Return 2 Zero Fired At Disney Hollywood Studios

[Bobray]

Now why would Iger's secretary allow a kid to talk to him? He is much much too busy to take a child's call. However if you replaced the kid with the adult it would make sense.

responding to cookiefairy's post

Oh and dont tell me you like chicken nuggets better than tenders!!!

BuzzBoy explained that the tenders wouldn't cook all the way through, so for health concerns, Disney changed it to nuggets. Hope I got that right buzzboy.

[DizCaptain]

Originally Posted by Bobray

BuzzBoy explained that the tenders wouldn't cook all the way through, so for health concerns, Disney changed it to nuggets. Hope I got that right buzzboy.

Well that makes some sense. I dont really enjoy food poisoning from undercooked food, however they honestly believe a deep fried chicken nugget made from non-real meat is fixing a health concern for undercooked meat?

[EtnaGreen]

Originally Posted by DizCaptain

Well that makes some sense. I dont really enjoy food poisoning from undercooked food, however they honestly believe a deep fried chicken nugget made from non-real meat is fixing a health concern for undercooked meat?

I find it funny that the first how many years they had chicken nuggets they weren't undercoocked(I would know that's all my brother would get at disney), yet recently "they were undercooked". So all those other years they gave billions of people food poisoning. I'm confused and lost, it reminds me of the reason they closed vmk because,"it was just a promotion." I went back to WDW sometime early this month and had their chicken nuggets, they were better than most chicken nuggets,but my brother and I both agreed the chicken tenders were better and more filling. Yes you are correct they look like mini chicken tenders.

[Gorams]

Originally Posted by EtnaGreen

I find it funny that the first how many years they had chicken nuggets they weren't undercoocked(I would know that's all my brother would get at disney), yet recently "they were undercooked". So all those other years they gave billions of people food poisoning. I'm confused and lost, it reminds me of the reason they closed vmk because,"it was just a promotion." I went back to WDW sometime early this month and had their chicken nuggets, they were better than most chicken nuggets,but my brother and I both agreed the chicken tenders were better and more filling. Yes you are correct they look like mini chicken tenders.

I agree, I had the chicken nuggets many times in June and they were delicous. I don't see what everyone is complaining about.

[BuzzBoy133]

It is REAL chicken and they replaced them to keep quallaty up. I even talked to a Cast Member, and they explained the whole thing.

[Bobray]

I agree with you that tenders are better than nuggets, but I'd rather be safe than sorry.

As for my Arby's, I was sad too. It makes me want to sing American Fry:
"The day, the fry had died.
Bye, bye, miss american fry.
Brought my Darby to the Arby's
but the service was slow.
And good old boys were
drinking coke and a Sprite saying,
'This just doesn't seem right'
'This just doesn't seem right'"

Err, Sorry for breaking out in song like that, but I just really miss those fries!

[awsomered]

Wait they are just stopping the pre-show right? Not the beauty and beast show all together?

[BuzzBoy133]

Yeah, just the pre show.

[Pinkglitter]

LOL! I told my mom and she got all sad!LOL!

[DinoVan]

Paying the HSM 3 cast? WHy would you pay them? I HATE HATE HATE HATEEE that movie! Why would you get rid of a classic for horrible fake actors who are stuck up? Stupid stupid disney, i cant believe they did this. First chicken now beauty and the beast.

[EtnaGreen]

Originally Posted by DinoVan

Paying the HSM 3 cast? WHy would you pay them? I HATE HATE HATE HATEEE that movie! Why would you get rid of a classic for horrible fake actors who are stuck up? Stupid stupid disney, i cant believe they did this. First chicken now beauty and the beast.

I hate that movie just as much as the next person, but if little kids enjoy it and since companies are tight for money these days I understand why they had to cut return to 0. Plus unless you've actually met the actors in person you can't call them stuck up.

[Bobray]

While the idea of Disney laying off the Beauty & The Beast cast for HSM stuff is both criminal and unsurprising,

Just to be clear, Disney took out the opening act to Beauty and the Beast, called Return to Zero, not the whole show.

Are these all of the things that make you think of Disney? Do you think the whole Disney company is just a bunch of chicken nuggets or an opening act? These are small changes in an amusement park visited by millions of people around the world. Let me guess, next you're going to complain that they took down the second lampost from the right of the Splash Mountain ride entrance or that the shrubs in the Magic Kingdom were trimmed differently. These are such small things compared to the rest of the Disney parks. Cheap? I don't think so. Disney made these actions for specific reasons in the best interest of the company. For health concerns, Disney changed chicken tenders to chicken nuggets. For spending on HSM3, Disney took out Return to Zero. Probably because they thought they would get more money and audience out of HSM3 than Return to Zero. Who knows, maybe Disney will bring back Return to Zero after HSM3 has been paid off. Is missing Return to Zero seriously going to ruin your whole trip to Disney World?

