Toy Story Land expansion announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios

[DisneyDodo]

My main issue w/ TSL is that "Andy's backyard" isn't the kind of movie setting guests want to immerse themselves in. I can understand seeing Monsters Inc. and thinking "I wish I could walk through Monstropolis" or seeing Inside Out and thinking "I wish I could explore the inside of Riley's brain" because these are the kinds of locations that can only be found in their respective Pixar movies. Anyone in suburban Middle America can look out the window and see exactly what Andy would see in Toy Story. Not saying TSL is inherently a failure, just that there are more distinctive & unique "worlds" in Pixar that would really have lent themselves to immersive theming. For me, the point of an IP-based land is to transport guests somewhere they could never visit elsewhere, and Andy's backyard is the exact opposite of that.

I love Toy Story, but I think it's the characters and premise that makes these movies stand out, not the setting. As much as I enjoy TMM, it could be rethemed easily enough–there's already the Buzz ride in Tomorrowland, so this would actually make TMM feel less redundant, and guests would still flock to it due to the interactive ride mechanics.

The fact that you are in Andy's backyard is not what makes this land unique. Rather, it's the being shrunken down to the size of a toy that makes you feel like you are being immersed in a whole new setting.

 

[HMF]

Totally agree. Pixar Place would've possibly made sense 10 years ago when Pixar had a clear identity. Today it would be pointless and limiting. Joe Public doesn't care about the "Pixar Campus" or whether it was Disney or Pixar that released Inside Out or Zootopia. If they build an animation studio land, it should be open to whatever properties would make great attractions from all sources of Disney-producted animation.

It's weird enough that DCA is getting the bizarre Pixar makeover of Paradise Pier.

Which is exactly why I feel they should merge WDAS and Pixar into a single entity because they virtually already are.

 

[Amidala]

The fact that you are in Andy's backyard is not what makes this land unique. Rather, it's the being shrunken down to the size of a toy that makes you feel like you are being immersed in a whole new setting.

Yeah, I haven't forgotten about that, but this still isn't immersion on the level of Pandora and SW:GE. And a lot of people will say "Well of course not, TSL is for kids," but I think the draw of Disney parks is that the best areas and attractions will appeal to children and adults. The obvious comparison is Cars Land in DCA, which was made w/ young fans of the Cars franchise in mind, but has beautiful, movie-accurate theming (from the buildings to the rock-work) and top-tier animatronics. TSL has neither of these things.

And while I'm sure TSL will be fun and I'll enjoy it immensely, I just don't think putting in bamboo grass and installing over-sized toys around a few B/C-Ticket rides (I wouldn't go so far as to call them off-the-rack carnival rides, which others have said) just doesn't scream immersion to me. I'll be the first to take this all back if TSL really wows when it opens though, I don't want to be right about this.

 

[Andrew C]

Which is exactly why I feel they should merge WDAS and Pixar into a single entity because they virtually already are.

They are more unique than you think.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I've never said Toy Story Land is the only thing to do anything wrong. I was simply highlighting what I see as a problem with the land. I'm fine with people disagreeing with me, surely that's the whole point of a discussion forum, but I won't accept people telling me that my opinion is wrong.

To be more accurate... opinions indeed can be wrong. I don't know where people get the idea that just because they think it, it's correct. However, opinions can change and they usually do when other evidence is presented that contradicts our own opinion. Your opinion can be that you like it or that you don't but, opinions that highlight facts or attempt to contradict facts can indeed be wrong.

 

[No Name]

Totally agree. Pixar Place would've possibly made sense 10 years ago when Pixar had a clear identity. Today it would be pointless and limiting. Joe Public doesn't care about the "Pixar Campus" or whether it was Disney or Pixar that released Inside Out or Zootopia. If they build an animation studio land, it should be open to whatever properties would make great attractions from all sources of Disney-producted animation.

It's weird enough that DCA is getting the bizarre Pixar makeover of Paradise Pier.

I agree, and would even say that an animation land isn't a good idea. Unless it's actually about animation, it's just a collection of unrelated characters and stories, with no relation to the other lands (as opposed to Fantasyland).

