MagicHappens1971
Well-Known Member
On an related note, the other comments in the WDWMAGIC article discuss the extension of Disney+ past movie streaming, didn’t those plans die with that new part of the company that was dissolved?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Disney CFO Christine McCarthy says Disney will continue to focus on existing intellectual property for new park investments
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
T
So long, imaginative and original Disney parks of yesteryear. It was an honor to know and experience you. Hopefully the new "build what resonates with fans based on our streaming platform" parks don't insult your memory too badly.
That's what I thought happened.
So long, imaginative and original Disney parks of yesteryear. It was an honor to know and experience you. Hopefully the new "build what resonates with fans based on our streaming platform" parks don't insult your memory too badly.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
IP can be well implemented in the parks but the issue I have isn't that IP should never ever be in the parks because it's all garbage. Of course not. IP can and has been used tastefully in three of the four WDW theme parks. But there are real reasons why you can't ONLY use IP to design a theme park. Disparate IPs have different themes and tones because they are their own works of art and were not designed to fit into the thematic framework of other, unrelated works of art. Parks like DAK and EPCOT work so well because they were created from the ground up with consistent themes and ideas throughout. Throwing in extraneous IP can work but you can't build a out theme park under the condition that you won't create ANYTHING and will only use things that already exist.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
Honestly, it amazes me how anyone can be even remotely okay with this. There's nothing inherently wrong with IP in the parks. But there is something seriously rotten with having no interest in creating anything new and only ever being interested in using existing brands and franchises in the parks. I'd be cool with some IP here and there but not every park needs to be a simple "ride the movies" USF clone.
MagicHappens1971
Well-Known Member
I mean Epic Universe is just an IP based park without the "ride the movies" premise. I think it's supposed to be all the "universes" connected? Not a great basis for a theme park, but it will still be uber successful.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
Don't get me wrong I do love Universal but I always felt there were some creative superiorities to the Disney parks which made me prefer them. IOA is an awesome, fun theme park, but a DAK or EPCOT Center, thematically rich park it is not. It doesn't have a whole lot of creative depth beyond just being a theme park. From an artistic standpoint it's kind of just a collection of random IPs and attractions. Respectively.
I’ve been saying it for years. IP works in the right place and in moderation. There was always a balance between IP and originality. Without the latter there would be no Jungle Cruise. No POTC. No BTM. No HM. No Space Mountain. No Horizons. No SSE. No Journey into Imagination (ironically). And so on.
The suits of todays company can’t see beyond their next quarterly. They’re floundering. And it shows.
MagicHappens1971
Well-Known Member
DAK isn't my favorite park, but I think it is the most well-themed "theme park" out of the Orlando parks & Disneyland. I haven't been to the parks overseas yet, so I can't speak to those.
Unfortunately, the winds of change are leaning towards more and more IP. I think most IP integration can be successful, it just depends on the mandates from above to the creatives.
bcoachable
Well-Known Member
I don’t think the current version of WDI is “Your fathers Imagineering”…
Much of the heavy lifting is now being farmed out to private firms and such
doctornick
Well-Known Member
That's basically my take, but with the caveat that "more" should be actual additions, not replacing attractions that currently exist. I don't think Zootopia fits in DAK for example, but if it was a new build, then whatever; it shouldn't replace Dinosaur/Dinoland USA. Same with Tiana - would love to see a ride based on that property but should have been in addition to Splash (yes, I know there are other factors there).
So, I'm cool with the "beyond thunder mountain" plans for example if it leaves intact what already is at MK. I'd like to see the WoL building used instead of sitting empty even if for IP. Add stuff to DHS, but actually expand the footprint (e.g. build on the space between RNR and Animation courtyard to create another path).
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Hard to do when you’ve produced so little of value in years
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
Set aside Disney. When / what was the last new original non-IP attraction developed by a major theme park?
MagicHappens1971
Well-Known Member
WDI is not the problem here, rather the scapegoat. WDI is not cheap, they overspend and TWDC keeps their budgets in line, which is why they almost always over-promise and under-deliver. I don't think it's even fair to call them uncreative, they do what they can with what they're told to do. They can still be creative, just within the constraints of the IP mandates.
Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser (aside from all the hate it wrongly receives) is probably one of the most creative and coolest things WDI has done in years, aside from RotR.
SteveAZee
Well-Known Member
The problem is, IP that polls well on Disney+ comes into the parks replacing existing attractions that, perhaps, are original non-IP attractions.
aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
shes another one that needs to be ousted simple as that. So the parks are going to be for disney plus subscribers only, that's essentially what she's saying. This company is so short sighted now and the way they alienate their guests outright. This was the whole purpose of taking splash mountain away, other than political reasons it was simply to change it into a disney plus commercial attraction. Its just going to keep getting worse from here. Bunch of data obsessed idiots. But nothing will change as long as the parks are packed and people keep forking out money to them, I know its hard not to were all guilty, but were reaching the point if not already there that its time to start keeping the wallet from disney.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
One of Epic Universe's coasters is supposed to be original. So we truly have come full circle. Even Universal is creating more non-IP attractions than Disney is.
MagicHappens1971
Well-Known Member
This isn't what she's saying. She's saying they're going to continue to leverage Disney+ and IP into the theme parks.
This post is short-sighted.
This isn't true. Their primary purpose was to remove SotS and further the Disney Princess franchise by plugging in Tiana.
Research and data is how a company remains successful and continue to innovate.
I am in no way a Disney apologist, but this post is a short-sighted take like many on here that believe the parks are Disney's only business, they're not. They are Disney's most profitable business, and it only makes sense to continue to leverage your other business segments into the theme parks. It's just business.
MagicHappens1971
Well-Known Member
Is this one of the central spine attractions? Because aside from the spine all of the lands are IP based.
JMcMahonEsq
Well-Known Member
Honestly it amazes me that anyone would even blink an eye that this would be the standard practice.
Leave aside all the business reasons for doing this, ROI for multi million dollar expenditures on new rides. The need to be able to cross market/merchandise. The fact that its Disney IP that seperates it from other parks (you can ride a roller coaster anywhere, but you can only take your daughters to see Elsa at Disney.) Hasn't this been going on for decades or more?
When you look at the offering at MK, most of the rides stretch back to existing IP. Tron, 7D, Splash Mountain, Peter Pan, Under the Sea, Enchanted Tales with Belle, Mickey Philharmonic, and Winnie the Pooh, even oldies like Tom Sawyer, Swiss Family Robinson, Goofy Barnstormer, Aladin, Dumbo, Mad Tea Cups, all are IP based. As are the Buzz lightyear, Toy Story, Pandora, ect. Absent your park originals, the vast majority of rides built after came with IP attached.
Hell some of the original rides of the park, Small World, Carosell of Progress, were borrowed preexisting IP that they knew were popular. Both were not built or designed for the Parks, but were main features at the World's Fair that were so well received they were later brought to the parks
This has been going on for years, I don't see how/why people would get twisted about it now.