Quinnmac000
Well-Known Member
The plot thing there are many different ways to do it...Disney may not be building outwards but possibly upwards...Im not a insider but not everything has to be ground level. Like the TTA or the astro orbiter.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
The Spirited Seventh Heaven ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
Rteetz
Well-Known Member
I was on Twitter and noticed that Jim Hill posted a new podcast so I decided to listen for some humor.
1. Steve Davison is working on a new show for Epcot to replace Illuminations, possibly as soon as 18 months from now.
2. DHS is getting a makeover, Star Wars is the first component.
3. Great Christmas light fight the new special ABC started doing last year will start to tie into the Osbourne lights.
4. Maelstrom is getting frozen
5. DHS will get a ratatouille type ride but its not ratatouille
6. Great Movie ride will be leaving
7. Star Wars construction could begins soon as January.
8. Universal is building a new 250 million dollar water park that is supposed to be better than Typhoon Lagoon and Blizzard Beach
9. Floating Mountains will be some of the best immersive work disney has ever done. That land will be one of the best Disney has ever done.
10. DHS will be getting a mix of A, B, C, and D tickets to make it a full park.
11. Tangled might replace Beauty and the Beast
12. Maelstrom redo starts Oct. 1st.
13. Echo Lake becomes Star Wars, Star Wars X- Wing spinner
14. Hollywood & Vine stay because of Disney Junior, Indiana Jones stays
15. Wilderness lodge is getting more DVC just like Spirit said only difference was Jim said the over water rooms would be cottages not Teepees.
That was it...
1. Steve Davison is working on a new show for Epcot to replace Illuminations, possibly as soon as 18 months from now.
2. DHS is getting a makeover, Star Wars is the first component.
3. Great Christmas light fight the new special ABC started doing last year will start to tie into the Osbourne lights.
4. Maelstrom is getting frozen
5. DHS will get a ratatouille type ride but its not ratatouille
6. Great Movie ride will be leaving
7. Star Wars construction could begins soon as January.
8. Universal is building a new 250 million dollar water park that is supposed to be better than Typhoon Lagoon and Blizzard Beach
9. Floating Mountains will be some of the best immersive work disney has ever done. That land will be one of the best Disney has ever done.
10. DHS will be getting a mix of A, B, C, and D tickets to make it a full park.
11. Tangled might replace Beauty and the Beast
12. Maelstrom redo starts Oct. 1st.
13. Echo Lake becomes Star Wars, Star Wars X- Wing spinner
14. Hollywood & Vine stay because of Disney Junior, Indiana Jones stays
15. Wilderness lodge is getting more DVC just like Spirit said only difference was Jim said the over water rooms would be cottages not Teepees.
That was it...
asianway
Well-Known Member
Did Jim talk about how much he loves his press credential?
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Reading between the lines, I'm assuming it will be more than just toontown at DL. I agree that if all we got was a SW land equal to the current size of toontown in DHS it would be a little disappointing. I do think the DHS version will have a larger retail and dining area. The ride(s) will probably be clones. Let's just hope we don't get the POTC treatment.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Regarding Toontown: is it possible that TDA has acquired land to move backstage facilities so the total acreage is larger than just TT?
Last edited:
Mike S
Well-Known Member
Of course it will. Can't have rides taking up the space of places where guests could spend money now can we? Because as we all know, the reason people go to Walt Disney World is to buy things in the gift shops
Last edited:
Mike S
Well-Known Member
That would definitely be great. One would hope that's the case.
EPCOTCenterLover
Well-Known Member
I'd like to see some of this. But we'll see.
Travel Junkie
Well-Known Member
Disney owns various lots around Anaheim, known and unknown to the general public. The answer is yes, they could conceivable move some if not all of TDA off site and open up a large chunk of land. Even if they chose to keep it, The TDA building is a long narrow building that hugs the freeway and could be built around after relocating other backstage areas.
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
Discussion about Eisner vs Iger again? Eisner wins no question as the better CEO by a vast amount. But I think of the leadership philosophies of Eisner and Iger as having the choice between two buttons. With Eisner, one of the buttons gives a delicious treat and the other button produces a painful electric shock. You either get a treat or intense pain, it's a mixed bag. With every Splash Mountain we got an Imagination 2.0/3.0. With every DisneySea or Disneyland Paris we got a Walt Disney Studios Paris, California Adventure 1.0 or Hong Kong Disneyland (opening day roster, it has since been vastly improved alongside DCA)... Or even something in between containing both extreme quality AND crippling budget cuts/disappointments- Animal Kingdom. With Iger however, in almost all cases both buttons just produce an electric shock except when his hand is forced to produce something quality (even there i'd readily argue his best projects don't match the best quality efforts of any of his predecessors). Neither scenario of button choices is ideal, it's just that one IS immensely preferable to the other because you have a CHANCE at a treat.