My main issue w/ TSL is that "Andy's backyard" isn't the kind of movie setting guests want to immerse themselves in. I can understand seeing Monsters Inc. and thinking "I wish I could walk through Monstropolis" or seeing Inside Out and thinking "I wish I could explore the inside of Riley's brain" because these are the kinds of locations that can only be found in their respective Pixar movies. Anyone in suburban Middle America can look out the window and see exactly what Andy would see in Toy Story. Not saying TSL is inherently a failure, just that there are more distinctive & unique "worlds" in Pixar that would really have lent themselves to immersive theming. For me, the point of an IP-based land is to transport guests somewhere they could never visit elsewhere, and Andy's backyard is the exact opposite of that.

I love Toy Story, but I think it's the characters and premise that makes these movies stand out, not the setting. As much as I enjoy TMM, it could be rethemed easily enough–there's already the Buzz ride in Tomorrowland, so this would actually make TMM feel less redundant, and guests would still flock to it due to the interactive ride mechanics.

TSMM is one of the highest-rated rides. It's the last thing the company would retheme.

 

[Amidala]

TSMM is one of the highest-rated rides. It's the last thing the company would retheme.

I know that, but like I said, it seems to me that the ride mechanics are more appealing to guests than the attraction itself. Shooters are always going to be a huge draw (even Buzz at MK sees absurdly long wait times for an attraction that's getting pretty dated), and I don't think that would change if the property was switched out. ToT was also a high-rated ride, and it continues to be after the switch over to GOTG (not a huge fan of this particular change, but Disney seems pleased w/ the resulting popularity).

Not saying this would ever happen, but I don't think it's so far-fetched.

 

[cheezbat]

See, I feel the opposite. If we would have gotten any verion of the above described Pixar Land it just would have been a mashing together of a lot of very different IP that have no cohesive theme except "pixar" which is irrelevant in many people's eyes because Disney=Pixar and vice versa. When people see Woody, Buzz, and WalleE and the like, I think most just see them as Disney characters and in time, more will as Pixar being its own studio will be a distant memory. I fail to see how Pixar studios with its concrete buildings and brick exterior would be a better enviorment than TSL. Would the rides have been better? Maybe, but what about theme? I find it funny that some of the same people who bemoan Guardians going into Epcot or Mickey replacing GMR would suggest that a random collection of Pixar properties would somehow help DHS with its identity problems...

And nobody would care. The park would be far better off than it is now, and would be way more suited to handle the future crowds from Star Wars Galaxy's Edge. Instead it's going to be a nightmare.

The theme of DHS is movies. Nothing more anymore...so throwing any IP that's based on a movie fits. Zootopia? Sure. Indiana Jones? Definitely. Finding Dory? Yep. Frozen. Of course.

DHS has become by far my least favorite park in central Florida. I'd rather them dump any movie IP into the park for more rides and attractions than them try to shoehorn IPs into parks they don't belong in(Indy in DAK, Guardians of the Galaxy in Epcot).

Of course I'd love if the execs actually cared and listened to WDI and actually did everything they could to keep cohesive theming and proper placement of attractions, but obviously we live in the Intelectual Property Age where everything has to be synergistic: if it's a movie with merchandising potential, it's gotta be an attraction. Doesn't matter where you put it, just get it in the parks. Nothing original anymore.

 

[wdrive]

To be more accurate... opinions indeed can be wrong. I don't know where people get the idea that just because they think it, it's correct. However, opinions can change and they usually do when other evidence is presented that contradicts our own opinion. Your opinion can be that you like it or that you don't but, opinions that highlight facts or attempt to contradict facts can indeed be wrong.

Opinions can be wrong but I struggle to see how you can say I'm wrong for having an opinion on how movie continuity will effect a theme park land that is not even close to completion. I don't feel anyone has presented anything to me that contradicts my opinion.

I've said this before but I hope I love the land whenever I first visit, that is obvious surely. It's just that I don't think I will. And I'm not wrong in thinking that.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Opinions can be wrong but I struggle to see how you can say I'm wrong for having an opinion on how movie continuity will effect a theme park land that is not even close to completion. I don't feel anyone has presented anything to me that contradicts my opinion.

I've said this before but I hope I love the land whenever I first visit, that is obvious surely. It's just that I don't think I will. And I'm not wrong in thinking that.

