Eisner's Legacy, Iger's Chance and Disney's Future

[JakeLipson]

Today, Robert Iger took up the top job as CEO of The Walt Disney Company after that position had been held for 21 years by Michael Eisner.

Being as this is extremely significant for the company and I am a true Disney geek at heart, I felt I should say something about it. So here's what I'm saying.

Let me preface this by saying that I was just growing up in the late 80s and 90s, so haven't really been able to keenly observe Eisner until he was in his rut years. I was growing up during the Rennisance period and after, and hold all of their musicals 1989-1999 (counting Tarzan as a loose musical) very dear to my heart as the films that I grew up on. Thus, animation -- and particurarly grand-style animated musicals -- are my biggest concern and passion within my larger love for Disney as a whole, complete company.

Okay, now, from my research and observations, here are my thoughts on Eisner, Iger, what's happened up until now and what will and should happen next. (Those are not nessesarily the same things, unfortunately.)

Michael Eisner was ABSOLUTELY the right man for the job from 1984-1994, and really brought Disney back from a state of desperation, making it a comercially viable major entertainment company again. He deserves the respect of every Disney fan for what he helped do during that time.

And heck, even in 1995 or so he was all right (if unspectacular) from what I can tell. But by the time The Lion King had ended its long, leggy and enormous theatrical run and was released to VHS, where it promptly shattered every record in the book, things started to go to his head. And I think that's when he really started to slip; he should have been on the lookout for a replacement that year. But his vanity kept him holding on 11 years longer than he should have. Lately I've heard that he wanted to build a legacy, but by 1994 he had already done that. He had brought Disney back from the edge of death, and would have been brilliantly remembered as a true visionary if he had exited at the top of his game. He did many important things for the studio, but the most important was his helping to re-energize Disney's animation department. He should have quit while he was ahead.

Instead, he dug in his heels and in the process lost sight of what the company really stood for. He had helped the company regain its identity, only to forget all of that in a quest for glory that he really had already obtained. This caused that glory to fade as he began to dismantle and then completely destroy the classical animation studio that he had helped to rebuild. He turned his own and the company's back on the art form that they had pioneered and neutured with tender, loving care for decades, and that's a sad, sad thing.

It leaves his legacy tarnished -- once brilliant and recently stupid cancel each other out, and most people are now likely to remember the later, stupid Eisner instead of the more distant brilliant one. I respect him and give him my grattitude for 1984-1994, but beyond that, he REALLY missed the point and passion of the company that he was trying (unsuccessfully) to lead.

As he exits the studio, Eisner has started to reinvent Disney animation once again as a "hip" CGI outfit; they have become a follower in the industry, not the leader that they have always been in the past. The new movie slate allows Iger the same chance that Eisner had 21 years ago; he can now redefine what the Disney studio does as the animation company it was founded to be. He can either continue with Eisner's second rennovation and turn the company into a CGI copycat in a market way too flooded with those right now...or, if he's really bold, he can allow the films that WDFA currently has in the middle of extensvie production to play out and then go back to its roots to find something both new and classical all at once.

The key to his success or failure with Disney animation, as I see it, is the Rapunzel project, which is currently in production for 2009 as a Shrek-like joke CGI movie, "Rapunzel Unbraided." It is obviously far too late for him to tinker with Chicken Little and the like; Wilbur Robinson is too far into production as well, and I don't know what's gong on with American Dog. But Rapunzel Unbraided presents him an oppertunity to make a big statement here, and I think that's really where we can begin to judge Iger as Iger and not "Iger dealing with the remnants of Eisner."

I believe very strongly that traditional and CG animation can and should goexsist; I love both forms and wouldn't give up either one. I think traditional animation needs a major studio to jump behind it with force and say, "We still believe in you." If they do this, no studio will make a stronger statement on it than Disney, and given their wonderful trdition of classical fairy tale musicals, dating all the way back to the film that founded their feature animation empire -- Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs -- there is no better film to make this statement with than Rapunzel, and the oppertunity is right there ripe for the picking.

With Rapunzel, Iger can bring the studio back to its classical epic fairy tale roots and create a savior film to regenerate traditional animation in the same way that Cinderella did in 1950 and The Little Mermaid did in 1989. I have nothing against CGI, but think that certian stories are suited to it, while certian stories are suited to traditrional animation. Rapunzel, as a story, screams to be treated in the vein of those films I just mentioned. It should be a big, bold, daring, beautiful, epic-scale take-no-prisoners fairy tale romance musical that will take audiences' breaths away.

If Iger moves EXTREMELY quickly, he can probably still steer the Rapunzel production in that direction -- and singlehandedly show the world that traditional animation is still a viable art form. It's DEFINATELY got the talent to do it there in SPADES -- just to name a couple of many pros, Glen Keane, who is a legendary traditional animator, directing presents tons of great possibilities, and whoever hired Kristin Cennelworth to voice and sing for the title character deserves an immidate pay raise and promotion. Wheather Iger will be smart enough to see this talent and put them all to their proper use is the big question mark.

If he does move this production to big traditional musical status and revive the animation department with its own unique voice again because of it he will have earned my love and respect just for that. It has been far too long since a big Disney musical truly set the world on fire, andd I miss when that used to happen. I dream fondly of a day when that will happen again, and I hope I am here to see it.

If, on the other hand, Iger lets that one golden oppertunity slip past him, it will probably not appear again for a looooooong time. Therefore, I think we need to wait and see what he does -- or doesn't -- do with the Rapunzel project before we can really see if he's got the smarts to do right by Walt's legacy. I know and love the fact that there are other areas of the Disney company that deserve his attention as well, but animation is the thing that the company was founded on and I think any real distinct definition of how he handles Disney will and should start there.

As I say goodbye to Eisner and am tempted to thank him and hug him before being just as tempted to scream and slap him in the face, I wish Iger luck in cleaning up and fixing the mess that Eisner left him with and reinventing it into something great once again. I hope for the best.

Your thoughts?

[Damian]

Very good article. and I agree on all points. Eisner did some great things for Disney back in the 80's but became a victom of his own success. It's apparent Eisner's strong qualities lie in bringing something back to success, not mainting that success. He got greedy and assumed the fans would enjoy any animated piece of crap they'd throw at us, losing focus on what was really important; good storytelling.
He grew the theme parts so much that some started to implode on themselves. I never quite understood why he thought opening a theme park based on California IN California was a good idea, but he did and we ended up with Disney' California Adventure which has struggled to become profitble since the day it opened. (I've been there, it absolutly does NOT have the same magical feel that Disneyland/World does)

It's a good thing he's living because it's time for some one with some fresh ideas to take the reigns again. I have no opinion on Rapunzel and quite frankly I had no idea it was in pre-production. Honestly I can care less what format is used (Traditional vs CGI) just so long as the story is great. Obviously I would like to see Disney bring traditional back because like you said, it's what the company is founded on and Uncle Walt would want it that way.