels and fairy tales that aren't protected by copyright law). Ooops! On another angle; Walt Disney has in fact been parodized a lot over his career with Fantasia being a very prime example of this. I'll never forget the Smokey The Bear appearance in one of his animated shorts and various other parodies which I would watch more of if they were available. So Walt Disney is no stranger to topping pigs (fairy tales/public domain) with piglets (parodies of public domain); so to speak. Where's the outrage for that? In response to the comment about diluting of a _brand_ (How insulting is that to the original writers?); I find that stupid and misguided since Walt Disney has done the exact same thing to the original fairy tales and novels. Much of the public domain material Walt used (not stolen since copyright laws don't exist for it) was actually not made for children. It was made for adults and contained a lot of naughty stuff like sex and execssive violence which would have caused shock and outrage if Walt hadn't diluted and watered down the material. The Disney producers do the same today; although most of the watered down is complete overkill on their part. I ask this question: Why isn't there outrage right there? Don't the original creators matter anymore? I think that this is proof of jealousy on the part of the Disney purists who basically hate anyone who manages to "one-up" Walt Disney or anyone who create a parody for that matter....like TaleSpin did with the Jungle Book which by the way was the worst film Walt Disney ever created in his career. That may not be saying much compared to others; but even he can have an off day in Feature Animation. Can't he have at least that?! The bottom line is that TaleSpin was not really an ill-thought idea at all. It was a really great idea which sadly took me three years to understand and love. There are few series live or animated that have what TaleSpin has to offer: 1930's setting, tropical paradise, Air Pirates, airplane technology and cute furry animals who can dance and kick butt at the same time....and that's just for starters. The only reason why purists hate it is because it so happens that three of the characters names are Baloo, Louie and Shere Khan. I can only say what I said in my editorial about Plunder and Lightning editing: SPARE ME YOUR EXCUSES PURISTS!! I'm not buying your sob story!

 I think we can all agree that this statement is blastmophis and taking God's good name in vain. However; there is more to this since the above statement can also be considered codeword for Walt Disney being a very moral man in the same vein as Fred Rogers; even through Rogers is a former minister himself and therefore has more creditability of morality on his part. I know that Jim Baylo stated this in a previous editorial as well (It's All About School [Cartoons]). Well; maybe it is just me; but Walt Disney is not that moral at all. He is no stranger to the world of the vice so to speak. It has been well documented that Walt has actually used unfriendly cuss words (dammit) and that he smoked. While his cussing is tame by today's standards and he kept it under control for the most part (thank goodness); he did manage to slip smoking and drinking into his animation. Sleeping Beauty even had the word hell in it. There were worser than today black stereotypes in film (although at times it seems like there's little difference compared to today; if you believe the NAACP.) Even early into the life of Mickey Mouse (considered the most friendly prankster in animation history); he had suicidal thoughts although I considered people who call that having a personality as human-hating sadists. But that's just me. There are a couple more vices in both Walt's life and film career (still tame by today's coarse standards mind you); which pretty much explain why I think calling Walt Disney an absolute role model is asking for way too much. Sure; he's better than 90% of the entertainers out there today. However; let's not make him an idol. Walt _was_ smart enough not to fall into that trap thank goodness; but I wish the Disney fans wouldn't fall in it either. Walt Disney is not God. He is probably the non-cooking equalivant of the Urban Peasent's James Barber; but without the massive changing of professions that James underwent in his life.

Okay; that is enough of defending Walt Disney Television Animation, sequels, prequels and parodies everywhere. It is now time to condemn Disney Television Animation (sort of anyway) and expose what should be done to turn Disney's fortunes around. Recently Disney's release list was revealed and it was loaded with sequels (Read: Almost every single production was a sequel or a parody) I'm sure that this was cause the sequel-fest backlash to continue without fail. However; fans must understand that these low-budget productions are still making money for the company even if they don't bring in tons of it. In other words; until they lose money off of the sequel-fest, the backlash serves little purpose other than a moral one. The reason that these sequels sell is because parents who both of them work while allowing children to be babysat by these sequels on the premise that they are designed for kids only and that they serve their purpose (even through these sequels are for the most part worse then the originals and are no safer to show than more quality original animation out there.). They also denounce critics who speak their mind on USIMDB (for example) for the same reason and believe that they are just _shouting in the wildrness_ and therefore aren't free to speak their mind freely at all. I can go on about freedom of speech and expression; but I won't because I can nail these misguided parents by telling them that they are a bunch of hypocritics. It is hypocritical for these parents to criticize other people for being critics when the parents themselves are acting exactly like critics themselves. Oops! Maybe you parents are shouting in the wind as well too. On the other hand; I can understand parents saying the same thing about Nick or Warner Brothers since most of the stuff nowadays is designed for kids only. I know it's sad; but it is true. However; that doesn't apply to Walt Disney entertainment in this case. Walt Disney Entertainment is for families; which means that it must appeal to both kids and adults (Read: Parents are adults too in you didn't realize it already.). In order to be successful (like Walt has been) the entertainment must not insult the intellegence of both the child and the adult. It cannot be one or the other; it must be both. I know this is putting Disney to a different standard; but that's the price you pay for being beyond excellence at this point. I wish Michael Eisner would realize this right now.

