Can I use the Curse Word Now? - Pirates of the Caribbean

Hi, everyone!

Again, sorry for the lack of posting.  The blog is going to shift a little.  We're going to be covering current events still, but with more...philosophical posts. I hope what I have to offer still interests you all.

That being said, I've held my tongue long enough regarding the upcoming refurbishment of Pirates of the Caribbean, which intends to alter the auction scene, making it more "politically correct".

My grandfather loved a saying, "I'd rather be historically accurate than politically correct." He was a history teacher, and understood the value of seeing things as they were, not as we'd like them to be seen.

Here is the original article from last year, informing the public that all versions of Pirates (starting with Paris, then Walt Disney World, and soon Disneyland's original) will be getting this "updated" scene.  And...an uproar ensued.  Myself included.

Now, just in case you need a refresher, back in the 1997, Pirates experienced a similar refurbishment, intending to soften the Pirates'...antics.  In the "chasing wenches" scene after the auction, the pirates and women were given food and goods, to imply these women were not being sexually threatened, but robbed.

And then, back in 2006, Jack Sparrow was added to the attraction, but no changes were made regarding the potentially problematic issues with the characters.......

So, now the auction scene is being changed, and the Red Head ("We wants the Red Head!") is no longer a piece of...goods, but will be a Pirate lass assisting her male counterparts in collecting from the townspeople to auction off their possessions.

Now, why, you ask, is the Bride Auction problematic?

The supposed complaint from guests (and seriously, I'd love to see the numbers on this) communicates a discomfort at the concept of sex slavery occurring in a Disney theme park.

Alright.  Let's pull this apart.  I'm just going to list numerically (though in no particular order) why this is just....ridiculous.

1. Mental Gymnastics

One of the main complaints is drawing a parallel to more contemporary instances of sex trafficking and slavery throughout the world. 

Why are you making that far a mental leap into sex trafficking and slavery? Now, I don't have a lot of information on the state of such a trade at the time the attraction was built, but do you really think if the company, and Walt Disney himself, had known this was a problem THEN, they would have made another decision regarding this scene? The answer is yes.

And, hearing that complaint, I wonder (and this is more of a general question) whether people understand how old this attraction is.  It's not recent.  It's not intended to reflect NOW. I get the impression a LOT of the complaints about this scene (assuming the formal complaints exist) come from people with some kind of lack of understanding of the attraction and company's history as a whole.

Disney is not "for kids".  It's for FAMILIES, which includes adults.  It's not a babysitting enterprise, it's a STORYTELLING enterprise. THIS is a story being told.  And you need certain elements for a story. The piece of the story the auction fills is that "Sodom and Gomorrah" phase of the Pirates story, if you will.  We're seeing these characters at their highest indulgence, their arrogance.  They need to rise to certain heights in order to fall into jails and drunken gun fights.


And are we forgetting the portrait of the redhead in the earlier scene with the drinking skelton pirates? That's supposed to be her, not lookin' particularly PC there either because the timeline of the story is technically backwards. So, was she always a slinky pirate? Or just a greedy pirate? That indicated she married a pirate and then, seemingly, became one herself.  How is that an oppressed sex slave?

The changes being made do NOT add to the narrative.  It only diminishes that storyline.

2. Let's Be Real...

On the DIS Unplugged podcast, a host told a story from a Cast member friend at Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom.  A guest asked after the attraction, "Why would Disney show something like this"?

Uh, because it HAPPENED?

You think these were self-aware Pirates? You think these were nice Pirates? I don't understand what people think pirates were like that this astonishes them.  Yeah, Disney attractions aren't meant to be the whole song and story of a subject, but they are meant to at least excite your interest in study and research on a subject.  How can you do that when you're not telling the truth on the subject?

Partially, this goes back to the complete lack of understanding of what Disney is supposed to be, a storytelling enterprise, not just a sweetness and light factory.

A deviation to show my point:
Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling told a story about a woman who wrote to her after Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets was released, asking to make the next books "happier". And her response to the women on camera was "you might want to quit now, because it's only going to get worse."

