-
The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More -
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Primeval Whirl, Stitch's Great Escape and Rivers of Light permanently closed
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
peter11435
Well-Known Member
No.
Zootopia is not a natural fit for AK. It doesn’t fit the theme of the park at all.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
If they were going to stretch things that much, I'd rather see Sherwood Forest and Disney's Robin Hood characters than Zootopia. They fit the theme of AK equally well (which is to say not at all).
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
IPs aren't the problem. IPs are allowed, they just need to be thematically appropriate. Shang Chi is thematically appropriate for a mystical animal section of DAK.
WondersOfLife
Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
No it’s not.
Poseidon Quest
Well-Known Member
No, not really. The mythical animals of Beastly Kingdom were based on thousands of years worth of myths, having played a large part in many different cultures. They were an aspect of human relationships to animals, which is the theme of the park. A few CGI Pokémon from Shang-Chi is not equivalent and is very thematically inappropriate.
You do realize that the mythical animals in Shang-Chi are from Chinese myths and have an equally long (if not longer) historical record right?
sedati
Well-Known Member
I don't get it. They're still based on something previously established. There's no purity to the concepts. What's worse, is how those Epcot ones you pine for were filtered through outside corporate interests.
Poseidon Quest
Well-Known Member
That's like saying that the mythical creatures and animals from the Thor films are thematically appropriate as well. Obviously, they're inspired by real cultural mythology, but they're still comic book versions, inappropriate for the theme of the park.
Asgard isn’t exactly presented as a paradise where people are in harmony with nature though (you know the guiding theme of the whole park.) That’s why Asguard doesn’t fit, but Tai-Lo is presented that way. That’s the difference, it’s why I would be ok with it and why I’m not ok with Zootopia (where the goal of the animals are to become civilized and deny their animal nature.)
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
I would be fine with it if Rohde was still present, since I know he’d make sure it still worked for the park. I don’t trust The Zach, et. al.
Jrb1979
Well-Known Member
World of Motion, Horizons, Journey into Imagination, and all the World Showcase attractions had no Disney IP in them. Corporate interests doesn't bother me. For that matter the best attractions at Disney have no IP attached to them. Those are Haunted Mansion, Pirates, Big Thunder and Space Mountain.
sedati
Well-Known Member
If corporate interests don't bother you then why does Disney's own corporate interests (the company you're actually paying to visit)? Exxon is fine, but Roxxon is heresy?
sedati
Well-Known Member
But they yeti is fine? It's not actually a real yeti- just an imagineered version. How is that different from a comic book version. Or any? They're all interpretations, but one is seen as legit and the other as unspeakable.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I don't think there's any way they'd build Ta-Lo and not turn it into an MCU hub somehow. It would be about Marvel characters, not animals/nature.
Jrb1979
Well-Known Member
Cause what draws me most is the attraction not what IP is attached to it. I don't have an emotional attachment to any Disney IP. If I had to pick between a Disney dark ride and Top Thrill Dragster at Cedar Point. I would pick Dragster 10 out of 10 times. That physical rush of going 120 mph in 4 secs does more for me then a slow moving dark ride.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
Roxxon isn't heresy, but a Roxxon ride is almost by definition going to be a heavily IP based Marvel ride. Corporate sponsored attractions don't necessarily have to have much of anything to do with the corporation. Journey into Imagination was sponsored by Kodak, but the ride wasn't remotely an advertisement for Kodak.
The original EPCOT attractions make up a significant portion of the top 15-20 rides Disney has ever built, and the fact that they weren't constrained by IP usage is likely a big reason why. I don't think it's a coincidence that many of their other best rides also don't rely on an IP.
It's not that IP rides can't also be great -- it's that they tend to limit what you can actually do. Splash Mountain is an IP based ride that's one of the best at WDW, and Rise of the Resistance is too (apparently; I haven't been on it yet). So was Great Movie Ride, but it's gone. I'm not sure there are any others that apply, outside of maybe Flight of Passage (I like it, but I'm not as enamored as others and think it's only the third or maybe fourth best ride in DAK) or MMRR (which I have also not been on).
Based on Disney's history, it sure seems like it's easier for them to build a great ride when it doesn't rely on an IP.
EDIT: I forgot about Tower of Terror, although I don't think the Twilight Zone IP is absolutely necessary for that ride to work the way it is with something like Rise of the Resistance.
Last edited:
Poseidon Quest
Well-Known Member
It is definitely an artistic interpretation from the people in Imagineering, but it's done with respect to the original legends. It draws from real world culture directly and continues the theme of human and animal relationships. I like Marvel films, but the highly polished and colorful blockbusters have no place other than Hollywood Studios. Even Avatar was a poor choice for the park, but it works so well because of how Rohde and his team were able to devolve away from the source material, exploring that same concept of fictional animals, but this time in the context of sci-fi. By directing Pandora in such a way as to contribute to the themes of conservation and human-animal relationships of the park, it doesn't manage to feel shoe-horned in, though I will always consider the idea a folly of Iger's. Now though, I have zero trust in the leadership of Chapek and the Imagineers to make any shoe-horned property fit into the theme of the park. As we've seen, Epcot has continued to crumble into a mess with no theme, full of aggressive mediocrity. With perhaps the exception of Mission Breakout, Disney can't even seem to get Marvel attractions right either. Almost all of them have ranged from "somewhat acceptable" to outright bad.