It is however important to remember that these are Disney standards one expects them to amount to. Personally I see no reason to settle for the lesser of two undeniably seriously flawed leaders (even if one is immensely less flawed than the other) when in the past we've had (and if allowed still could have) a better alternative to either one of these men running the company. The way it was run when Walt Disney was alive is not an unattainable goal, there are still people capable of doing that (they are simply kept away from positions of power by the established powers that run/ruin things). We can do far better than either Eisner or Iger.
I do believe Eisner at least deserves some of the blame for allowing Iger's rise to power in the first place. This may not have been his original intention (in fact he clearly didn't want to relinquish power). But his shortsighted and egotistical alterations to the higher corporate structure unquestionably had a major hand in starting the company down its path to the utter mess it has become. He inflicted those initial wounds that crippled the parks. The gutting of the corporate structure (firing the old guard and clearing the way up for the Wall Street jackasses) fundamentally and negatively altered the philosophies by which the company was run. He allowed it to lose balance and slip off its established philosophies, compromising the incredible standards the parks used to adhere to. He went too far in his cuts though and the company veered out of control, tumbling violently down the ladder of quality it had been ascending for decades.
The constant stream of quality cuts at the parks starting in the mid 90's even at that point in time had obvious consequences (short and long term). Consequences I just cannot possibly imagine Eisner (who is an obviously intelligent person) didn't see coming. In retrospect, while these initial cuts weren't remotely as severe as more recent ones (at least on the WDW side of things anyways, Disneyland's worst years to date were definitely under Eisner), his actions sounded a signal to the higher ups on Wall Street. It sent them a message that it was okay for them to start slowly but surely turning up the boiler on the "frogs" (park goers) they had so carefully caught in the mouse trap. Executives started feeling comfortable that they could get away with more and more cuts because so few people would notice or care initially. Not when customers are being gradually but systematically conditioned to lower their standards and further brainwashed by the brand marketing and buzzwords. The cuts grew like a parasite. I liken Eisner's first cuts in this regard to "inception", the first subtle ideas planted and put into motion. Initially slow to grow back in 1994, but soon spiraling out of control into a deadly malignant cancer (still untreated, ignored and ever growing with no hope in sight).
Also, the shortsighted and paranoia-driven firing of the old guard that Eisner initiated during his reign likely helped to clear a path to the top for wall street dunces like Staggs, Rasulo and Iger. This also goes for the complete mess he caused to Imagineering as well (firing many talented people so they ended up being picked up by Universal, keeping the most talented people like Tony Baxter from contributing to big new projects, putting less talented creatives in positions of power and creating a toxic atmosphere overall). I like Eisner infinitely more than Iger, don't get me wrong. I also have said that i'd have given him several more years to see whether he could clean up any of the mess he caused (there were clear signs of that regarding the parks during his last few years). But the question remains whether we would have been in this current mess in the first place had Eisner's actions from the early 90's onward been averted. I think many of his less favorable actions during the second half of his tenure set a dangerous precedence for how the company felt was acceptable to treat paying guests going forward.
Eisner's first years until about 1994 felt like the parks were soaring up the quality ladder at an awesome pace. 1994 was the slip up as the first slashes occurred. For the second half of the 90's, alternating between climbing and falling. Eventually losing its grip completely and entering freefall. Starting around 2004-2005, finally catching hold again of the ladder after falling about halfway down the ladder it took decades to climb. There were attempts to regain composure and hesitantly scale back up a couple of notches with difficulty (with Disneyland's cleanup and Everest). Only for Iger and his gang to come in to stab the company in the back, kicking its corpse back off the ladder for good.
It is however important to remember that these are Disney standards one expects them to amount to. Personally I see no reason to settle for the lesser of two undeniably seriously flawed leaders (even if one is immensely less flawed than the other) when in the past we've had (and if allowed still could have) a better alternative to either one of these men running the company. The way it was run when Walt Disney was alive is not an unattainable goal, there are still people capable of doing that (they are simply kept away from positions of power by the established powers that run/ruin things). We can do far better than either Eisner or Iger.
I do believe Eisner at least deserves some of the blame for allowing Iger's rise to power in the first place. This may not have been his original intention (in fact he clearly didn't want to relinquish power). But his shortsighted and egotistical alterations to the higher corporate structure unquestionably had a major hand in starting the company down its path to the utter mess it has become. He inflicted those initial wounds that crippled the parks. The gutting of the corporate structure (firing the old guard and clearing the way up for the Wall Street jackasses) fundamentally and negatively altered the philosophies by which the company was run. He allowed it to lose balance and slip off its established philosophies, compromising the incredible standards the parks used to adhere to. He went too far in his cuts though and the company veered out of control, tumbling violently down the ladder of quality it had been ascending for decades.