I don't think that any of us are in a position to make that determination, but, I wasn't even aware of what the particular issue was, just that opinions can be wrong if based on some factual thing. If what you are talking about is factual and your opinion is backed up by experts (not us armchair imagineers) then your opinion is correct. If it isn't backed up by people that are actually in a position to know then it is wrong. Now your opinion that you find it good, is quite valid, but, not necessarily correct based on fact. But what you like, you like and cannot be wrong. It is your individual taste and not being passed off as a consensus of opinions.

 

[HauntedMansionFLA]

The latest pictures of the coaster makes it look like there is a trench???

 

[peter11435]

The latest pictures of the coaster makes it look like there is a trench???

Not like the ones originally proposed

 

[MrPromey]

Ugh. Thanks for clarifying. And to think, they could have just expanded Pixar Place and included a Monsters Inc. attraction and another Pixar IP attraction instead which would have allowed them to keep the existing urban campus theme. I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when clueless executives decided to devote so much space to such an ugly and creatively limiting theme instead of just expanding what was already there which would have allowed freedom to build all kinds of great Pixar attractions.

I suspect that would have cost substantially more and taken considerably longer to design and construct than Disney was interested in, though.

They needed what was going in here to open quickly (by Disney standards) and work as the opening act during the remaining construction of Star Wars Land. Something with new e-ticket attractions that would rival what they're doing next door would have been awesome for guest but they needed new attractions in a more immediate way and why bother investing big in something that probably wouldn't end up providing a significant marketing boost over the Star Wars project in the same releative timeframe?

It's a short-sighted project intended to fix a mess created by short-sighted management of the park but hopefully, it'll be done cheaply enough in their eyes that the land will be easy to give up when the time is right and they need the space. :/

 

[Brian Swan]

See, I feel the opposite. If we would have gotten any verion of the above described Pixar Land it just would have been a mashing together of a lot of very different IP that have no cohesive theme except "pixar" which is irrelevant in many people's eyes because Disney=Pixar and vice versa. When people see Woody, Buzz, and WalleE and the like, I think most just see them as Disney characters and in time, more will as Pixar being its own studio will be a distant memory. I fail to see how Pixar studios with its concrete buildings and brick exterior would be a better enviorment than TSL. Would the rides have been better? Maybe, but what about theme? I find it funny that some of the same people who bemoan Guardians going into Epcot or Mickey replacing GMR would suggest that a random collection of Pixar properties would somehow help DHS with its identity problems...

One could argue that almost every "land" in MK is a mishmash of disconnected IPs, tied together by a very loose conceptual theme. In AL you have Spanish colonial Caribbean, South Seas Islands, and jungles of the would "linked" by little more than a conceptual theme of "exotic locations" In FL you have Snow White/Dwarfs surrounded by Pooh, BatB, LM, and Dumbo's Circus. Then toss in Alice, Peter Pan and iasw for good measure. What's the encompassing theme? Disney cartoons. FrL combines a "Western" mine train with a "Deep South" flume ride.Add in a few buildings that look like "the Olde West" and an adventure Island with a Missouri theme. Don't even get me started with trying to find a cohesive "theme" to TL other than "quasi Sci-fi" (with a speedway that is a tribute to 4 decades in the past). LS may be the only land that has a unifying thematic integrity - but tell me, what is a New Orleans style riverboat doing in a Revolutionary era New England town?

But you know what - it's still a lot of fun, and it's still the most popular park in WDW. I know that "fully immersive" lands are becoming the new "industry standard", thanks to CarsLand, the two HP lands at Uni, and most recently Pandora. SWL will follow this lead. But I don't think that every addition to every park necessarily needs to be seamlessly immersive. I am in the camp that thinks a more "generic" Pixar Place would have been a better choice because it opens the door to more IP options, and I don't think "Pixar movies" is any more or less of a unifying theme than exhibited elsewhere in WDW. But, for better or worse, we are getting a land whose theme is "things inspired by the Toy Story movies". I think the conceit of the "shrinking you to the size of (some) toys and putting you in Andy's backyard" backstory is causing more angst than the land itself; they were trying to force a "land" that was always conceived as a collection of loosely connected rides/attractions into an immersive world that cannot actually exist in reality. And they were being lazy, and cheap.