And don't tell me you don't want change. Without change, there wouldn't even be a Return to Zero opening act in the first place.
Without change, there would just be Disneyland in California. Without change, we wouldn't have all of the parks or resorts we have today.
Without change, more recently, we wouldn't have Expedition Everest, the new and improved Spaceship Earth, the Laugh Floor, Toy Story Mania and many other rides.
In fact, if Walt Disney didn't make any change at all, we'd be stuck with a mouse called Mortimer! How are we supposed to cheer for the Mortimer Mouse Club? M-O-R, T-I-M, E-R-M-O-U-S-E?
Even further, without change, we'd be stuck with Oswald the Lucky Rabbit. Change is necessary.

Without it, we're only as far as we were the last time we changed. You may say, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." That's exactly right. If you don't change from the past, you will be doomed to repeat it over and over and over again. If you don't change, you will just repeat what's already been done. New ideas lead to new changes. Yes, taking away Return to Zero may seem like a horrible change, but without changes, we wouldn't have what we have today.

[ozzietropics]

Don't forget, guys, the economy's in the toilet. I don't believe there's a sector that hasn't been affected. I'm not surprised Disney's cutting corners. Projects are being postponed left and right. (According to a certain source, the only things that are moving forward are SM's overhaul and, for sure, a Hall of Presidents overhaul.

[BirthdayBandit]

Originally Posted by Bobray

Just to be clear, Disney took out the opening act to Beauty and the Beast, called Return to Zero, not the whole show.

Are these all of the things that make you think of Disney? Do you think the whole Disney company is just a bunch of chicken nuggets or an opening act? These are small changes in an amusement park visited by millions of people around the world. Let me guess, next you're going to complain that they took down the second lampost from the right of the Splash Mountain ride entrance or that the shrubs in the Magic Kingdom were trimmed differently. These are such small things compared to the rest of the Disney parks. Cheap? I don't think so. Disney made these actions for specific reasons in the best interest of the company. For health concerns, Disney changed chicken tenders to chicken nuggets. For spending on HSM3, Disney took out Return to Zero. Probably because they thought they would get more money and audience out of HSM3 than Return to Zero. Who knows, maybe Disney will bring back Return to Zero after HSM3 has been paid off. Is missing Return to Zero seriously going to ruin your whole trip to Disney World?

And don't tell me you don't want change. Without change, there wouldn't even be a Return to Zero opening act in the first place.
Without change, there would just be Disneyland in California. Without change, we wouldn't have all of the parks or resorts we have today.
Without change, more recently, we wouldn't have Expedition Everest, the new and improved Spaceship Earth, the Laugh Floor, Toy Story Mania and many other rides.
In fact, if Walt Disney didn't make any change at all, we'd be stuck with a mouse called Mortimer! How are we supposed to cheer for the Mortimer Mouse Club? M-O-R, T-I-M, E-R-M-O-U-S-E?
Even further, without change, we'd be stuck with Oswald the Lucky Rabbit. Change is necessary.

Without it, we're only as far as we were the last time we changed. You may say, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." That's exactly right. If you don't change from the past, you will be doomed to repeat it over and over and over again. If you don't change, you will just repeat what's already been done. New ideas lead to new changes. Yes, taking away Return to Zero may seem like a horrible change, but without changes, we wouldn't have what we have today.

I actually really loved that lamp post alot...and the shrubs were actually beautiful as opposed to their new look. However, while change is of the essence to survival you are kind of blowing things out of proportion because everything changes, but some things too soon. As for your historical quote I would like to counter by saying "History repeats itself." This is such a true statement. While it sounds like I am agreeing with you, I am not. If you look deeply into the meaning, I am saying that all of these changes will continue getting worse and worse repeating themselves. While you may blame the economy, disney is such a corporate giant, keeping a four man group wouldnt have affected things. There are enough merchandising for the first two High School Musicals to fund the third. Before you tell me that those might not have done well, then they shouldnt of even taken on the task of a third movie. While change is good in some aspects, if it occurs too soon then bad things may occur.

[ozzietropics]

Originally Posted by Bobray

That's Di$ney? I hate Di$ney. Luckily, however, there's Disney!