The constant stream of quality cuts at the parks starting in the mid 90's even at that point in time had obvious consequences (short and long term). Consequences I just cannot possibly imagine Eisner (who is an obviously intelligent person) didn't see coming. In retrospect, while these initial cuts weren't remotely as severe as more recent ones (at least on the WDW side of things anyways, Disneyland's worst years to date were definitely under Eisner), his actions sounded a signal to the higher ups on Wall Street. It sent them a message that it was okay for them to start slowly but surely turning up the boiler on the "frogs" (park goers) they had so carefully caught in the mouse trap. Executives started feeling comfortable that they could get away with more and more cuts because so few people would notice or care initially. Not when customers are being gradually but systematically conditioned to lower their standards and further brainwashed by the brand marketing and buzzwords. The cuts grew like a parasite. I liken Eisner's first cuts in this regard to "inception", the first subtle ideas planted and put into motion. Initially slow to grow back in 1994, but soon spiraling out of control into a deadly malignant cancer (still untreated, ignored and ever growing with no hope in sight).
Also, the shortsighted and paranoia-driven firing of the old guard that Eisner initiated during his reign likely helped to clear a path to the top for wall street dunces like Staggs, Rasulo and Iger. This also goes for the complete mess he caused to Imagineering as well (firing many talented people so they ended up being picked up by Universal, keeping the most talented people like Tony Baxter from contributing to big new projects, putting less talented creatives in positions of power and creating a toxic atmosphere overall). I like Eisner infinitely more than Iger, don't get me wrong. I also have said that i'd have given him several more years to see whether he could clean up any of the mess he caused (there were clear signs of that regarding the parks during his last few years). But the question remains whether we would have been in this current mess in the first place had Eisner's actions from the early 90's onward been averted. I think many of his less favorable actions during the second half of his tenure set a dangerous precedence for how the company felt was acceptable to treat paying guests going forward.
Eisner's first years until about 1994 felt like the parks were soaring up the quality ladder at an awesome pace. 1994 was the slip up as the first slashes occurred. For the second half of the 90's, alternating between climbing and falling. Eventually losing its grip completely and entering freefall. Starting around 2004-2005, finally catching hold again of the ladder after falling about halfway down the ladder it took decades to climb. There were attempts to regain composure and hesitantly scale back up a couple of notches with difficulty (with Disneyland's cleanup and Everest). Only for Iger and his gang to come in to stab the company in the back, kicking its corpse back off the ladder for good.
Last edited:
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Just keeping it real. SW land on both coasts is likely to be an e-ticket and 1 C/D ticket ride, best case scenario 2 other rides. Especially since both parks already have Star Tours (a solid D). DHS will likely get an expanded and indoor Jedi Training Academy and the much rumored Cantina. Not sure if there is room for all of that at DL.Of course it will. Can't have rides taking up the space of places where guests could spend money now can we? Because as we all know, the reason people go to Walt Disney World is to buy things in the gift shops
Carsland is 1 E and 2 Cs. Harry Potter phase 1 was 1 E and 2 repurposed rides. Avatar is planned as 1 E and 1 C/D. The key is how good the E ticket ride is and how immersive the surrounding area is.
danv3
Well-Known Member
So you're saying he reads these boards.
Seriously, I see like one or two things at most on that list that haven't been discussed here at great length.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
I get it. The post you quoted was sarcastic. I hope we do still get an amazing E Ticket out of this.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
IMHO it needs to be something better than just the speeder bike coaster. It needs to be Disney's answer to FJ. Cutting edge and maybe even mind blowing.
Captain Neo
Well-Known Member
Star Wars makes more sense in Disneyland's TL that place has been in desperate need of a revamp for decades. They can give Nemo Subs to Fantasyland and just kinda loosely incorporate the Monorail and Space Mountain and demo everything else.
Cosmic Commando
Well-Known Member
They can open up nine acres at the back of the park without breaking a sweat (if we're counting losing Toontown as "not breaking a sweat")... almost 12.5 if they can build a new horse stable off-site somewhere. Cars Land is 12 acres.
Cosmic Commando
Well-Known Member
Like the Matterhorn, you can say the Subs belong to whichever land you want... doesn't change their visibility in Tomorrowland.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
If only Disney could build that indoor dueling coaster. What a ride that would be.