What people don't seem to realize is the need for darkness in stories.  Find me a story that doesn't have darkness in it, and I'll show you a story that has FAILED.  Snow White made children in the theater wet their pants in its initial theatrical run. Did parents complain to this degree then? I doubt it.

So here's my minor point I'd like to ask Disney....WHY are you bowing to those who obviously have no comprehension of how storytelling works? Why? Are you all so spineless, that you couldn't give your Cast Members a nice little blurb explaining that? Stories have bad and good in them. You need to see the dark to appreciate the light.

Which kind of dovetails into yet another point in how people seem to be complaining about the scene.  "You are glorifying this behavior".

Explain to me how portraying a situation is glorifying it? Please, I beg you. Does any horror movie glorify the killer/slasher/villain? How does that even make sense?

Which brings me to my next main point

3. Nothing bad ever happens in the movies....

Yes, the sex trade and kidnappings in sex slavery happen in many places around the world.  That's a horrible and hopefully temporary fact of the world we currently live.  But, again, you're making a big leap from this little scene to the current issue we face in the world.

For example, In Back to the Future, let's face it, Biff attempts to rape Lorraine. Thank God George McFly intervenes.  Point being, because a rape is attempted, and rape is still an issue in our society NOW, does that mean we should never watch that movie ever again?

Of course not, that's ridiculous.

And this goes back to the "glorifying" argument. Biff's attempt is not a glorification, it's a plot point. It has to happen in order for George McFly to come to her rescue and seem like a hero.  It's necessary.  It's STORYTELLING.

Duh.

4. Enough is too much! 

As previously mentioned, the ride was refurbished in 1997 in order to make the pirates less...less...Pirate-y.

And there was an uproar then.  And here we are again. How long are we going to do this until we are singing "It's a Small World" dressed as pirates? And even THEN people will complain about how the song is somehow racist. (I'm serious, I've heard Small World criticized for being racist. Why are people allowed to talk? Why?!)

Again, we're diminishing the story until there is none.  

And I can already hear some of the other history people telling me, "Yes, but X. Atencio said himself there is no real story!" Yes, I know. It's more of a general portrayal than one singular linear story.  This is how good Disney Imagineering was in the 1960s that they think there is no story here and there totally is. This IS a story of the consequences for these Pirates. Dead on a sandy beach, doomed forever to ride a ship as a skeleton, somehow buried amongst your riches. And to the survivors taking over the town, jailed and drunk, pathetic has beens for their crimes against women and property. 

5. Fat-ism?

Now, in the press releases and official statements from the company, we're worried about the poratrayal of women as objects.... but you weren't at all worried about the auctioneer pirate describing the little chubby bride for sale as a ship? Thanks a bunch, fellas! 

And why is SHE so happy to be sold off anyway? Is there an implication that this is the only way she'd get a husband?

I'm just pointing it out, I wouldn't have any actual problem with it, but let's just put it all out there. 

Adding to that, while the little ladies in the background seem scared, the Red Head and this little lady don't seem upset at all.  There is something to discuss about that portrayal. What was the intention? Do they want to be Pirates? Part of the fun is the ability to figure out the deeper potential contexts. 

6.  Picking and choosing.

So, I'm going to have to pick at that old wound...Tower of Terror's transition to Guardians of the Galaxy....

You didn't care a lick when people expressed (and continue to express) anger at the change to Guardians.  And for many (myself included) the issue wasn't just the "contemporary" IP, and the garishly ugly exterior design, but the "Bye, Felicia" money grabs that were themed t-shirts and food to "celebrate" the removal of the perfectly logical theme.

The uproar was shockingly louder than the nonexistent complaints about the auction scene. And, like I said, they make no sense. So why are you listening to these people and not those with legitimate concerns about the overall theme of your parks? 

Not to mention, in the last few years, there has been a "We wants the Redhead!" shirt for sale in the parks.  So, you were happy to profit off the potentially problematic scene just recently, but NOW you're not? Make up your mind, Iger! 