How Disney thinks:
Mr. Iger:Magic Magic Magic!
Secretary: Mr. Iger, you have a call. It's a child who want's to speak with you about Disney's future.
Mr. Iger: :Let me talk to him.
Secretary: Okay, hold on.
Kid: Mr. Iger, I hate the company because nothing is happening the way I like it. I mean, if I want chicken tenders instead of chicken nuggets, I should get it.
Mr. Iger: Disney makes our decisions for the best of the company and the world. Not just because a few kids can't get their way and blame it on "Disney's only in it for the money" thing. We make our decisions in the interest of a bigger audience than just you. Other people like the decisions we make very much. And if you don't like one or two these decisions, we have many other things that you might like instead.
Kid: I still think that the decisions should be made in my interest.
Mr. Iger: No, it should be made in the world's interest.
Kid: Me!
Mr. Iger: The world!
Kid: Me!
Mr. Iger: The world!
Kid: Fine, I'll just say Di$ney's only in it for the money on VMKF.
(no offense to anyone, but this is how it looks to me)

I believe you confused Michael Eisner with Bob Iger. It's all about the money, but that's not how it happens.

Originally Posted by EtnaGreen

Yay quotes!

I agree and besides since they were so popular and noticed it won't be too long before they get another job.

Yes, but when I didn't sweat the small changes(when disney started changing epcot), they eventually added up to much that it was the size of one park. Disney got rid of cranium comman, food rocks, dreamfinder, and many other awesome attractions. When disney ruins a park after changing a bunch of little things it starts to worry you when disney makes changes. As for the chicken nugget thing, some people do come to the parks to eat their favorite foot their. If the only reason they went their was to eat their awesome chicken tenders they would kind of upset, dont you think?

Believe it or not, EPCOT saw major attendance problems way back when. Now, it's the 6th most popular park in the entire world. 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th were also claimed by Disney Parks. I never visited WDW before the Millennium Celebration, so I missed out on all the good stuff: Horizons, World of Motion, Journey Into Imagination, etc. Am I upset that they changed all of this? Not as much. This was necessary, as kids and teens wanted to see less of hydroponic plants and more thrills. There are less of you guys who appreciate the detail and theatrical bliss that is the Disney Parks. It's really sad that most of the things that make Disney great are overlooked by ignorant teenagers. I applaud all of you for appreciating this. However, that demographic is ever-shrinking, and Disney is forced to cater to a larger, cheaper, crowd.

I loved that lamp post, that is where I first met mickey mouse.

Can you please answer my question this time? How come suddenly after several years of serving the chicken tenders they suddenly did cook all the way through? And if they were giving people food poisoning wouldn't it have been all over the news?

Oswald the luck rabbit was way cooler then mickey.


I'm confused, didn't you just repeat the same thing over again?

I'm not sure what to say about the nuggets/tenders, so I'll stay out of that. But Cluck-U chicken strips are the greatest.

Originally Posted by Bobray

Just to be clear, Disney took out the opening act to Beauty and the Beast, called Return to Zero, not the whole show.

Are these all of the things that make you think of Disney? Do you think the whole Disney company is just a bunch of chicken nuggets or an opening act? These are small changes in an amusement park visited by millions of people around the world. Let me guess, next you're going to complain that they took down the second lampost from the right of the Splash Mountain ride entrance or that the shrubs in the Magic Kingdom were trimmed differently. These are such small things compared to the rest of the Disney parks. Cheap? I don't think so. Disney made these actions for specific reasons in the best interest of the company. For health concerns, Disney changed chicken tenders to chicken nuggets. For spending on HSM3, Disney took out Return to Zero. Probably because they thought they would get more money and audience out of HSM3 than Return to Zero. Who knows, maybe Disney will bring back Return to Zero after HSM3 has been paid off. Is missing Return to Zero seriously going to ruin your whole trip to Disney World?

True, but it's the little things about the Parks that make folks like me love 'em. I could totally see where they wanted to cut corners, but this maybe Four for a Dollar wasn't the best choice.

And don't tell me you don't want change. Without change, there wouldn't even be a Return to Zero opening act in the first place.
Without change, there would just be Disneyland in California. Without change, we wouldn't have all of the parks or resorts we have today.
Without change, more recently, we wouldn't have Expedition Everest, the new and improved Spaceship Earth, the Laugh Floor, Toy Story Mania and many other rides.
In fact, if Walt Disney didn't make any change at all, we'd be stuck with a mouse called Mortimer! How are we supposed to cheer for the Mortimer Mouse Club? M-O-R, T-I-M, E-R-M-O-U-S-E?
Even further, without change, we'd be stuck with Oswald the Lucky Rabbit. Change is necessary.

Without it, we're only as far as we were the last time we changed. You may say, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." That's exactly right. If you don't change from the past, you will be doomed to repeat it over and over and over again. If you don't change, you will just repeat what's already been done. New ideas lead to new changes. Yes, taking away Return to Zero may seem like a horrible change, but without changes, we wouldn't have what we have today.

I don't think the removal of Four for a Dollar is as much change as it was a cost-cutting measure.