A Few Thoughts on Other Disney Channel Shows....

[TransWarpDrive]

The other night after Kim Possible, I kept the TV on to watch an episode of The Emperor's New School. The episode they ran seemed to be the series' finale, as it dealt with Kuzco's finally graduating from the academy so he could become Emperor. I was glad they did that episode, as it provided closure to that show's storyline. I remember how back in the 60's, TV producers didn't always come up with an overall "story arc" for their series that had a beginning, middle, and an ending. They just kept the storyline going in perpetuity.
Gilligan's Island was, IMHO, the worst offender in this category, because it seemed to my young mind that those poor folks would never be rescued. No matter what happened in each episode, they'd always end up back at Square One at the end, status quo preserved, with them remaining stuck on that island. Believe me, I was glad to see the castaways get rescued in that 1978 TV movie, Rescue from Gilligan's Island. It finally provided the closure that I felt was missing.
Anyway, The Emperor's New School has closure with its graduation episode and it's a good thing, too, seeing as how Eartha Kitt, who voiced the evil Yzma in the series, just died this past Christmas Day of colon cancer. Sure, they could have gotten another actress who sounds like Miss Kitt to play the character (like Earl Boen filled in for Ricardo Montalban at times to do Senor Senior, Sr. in Kim Possible); but it just wouldn't have been the same. Eartha Kitt had a rather distinctive voice, and she obviously enjoyed the role - she played the character with such relish. And she was the only actress to play Yzma - she first did that character in the original Disney movie, The Emperor's New Groove, back in 2001; and reprised the role again in 2005 for The Emperor's New Groove 2: Kronk's New Groove.
I think Miss Kitt's death may be the reason for the series' ending after only 46 episodes (this according to the IMDB's information on the show). The producers may have known about her illness, and come up with that episode's script as a way to finish things off before she passed away. That's the only explanation I can think of, because they were nowhere near the bookkeepers' limit of 65 episodes per series (which was the subject of much debate amongst KP fans during that show's third, and originally final, season).
Anyway, we've lost a fine entertainer with Eartha Kitt's passing. As for whether they'll make more episodes of The Emperor's New Groove, well, I just don't know. That's something the Disney Channel programming brass will have to decide, if they haven't done so already.

Speaking of the hotly-debated "65-Episode Limit," it occurs to me that in protesting said limit (as it applied to further production of Kim Possible episodes), we may have done Michael Eisner something of an injustice. Those of you from the old ARA forum will recall how a great hue and cry was raised when it was revealed that KP would cease production after 65 episodes, and blame was leveled at a number of Disney executives for allegedly setting that limit, including Mr. Eisner. However, the truth of the matter is that Eisner had nothing to do with said limit; it was strictly a mathematical figure arrived at by DC bookkeepers in determining the minimum episodes needed to profit Disney if and when the show was sold to individual viewing markets for syndication. Michael Eisner probably wasn't even aware of the limit; he had more important things on his mind than the fate of one TV show running on Disney Channel. He had his own, much bigger battles to fight while running the Walt Disney Company as a whole.
Now I'm just as guilty as the rest of KP fandom; I did my share of Eisner-bashing during that whole debate. I just feel that maybe we misjudged the man by blaming him for the 65-episode limit, then dumping all over him the way we did.
Anyway, I thought I'd share my thoughts on these matters. Please feel free to comment.

[lunchmeat]

The impression I have had for a long time (I think we may have had that discussion before, but it's been awhile) was that the 65 thing was never even a policy, just a recognized industry breakpoint for later syndication (makes sense, if a syndicated show is run 5 times a week, this would give you 13 weeks or about one season's worth of re-reuns).

The thing with Esiner is that he was the one that originally green-lit KP in the first place. Without him there would have been no series. I seem to recall that he was in fact, rather fond of the show. One thing to bear in mind is that corporate presidents and CEOs aren't dictators, they have have to answer to stockholders and others, all of whom get input from many different facets of the company. These different componants also have decision making paths and responsibilities. This is why it would have been futile to write to Eisner regarding KP merchandise and expect him to be able to wave a magic wand and cause a cornucopia of figurines and pins to appear. The merchandising department would have their own management, analysts and so forth. He could probably suggest it, or tell them to study the idea, then either act on their inputs or have to live with their decisions, depending on how things were structured. Same thing with comic books (aka graphic novels or whatever the current in term is). So heaping approbrium on the guy is probably unfair.