7. A Better Solution

OK...so let's say this is a genuine problem that needs to be....addressed.  This was the stupidest way to address it. 

"Oh, we have a piece of artwork from Marc Davis showing female pirates". (See below)

Yeah, I also found a piece IN the D23 Expo exhibit of the females sort of tempting and messing with the Pirates.  You couldn't have used THAT? 

Another good solution was to further alter the chase scene that occurs next.  You already messed it up once.  Turn the women around to CHASE the Pirates.  Make them fight back! It's an interesting twist.  All you need is Twisted Sister's "We're Not Gonna Take It" and you have a moment, there! 

8. Rubbing More Salt in the Wound

So....there has been fan "feedback". And what is Disney's solution?

Introducing "Redd" as a character to meet in the parks.

http://www.wdwinfo.com/news-stories/new-pirate-redd-will-be-wandering-disneylands-new-orleans-square-this-summer/

Now, read this "interview" the Disney Park Blog did with Redd:

https://disneyparks.disney.go.com/blog/2018/05/brassy-buccaneer-sailing-into-disneyland-park-this-summer/

Now, Disney executives? Are you there? Are you listening? Come closer....
Closer.....

HOW STUPID DO YOU THINK WE ARE?!?!

I mean, who proofread this? And I don't blame the writer, this poor guy has a terrible job to do, trying to make this idea palatable. But really? This is straight from the interview.

Are you anyone’s bride? 
M’ only love is profits, dear.

Thank you.  Thank you for making it CLEAR she's NOT a bride. So you need to hit the nail on the head THAT hard? I'm sorry, but this could have been an opportunity to make her cheeky and interesting.  No, instead we're doing EXACTLY what I feared, making her bland and boring but TELLING us she's brave and independent. Yeah, no. I'm not buying it, fellas...

That's all I can think of at the moment.  You want to add to the argument? Want to complain? Make your voice heard and add to the comments below. 

Just a reminder, we've got social media coverage. 

Twitter: @MouseShadowBlog
Facebook: Shadow of the Mouse 
Instagram: @TheShadowoftheMouse

The Instagram is fairly new but we'll build it up.

Have a great week! 

Can I Use That Curse Word Now?: Disney Channel and the Cancellation of Girl Meets World

A couple of years ago, I did something I hadn't done with regularity since about 1995....I watched a show on the Disney Channel.

Disney decided to reboot, or rather continue the story of Cory and Topanga from Boy Meets World This time, the story is about their daughter, Riley, and the show is called Girl Meets World.

Many cast members came back, including Rider Strong not only returning as Shawn Hunter, but (with his brother, Shiloh) also behind the camera.  Will Friedle not only brought back Cory's brother Eric but also wrote an episode. William Daniels, now bordering on his 90s, has shown up to continue to be a mentor to his students, and his student's children...slash students.

However, as of Friday, January 20th (my birthday, by the way.  How rude.), the Disney Channel will broadcast the "series finale" of Girl Meets World after only 3 seasons.

The Disney Channel, as a whole, is bright, garish, LOUD, and ridiculous to a degree I regularly find stunning. As I said, I haven't watched the channel regularly in YEARS, mainly because of this push to original entertainment suitable for the glittery trash bin.  I'm shocked the shows on this network do not induce seizures in children on a regular basis.

And that's just the look of these shows!  The content is always utter garbage. Girl Meets World, as much as the network allowed, tackled issues affecting teens in the here and now; the autism spectrum, cyberbullying, developing one's moral code, believing in yourself, hope, and thriving despite a less than perfect life.

But, sure, Disney, dealing with life with a famous twin is far more important.

The cast is also very different from the rest of the network.  There was a small amount of online protest at Sabrina Carpenter's having a singing career, but it's never impacted the show, with the exception of the theme song (which is fantastic) and allowing her to enrich her character here and there.  Rowan Blanchard is an intelligent young lady so utterly aware of her place as a role model to little girls (Miley Cyrus and Lindsay Lohan could really take a lesson here). And the boys in this show are equally as good.  It's obvious the creators took a LOT of time and trouble to properly cast these parts.