Are there going to be scale issues? How could there NOT be? There always have been. You meet Woody and Buzz who are 6 ft tall adults in costume. Then you meet green army men who are also 6 ft tall adults in costume; in the movies, Woody was about 16 inches tall and the army men were 2 inches tall. If Slinky Dog is going to be 5-6 feet in diameter (as a coaster car), then Buzz and Woody would have to be 25 or 30 feet tall to "be in scale". And what kids toy roller coaster play set would ever be large enough to manage a Slinky Dog's 3 inch wheel base? Movie timeline continuity - I don't see how this is really important. Maybe the land is set in the time of the first or second movie. Or maybe it just doesn't matter. Maybe it's OK to have three fun rides loosely connected to each other because they all have to do with the Toy Story franchise. Maybe it will be great. Maybe it will suck. It will probably fall somewhere between the two poles. But I'm not going to pass judgement on it until I actually walk through it and ride the rides...

 

[KimAnnFran]

Can someone direct me to photos of "Toy Story Land" plans?

 

[zachrupertdsn]

Well call me crazy, but I think it looks fun already.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Can someone direct me to photos of "Toy Story Land" plans?

Was there anything more specific you were looking for than this?...

 

[Spike-in-Berlin]

After I took a look at all the other TSLs worldwide (Paris, Hong Kong and DHS under construction) I finally have come to the conclusion that ALL these lands are, just like "A bugs land" in DCA BTW, CHEAP excuses to build CHEAP expansions with CHEAP rides, mostly disneyfied versions of CHEAP carnival rides, with CHEAP theming (absolute minimal theming in former WDI standards) to expand the parks with a minimum of money and imagination. Not ONE of these CHEAP lands features an elaborate and well-themed attraction. Actually the coming Slinky Dog rollercoaster in DHS will be the "shining crown of achievement" in these poor excuses for Disney lands although it will be the first open rollercoaster in a Disney park without any substantial theming of the ride itself (I don't count the kiddie coaster in MK), it is very UIA or Six Flags, it is NOT Disney. I hope this is NOT the future way of WDI and the parks.

 

[zachrupertdsn]

After I took a look at all the other TSLs worldwide (Paris, Hong Kong and DHS under construction) I finally have come to the conclusion that ALL these lands are, just like "A bugs land" in DCA BTW, CHEAP excuses to build CHEAP expansions with CHEAP rides, mostly disneyfied versions of CHEAP carnival rides, with CHEAP theming (absolute minimal theming in former WDI standards) to expand the parks with a minimum of money and imagination. Not ONE of these CHEAP lands features an elaborate and well-themed attraction. Actually the coming Slinky Dog rollercoaster in DHS will be the "shining crown of achievement" in these poor excuses for Disney lands although it will be the first open rollercoaster in a Disney park without any substantial theming of the ride itself (I don't count the kiddie coaster in MK), it is very UIA or Six Flags, it is NOT Disney. I hope this is NOT the future way of WDI and the parks.

I really don't think it's the future of WDI or the parks, not even this park, considering right next door to TSL they are building what sounds like it will be the most immersive theme park section ever.

 

[Rich T]

After I took a look at all the other TSLs worldwide (Paris, Hong Kong and DHS under construction) I finally have come to the conclusion that ALL these lands are, just like "A bugs land" in DCA BTW, CHEAP excuses to build CHEAP expansions with CHEAP rides, mostly disneyfied versions of CHEAP carnival rides, with CHEAP theming (absolute minimal theming in former WDI standards) to expand the parks with a minimum of money and imagination. Not ONE of these CHEAP lands features an elaborate and well-themed attraction. Actually the coming Slinky Dog rollercoaster in DHS will be the "shining crown of achievement" in these poor excuses for Disney lands although it will be the first open rollercoaster in a Disney park without any substantial theming of the ride itself (I don't count the kiddie coaster in MK), it is very UIA or Six Flags, it is NOT Disney. I hope this is NOT the future way of WDI and the parks.

I agree they're going CHEAP here (hey, that really IS more fun in all caps), but this is not Six Flags cheap. Six Flags would not have put in one tenth the theming effort that went into any of these TS lands. And they would have put Discovery Card ads and R-rated movie posters on every available surface.