Okay; my train of thought was going off-track on that tangent....Doesn't anyone notice that most of these sequels (Fantasia 2000 and Rescuers Down Under notwithstanding) are created through the Walt Disney Television Animation Division in which many either go to home video or the box office? Please note the key word here: Television Animation. That should indicate that something is wrong here. I've realize now that the problem with Disney is not the sequels pre se (if it was then it renders the whole point of defending the Television Animation Division pointless); but the fact that it's an animation division doing it; a division that was only designed to do _television animation shows_ and _television movies_. Television is a different breed of animal altogther compared to the box office/direct to video and putting the weight of work for these sequels on the fragile shoulders of the Television Animation Division pretty much sabotages both the Feature Division and the Television Division in terms of creative focus since TV Animation cannot peform box-office miracles and it gives the Feature Division a undeserved bad rap as a result of the former. Let alone dilute the Disney brand in the process. It also shows that Michael Eisner is lacking of new ideas as a result of this mismanagement since there are way too many sequels on the slate right now. I might not mind sequels per se; but too many sequels is simply asking for trouble and simply telling consumers that they have nothing left.

So what can the Disney company do to re-enhance the brand back into something that is respected again? (Since former glory is pretty much impossible at this point.) I suggest doing the only logical thing (besides filing for bankruptcy of course) which doesn't require much in terms of thinking (firing Michael Esiner since the people considered to replace aren't much better and Mel Gibson is still unknown as an animation guy at this point.) or spending a lot of time and/or money (like the quality of theme parks) and that solution is to demote the Walt Disney Television Animation Division back to what they do best: Television Animation and Television Movies. They should stop making box-office sequels and direct-to-video at once. They simply cannot do it properly without screwing it up. If Disney wants to make sequels and/or remakes (2D/3D; it doesn't matter) then the Feature Division should be doing it since they actually take the time to create an actual half-decent film. See Fantasia 2000, Rescuers Down Under. If you really want to get cute; create a separate animation division for Direct-To-Video release so that it would allow for ideas to actually grow and not be half-baked like it is now under the Television Division. Not to mention that this would also have the interesting side effect of reducing the number of sequels and thus reducing the backlash from Disney fans. If you are worried about those parents who buy sequels; don't. They don't care anyway. They will eat it up regardless; as long as it pleases the child then there are no problems with this solution. I would also recomend that Disney remove shows like Teamo Surpremo (Recess, The Weekenders and 101 Dalimations: The Series for example) and reduce the showing of other shows that show multiple episodes per day to one. In Teamo's case; it is considered by many to be an allagory for what's wrong with Disney Television Animation: Bad animation (applies to the other examples), bad dead-ringer for Powerpuff girls (only to Teamo) and forced education down the throats of viewers (applies to the other examples) which basically give the impression that the show was only designed for please the three hour minimum requirement of the FCC. Hey; I expect more than low-brow entertainment from Disney; what did you expect? Particually; when school already exists in the real world. That's another thing that they can fix (both of them) without a lot of money or time; but that's another matter for another time. However; the question is will Eisner do this simple solution? Probably not; since Eisner doesn't even realize the fact that no one wants him at Disney anymore. He's even worse than Bill Goldberg; as least Goldberg left the WWE after WrestleMania XX. Sure it took a year; but he did leave. Michael Eisner thinks like one of those parents who criticize critics; as a shout in the wind and thus doesn't deserve to by heard and heeded. Can you say influence to the drug of Esiner? I think so....but that's another tale for another time too....

Now to end my editorial; I want to talk about who might be the successor to the Disney fortune if Michael Esiner resigns (Read: Good luck fools)...more to the point; the possability of Mel Gibson being CEO of Disney. The creator of the most popular film of this year: The Passion of The Christ has been in the rumor mill recently; that Mel will become the CEO of Disney. Now let me state this before someone takes my statements out of context: Mel Gibson is a brilliant actor and he's an excellent producer. Hey; when you manage to create a wonderful film that both Christians and human hating sadists love then you have done something special (and they better bring it out on television unedited. I know CBC will considering that the CRTC cannot do anything about it.). However; I question people who think that Mel Gibson is the perfect replacement for Michael Esiner. Now Mel Gibson is a huge fan of 2D animation (hey he wanted Chicken Run to be 2D instead of Clay animation) which is a huge plus for him to get the job. On the other hand; I'm wondering if he can separate his religious agenda from film (something Walt was successful in; unlike Michael Esiner who cannot separate his PC'ness agenda from film...and not allowing Michael Moore's film F 911 (sorry Michael) to be released by Miramax doesn't count as separating someone's agenda from film). That is something else that Disney fans don't like is a certain agenda and values being forced down the throats of the audience. What I fear is that we will see Mel Gibson revise history from the right side of the spectrum as much as we see Michael Esiner revise history from the left side of the spectrum. I guess the absolute in life is that history is written by the winners is true; isn't it? Not to mention that Mel Gibson seems to love Pocahontas and the way it was protrayed; which is the allagory of a bad film in Walt Disney's Feature Animation Division and the allagory of revisionist history. Unless Mel Gibson learns the lessons of Walt Disney (by keeping the violence and vice to a minimum; which is something Mel Gibson has problems with considering Braveheart and to a much lesser extent Passion...plus keep his agenda out of films and let the story run as free as morally possible.) then Mel Gibson will be no better than Michael Esiner is...and Disney will be further driven into the ground.

Which returns me to the man who brought this whole issue of Disney's demise to ahead: Roy Disney. He should be counting his lucky stars that Michael Esiner is so bad because the sucessors aren't much better. I wish that Roy would stop whining and create his own animation company because then he wouldn't sound like he's crying foul and would actually sound like he is actually interested in the actual process of animation and innovation. Maybe it's time for Roy to stop crying a river and start admitting that he allowed Esiner to get out of control with the company since Frank Wells death. Walt Disney is indeed spinning in his own grave in double speed with Michael Esiner running his faithful company into the ground quicker than Baloo at a All You Can Eat One Dollar Special At Louie's and at the same time spinning at the thought that successor isn't any better or even rightous to the Disney name for that matter. That's the allagory of Disney in general in this new era of animation; now weep in sorrow as it can only get worse....That's my opinion; I welcome yours. See you next time.