Girl Meets World is a daisy in Times Square.  It was a show that should have heralded a massive change in the network.  A different story pace, a calmer aesthetic, more grounded characters.  Instead, though I can't confirm this, it seems the show and the network must have had a tug of war, trying to make the show match the network, instead of nurturing the show to be more like its predecessor.

And, no, I'm not saying old things are naturally better.  But Boy Meets World wasn't even a show that ran with the pack in the 90's.  It stood alone in the sitcom landscape.  Full House was cute, but rarely, if ever, made a statement.  Family Matters was constantly "a very special episode" until Urkel took over. (No offense to Urkel, I loved Urkel.)  Boy Meets World balanced a gentle, witty, humor that was still of its age, while at the same time did some pretty bold things, such as tackling the concept of an abusive parent, and cults (which you can easily deprogram someone from in a half an hour). Boy Meets World seemed to understand where it was and what it could do to shape its young audience while still never talking down to them.  Walt Disney would have been proud of it....

Eight seasons later, you can still sit back and look at it as a fine piece of television. You can pass it down a generation (through reruns on Freeform and MTV), that's a feat many shows can't do.

Girls Meets World wasn't given the same...luxury? Again, some of GMW's weaker moments, I feel, are more the result of the show trying to adhere to the Disney Channel's aesthetic.

I've gone the long way around, but this is just not right.  In a previous episode, "World Meets Girl", the cast interviewed the audience, and the international audience was encouraged to show the cast what the show means to them. And yet, this episode aired in the middle of the news that the show was being cancelled.  Disney let the cast, bonded through their experience on this wonderful little show, sit in limbo for MONTHS regarding the show's fate.

100%, the Disney Channel powers that be messed this up royally. 

The World needs Girls Meets World. Little girls need Riley, Maya, and Smackle. Little boys need Farkle, Lucas and Zay. And parents need to see that Cory and Topanga, like Allan and Amy Matthews, don't always have the answers, and that's ok. Maya gets to have hope that she can have a childhood like Shawn's, and see that Shawn turns out alright. Representation is a big buzzword right now.  Who is representing the normal (but goofy) teenager?

My goddaughter is 13 now.  Who is her Topanga?

Simple answer... Riley.

Currently, there are campaigns to try to move the show to either Freeform Netflix, or Hulu.  Take a look at the main fan website for more information. http://bmwsequel.com  They've also got a Facebook page to help you keep up to date on the fight to keep this show running.

We Boy Meets World/Girl Meets World fans owe a tremendous debt to creator Michael Jacobs.  And he has stated in an interview with The Wrap the show has the definite possibility of traveling to some place where it can grow a more, which is the best option.  Disney's biggest mistake, besides putting it on the Disney Channel in the first place, was not attaching it to BMW enough.  The show felt like a tightrope walk to let the original characters come in organically (very well played) and letting it stand on its own.  If Disney had known what it was doing, they would have let the show do what it was going to do, and re-run BMW alongside GMW so you could better see the themes dovetail and deepen through time. More than once, an episode of GMW seemed to take an episode of BMW and re-apply it with current needs.

Again, the link to find ways to help is http://bmwsequel.com.

And as payment for your reading and patience...here are the terrible pictures I got of the cast at the 2015 D23 Expo.  I couldn't get in line to meet them, they'd already cut off the line by the time I got there. But, in waiting to meet up with the rest of my party, I was right next to their entrance. So I clicked off these shots quickly.

And here is a shot of the area in which the meet and greet took place.  It was awfully crowded, and while I was sorry I didn't get to see them, I was glad they were so popular. 

Let's all just hope for the best. Hope isn't for suckers.

Can I Use that Curse Word now? Tower of Terror....Again.

Alright, hello everyone.

I didn't think I was going to do another blog post on the Tower of Terror, but Disney has forced my hand and I NEED to speak up about this.  I am currently incensed at what I witnessed yesterday, and I feel obligated to share it.