[TransWarpDrive]

So heaping approbrium on the guy is probably unfair.

I hate to sound ignorant, but could you please define "approbrium" for me? Thanks!

[lunchmeat]

Scorn or contempt. you don't see the term used much anymore, but I've read a lot of books published during the 1800s and early 1900s, so I've tended to pick up some of these older useages.

[campy]

Scorn or contempt. you don't see the term used much anymore, but I've read a lot of books published during the 1800s and early 1900s, so I've tended to pick up some of these older useages.

The word is actually opprobrium, with an 'o'.

[TransWarpDrive]

Scorn or contempt. you don't see the term used much anymore, but I've read a lot of books published during the 1800s and early 1900s, so I've tended to pick up some of these older useages.

The word is actually opprobrium, with an 'o'.

Lunchmeat, I agree with you wholeheartedly. That's exactly what I was saying (or trying to, anyway) in my first post. Mr. Eisner may have indeed enjoyed KP, but he certainly had nothing to do with the show's ending after 65 episodes. So it was pointless (and rude) of the fans to bad-mouth him the way we did.

[lunchmeat]

Scorn or contempt. you don't see the term used much anymore, but I've read a lot of books published during the 1800s and early 1900s, so I've tended to pick up some of these older useages.

The word is actually opprobrium, with an 'o'.

Ah well, just goes to show that some of us need spell check (besides, I'm a science and military guy, not an English major, though I do try).

Lunchmeat, I agree with you wholeheartedly. That's exactly what I was saying (or trying to, anyway) in my first post. Mr. Eisner may have indeed enjoyed KP, but he certainly had nothing to do with the show's ending after 65 episodes. So it was pointless (and rude) of the fans to bad-mouth him the way we did.

Figured, I think the whole Eisner has hooves and a spiked tail routine derived from some people having to have a villain, whether one is there or not. They tend to not understand that sometimes, things just happen, whether due to a combination of events or actions that they don't directly percieve. It's probably the result of a whole string of other events that resulted in the show not being picked up again. I would guess that it was more driven by a change in the marketing people's approach that was the culprit. They probably looked at the live actions shows, decided that they are cheaper and faster to produce plus all the additional product value (it's rare for a conversation with my nieces, who are in the target demographic, to not mention Hanna Montana or princesses at some point) and came to the conclusion that there's gold in them thar hills. The cycle time on producing live action (weeks/months vs months/years) would appeal to bean counters intent on getting something out and making money in the shortest possible time span.

[jeriddian]

Figured, I think the whole Eisner has hooves and a spiked tail routine derived from some people having to have a villain, whether one is there or not. They tend to not understand that sometimes, things just happen, whether due to a combination of events or actions that they don't directly percieve. It's probably the result of a whole string of other events that resulted in the show not being picked up again. I would guess that it was more driven by a change in the marketing people's approach that was the culprit. They probably looked at the live actions shows, decided that they are cheaper and faster to produce plus all the additional product value (it's rare for a conversation with my nieces, who are in the target demographic, to not mention Hanna Montana or princesses at some point) and came to the conclusion that there's gold in them thar hills. The cycle time on producing live action (weeks/months vs months/years) would appeal to bean counters intent on getting something out and making money in the shortest possible time span.

The ironic thing is that this was exactly the reason that they initially went with animation, because in the actual production of the shows they are faster and cheaper to make. The reason for going to the live shows is that the merchandising aspects are much greater, (personal appearances by the live stars, concerts, etc., are something the animated characters can't do.), thereby making the live shows more profitable.

[lunchmeat]

Funny how times change, but then again, those were the days when Disney had in house animators and most live actors were tied to the studio system and would have had to be bought out to perform.

[jeriddian]

Well, Disney now pretty much has their own studio system and their own stable of child stars ro choose from, so I'm sure they're getting a hell of a deal by using them. But they also made it cheaper when they ditched their in house animators. Now they just hire it out piecemeal to the orientals who do it 30% cheaper.