A hypothetical take on Walt's possible reactions to today's Disney Company.

Or is it? I have a definite answer to the question: Walt would *not* be happy with the Company if he were resurrected yesterday. But if Walt had never died and simply retired or toned down his responsibilities, it turns out I think he would be pleased.

I think that, overall, Walt would be happy with the company as it now exists. This would be true if for no reason than that he wouldn't really care about any of the departments not directly related to creative content.

I hate to be predictable about it, but I think Walt would be happy with some things and livid about others. First, I think he'd be happy about the revival of animation. Some of the films in the last decade or so (The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, The Little Mermaid) rank right up there with his classics. Let me ask you your thoughts on animation before I get too carried away.

As to how he would have felt about NASCAR on ESPN, I don't think he would have cared too much as long as it didn't interfere with the things he wanted done. I do think he would have agreed completely with the idea behind the ABC/Capital Cities purchase. Walt, more than anyone, understood the value of TV in cross-selling Disney products. 

One thing we need to keep in mind is that, while he was not as naive a businessman as sometimes portrayed, he was always willing to live with whatever business model it took to get his projects done. Those details he left to Roy.

But something else you mention here is critical: Walt did always want to do new things, and push the boundaries. In this respect, I'd actually think Walt would be displeased with the way some things have evolved. Disneyland is more or less the same experience now. Splash Mountain, though fun, is not really a new concept. The California Indiana Jones ride is the closest to a brave new technology we've seen post-Walt, in my opinion. 

What has Disney done since Walt died? In a nutshell, it stagnated at first, then it expanded by cloning itself. The additional parks (MGM Studios, Animal Kingdom) are copies of things other people have done. Ditto the cruise line. I agree the ABC purchase he would agree with, but honestly, Disney has not been very groundbreaking about new television shows. ABC was in last place until Regis' Millionaire show, and this was imported from England.

The fact that Walt was constantly innovating (and for most of his life had only one product line with which to innovate) has created an expectation in most people that everything Disney does will be innovative, and this just isn't possible when they have their fingers in so many pies. 

It may not have been successful, but I do think that Disney's attempt at a family cruise experience was very innovative for the industry. Direct marketing of the studios products through the Disney Stores was innovative at its time. In animation, Dinosaur was technologically innovative if not thematically. 

I think Walt would actually appreciate the unusually high level (for a corporation) of innovation that goes on at Disney these days.

You're quite right to point out that the company is not so nimble as it used to be. I consider the very diversified nature of the company to be a drawback. The real innovators these days are companies who take chances - like DreamWorks (founded by the guy who brought us the three great Disney movies mentioned above), or Steve Wynn, who is basically responsible for the modern Vegas. 

It's no coincidence that Vegas looks Disneyfied these days. Wynn does it better than Disney does, if you ask me. I recently had a conversation with an Imagineer who told me that Wynn frankly reminds him of Walt, with his visionary scope and innovative thinking.

And the "new" Vegas is an abomination. Putting a roller coaster on a casino is the equivalent of Joe Camel, training the next generation. (Though you shouldn't take me wrong, I loved the "old" Vegas). 

But we are straying here. I'd like to bring up a situation where I think Walt would disapprove but would be wrong. I don't think Walt would approve of the current live action films being produced by various Disney labels (other than Disney itself). But if Disney hadn't moved away from 100% G ratings then the company probably would not have survived the early 80s.

The problem with a topic such as ours is that we're basically plopping a 1966 man into 2000. As the Disney company changes and adapts to the constantly evolving culture, it becomes increasingly far from the frozen-in-time morality and "stance toward innovation" promoted about Walt.

He may have approved of Bringing Out the Dead as art, but not as a Disney movie. And I have to assume that he would have considered Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo as the sin against mankind that it is. But that said, production of movies that would have been unacceptable to Walt represents a line of revenue that the company just could not live without.

I get the feeling that Walt's method of creativity and innovation was not to be confused with simple expansion. He refused to do Snow White or 3 Little Pig sequels, yet the market is inundated with Disney sequels constantly now.

Walt agreed to do another theme park only because it would be the "wienie" attracting people to his "City of Tomorrow".

And the Imagineers are probably correct. With Walt around, the parks would have a stronger history of innovation. 

Remember, though, just about everything that we like about WDW was designed and created without Walt's presence. 

Every great movie since 1970 was done without Walt (and MANY bad movies were done WITH Walt) 

The new park going in at Tokyo Disneyland is looking very good without Walt. 

I'm not saying that every move Disney has made in the last 34 years has been good, but the Disney batting average over that time is definitely exceptional, whether Walt would approve or not.