So, my mother and I took my Aunt's two daughters to DCA in the afternoon.  The baby, now 6, needed her birthday button.  And the elder, Naomi, now 13, and I had a mission to get her on the Tower of Terror before Disney rethemes it for Guardians of the Galaxy.  I think I made my feelings plain in my previous blog. (http://theshadowofthemouse.blogspot.com/2016/08/can-i-use-that-curse-word-now-i-finally.html)

So, we each split off, my mom taking Olivia towards the Little Mermaid attraction, Naomi and myself to the Tower.

First, yes, the sign is gone. Plus, there is scaffolding on the side of the building. Visible to guests. Now, if you follow me on Twitter, again, my feelings on this removal of the sign have also been made clear.  It's insulting to the guests.  Did it honestly not occur to management that the aesthetics of the attraction contributes to the experience? Or did they care? I assume the answer is the latter at this point.

Tower of Scaffolding. 

So, around 2:09 we got int the 65 minute wait. (I verified these times with text messages to my mother, by the way). And of course there is a bit of a wait because people want to ride it before it closes.  We eventually make it to the boiler room and are directed up the stairs.  Now, if memory serves there are three elevator shafts and two floors, so that totals six separate elevator cars to accommodate guests. I didn't get to see how many were running downstairs but upstairs....only ONE.  1/3 of the capacity. I think we waited as long inside as we did outside. It was just after 4pm when we got out of the ride.  That's right. TWO HOURS.

Can I just unscrew this and take it with me NOW?

Now, Disneyland management...what could be the cause of all this?  For starters, I believe it was Micechat that reported one mine shaft being down while Disney installs the tech upgrades to the attraction.  Now, that doesn't really make sense to me because why would you risk accidentally damaging anything between January and May when this monstrosity debuts... But TWO shafts down? The attraction is operating at 33% capacity when you know for a fact people are coming to experience the attraction for the last time? When you have ENCOURAGED people to come and "celebrate" with singers, and merchandise*?

*While leaving down Hollywoodland, I spied a cast member dragging a luggage rack full of "Final Check Out" shirts and boxes of merch to the shop at the exit of Tower of Terror.

And yet, Disney seems to be doing whatever possible to thumb their noses at their stakeholders, the APs.

For those who need a little clarification, there is a difference between Shareholder value of a company and stakeholder value.   SHAREholder's are of course those who have purchased a financial share in your company, while STAKEholders are those who, as customers/clients/etc. share in the fortunes of the company in a different way.  I'd argue the APs are part of the stakeholders, and at this point, Disney is spitting on them with how they are managing this attraction closure. (Thank you, Len Testa, from TouringPlans.com for introducing me to this theory. It's right on the money.)

OK, Disney, I get it, you're trying to be "relevant". Because that's worked before.... (pause while we all come up with examples).  AND, like the Main Street Electrical Parade, you are trying to monetize the change. (Because, yeah, that parade is never coming back....).  But if you needed SO much time to destroy, PARDON!, re-theme the attraction, why didn't you JUST close it? You need to discourage visitors from visiting by running at minimum capacity, further inflating the wait times?

To top things off, in the past two weeks, Disney has been posting photos and video of the model for Guardians of the Galaxy: Mission Breakout! for the public to see, completely ignoring the backlash for the Tower of Terror.  This utterly tone-deaf response is appalling.  I don't know that I really have any words for it.  Disgusting, offensive....rude....ok maybe a few words.

While I understand Disney is a company that can technically do anything they want to their parks, this response and the continued response to the Tower of Terror lazy re-theme has gone entirely against the philosophy of the company.  Disney, YOU are alienating your customers...vociferously. What's next? Is Bob Chapek going to stand outside the Tower and throw tomatoes at anyone leaving the attraction with a smile on their face?

And I'm sorry to be harping on this, everyone, but to physically witness the treatment this attraction, and fans of it, are receiving, is beneath Disney. It seems they also wish to ruin their own reputation as a haven away from the world.

Shame on you, Disney.

God Bless the Silver Lake Sisters for their professionalism.

However, when the Silver Lake Sisters aren't performing, things look regrettably, already more blank.

Outside was a window display too cute to leave undocumented. 

It's such a shame little details like this will also go by the wayside for the loud and garish.

Luigi's Rollicking Roadsters

And just to add a little levity to the post, here's some of Luigi's.  The re-imagining of the attraction is just adorable, leaving the original queue in all its splendor.

I just love the new story and all the little dancing cars.  It's a delight to watch while you wait.  And quite infectious.  I know my family's cars weren't the only vehicles with its riders dancing along. It's the opposite of the Tower of Terror debacle, it's a well Imagineered ride that allows riders to forget their troubles while they ride.

That's it for tonight.  See you all real soon! Stay tuned for another post tomorrow, and one Wednesday after I head to Mickey's Halloween party on Monday.

Can I Use that Curse Word Now? - I finally talk about the Tower of Terror.

Alright, I've held my tongue here on the blog.  I wasn't sure I wanted to address it because I knew it was going to be a rant.

Let's get a few things out of the way...

• I'm not a Marvel fan. I just don't get it...  Just not for me. 
• Yes, I've experienced the Tower of Terror at Walt Disney World.....and immediately texted my mother to confirm it was better than ours. I have no illusions about DCA's being the "cheap" fix on the struggling park.

That having been said, Disney announced recently that the Tower of Terror is going to shut down in January to make way for...The Guardians of the Galaxy: Mission Breakout!

For starters, what's that? 

Yeah, I didn't see Guardians.  As a matter of fact, I saw the trailer and said...well, let's just say my reaction was a verbally un-Disney like muttering of surprise.  It just looked awful. Like a low level Saturday morning cartoon. And, yes, before writing this, I understand there is a sequel imminent and I checked out how much money the movie made.

But money and 15 minutes of popularity alone do not predict the popularity of an attraction. Look at Universal.  It's struggled for decades trying to get the "new hip thing" into their park, only to have it fade on them.  And yet, they chose to close Back to the Future, but that's another issue. Point being, do we really want the Disney parks turning into a Universal park? A hodgepodge of conflicting properties that don't make sense together? 

And don't get me on Star Wars, it's really not the same issue. Star Wars has, always been, and now under Disney's ownership, always been a hole that Disney couldn't fill itself.  A perfect puzzle piece from another box, if you will.  Marvel just isn't that, with the exception of Big Hero 6. 

And I've taken the time to read reactions from Marvel fans. Well, Marvel/Disney fans.  And it's similarly negative. 

Also, I knew a Marvel land was on its way to that section of the park, which is fine. I want the Marvel fans appeased but banished to a corner "children's table" where they won't continue to ruin our nice things.  But it seems the powers that be handed the Marvel child our prized Rod Serling vase on their way to sit....

My goddaughter, Naomi, is about to turn 13.  She is my benchmark for the 'young people'.  Frankly, I've been old since I was 6. Last week, while waiting for the tram, we talked about the change.  Yes, the movie was successful, but the most she'd heard of it was from a kid in her class who called it disappointing.  And her father, my uncle, agreed.  And Guardians was just the kind of movie he would enjoy.

The Tower, as it stands now, has always entranced younger children, whether they are ready for it or not. It's something to aspire to ride once you're "big enough". And I think the mysterious/creepy theme of Twilight Zone adds an element of healthy fear to the attraction.  Guardians continues on the path of destroying attention spans.

And, yes, I love the Twilight Zone show, and understand that this storyline is different from the show's more ironic intentions than merely mystery.  But the time in line always allowed me time to think and wonder about the characters in the elevator.  What did they do that this happened to them?
It puts one in mind of the Twilight Zone episode "Five Characters in Search of an Exit".

I often hear from Disney apologists, not to judge an attraction before it's even built.  I feel the need to do so, here, because I don't think even Disney is all that gung-ho about this change.  Having Imagineer Joe Rodhe make the announcement was a blatant attempt to hedge their bets against the already growing negative tide based on the rumors alone.  I truly feel sorry for Mr. Rodhe.  Between Avatar in Animal Kingdom and this, it appears he is the choice of the suits to make us, the stakeholders, take our medicine. It's insulting, to him and to us.  To think that because you pulled the bureaucracy card on Joe, means we'll just accept what we're told as a good thing. NO. I refuse. And Mr Rodhe will not be the scapegoat.

Disney, please come to your senses on this one.  I agree to the upgrades.  This attraction deserves to be equal to its east coast sibling, not destroyed for 15 minutes of popularity that won't actually impact theme parks to the degree you hope it will.

In the last fiscal quarter, Disney reported attendance was down at theme parks across the board-- without a real impact on spending, however.  One might attribute this occurrence to the price changes, but Disney didn't seem very alarmed at this change.  Perhaps, again, because it's technically doing what Disney wanted, bringing down the crowd levels.  If you've been to the parks on a busy summer day, or during the Christmas holidays, you can agree this is certainly a blessing.

Point being, this isn't going to be the boom for the parks you think it is. Are Marvel fans going in droves to Islands of Adventure? Did they ever? Then what makes you think last year's popcorn flick hit is going to have the staying power The Twilight Zone does?

Love Disney though I do, there is a reason the Black Hole attraction never got built.  Or the Black Cauldron attraction.  If you're going to put that kind of money into the ground, it better have staying power.

Disney, please stop taking the power AWAY from the Imagineers.  Don't force a property and a miniature budget on them.  WE know you have the resources, just let the Creatives do what they do best. 

"Can I use that curse word now?" - A D23 Discussion

Hello, Everyone

Sorry for the delay in my next post, but lately it seems I try to get my next review up (it's going to be a good one, by the way), and something comes up that I feel I should address...

Which brings me to my next segment, "Can I use that curse word now?" in honor of Inside Out's Anger (though I'm partial to Disgust).

https://d23.com/d23-expo-2017-tickets-on-sale-beginning-july-14-2016/

The link above is the announcement that tickets are going on sale for the D23 Expo 2017, on July 14th, which is next week.

There is no significant change in the price for normal tickets, for both D23 members and non-members.  

What I'd really like to discuss is the Sorcerer Package.  Last year, this package was $2,000.  I admit, I previously thought it was only $1,000 for the last Expo.  Still, there is a grievance here I would like to address with D23...

Now, let's just go by last Expo's numbers for a second....as Lou Mongello from WDW Radio would say, "Go with me here..."

If you bought the tickets during the Early Bird period, a three day adult ticket is $104. 

And the Sorcerer Package was $2,000.

Now, this year that package is $2,250.  And don't get me wrong, lots of interesting perks, but why the substantial price difference? 

With a regular ticket, my party (ok, it's my mother and me, but we are rather ruthless, I promise!) spend an incredible amount of time in line for shopping, the Disney Store being the worst offender.  I understand that Disney is most likely trying to price out or somehow deter those who just buy up everything and re-sell it on eBay, but how is this kind of a price difference going to help that? Is it really helping? And then why give so many perks that can be sold on eBay, like the luggage?

Now, this could be just another angry blog from an irate Disney fan, but I'm not mad....I'm disappointed.  Why isn't there a middle ground? I don't want to re-sell anything, I just want to maximize my time.  I don't want to miss out on meeting the cast of Girl Meets World this time..I WANT to go to the presentations (Disney Legends, Animation, Live Action, Theme Parks, etc.) without sleeping outside all night (by the way, I hope y'all are showered at some point in that process.  Another deterrent).  I just don't understand why D23 hasn't worked on a middle ground type package.  I'd even be satisfied to pay more for JUST guaranteed seating to the presentations.

You hear that, Disney? I WANT to pay more money!

I'd sincerely like to know who this Sorcerer Package caters to, because it's certainly not the fans. I even have names for the middle package, free of charge, Disney.  The Broom Package! The Dancing Hippo Package.  The Chernabog Package...???

I cannot be the only person flummoxed by this odd price tier.  Please feel free to leave your comments down below.

Have a great week, talk to you all soon!