DHS Monster Inc Land Coming to Disney's Hollywood Studios

[Bocabear]

I like Encanto... I thought it was a sweet film... I don't think it needs a land... or a parade... I don't think it needs to be shoved down our throats... I liked the film...I liked the characters.... But I don't think it was more than that....
Sure one attraction about it could be fun... any more is unnecessary. I liked Coco too...Feel the same way...sweet film, visually pretty and some great cultural references... Feels like more could be done with this especially with a Mexican Pavilion in one of the theme parks where it would fit seamlessly...

 

[JD80]

I think the "old" issue that Muppet 3D has/had is that 3D is ubiquitous now.
So making a big thing about it in the show really dates it.
What I liked best about the show is that it's a mix of film, animatronics, and a live character.
If they could have kept those elements, but updated the film so as not to act like 3D is new it would have worked better for me.

I agree with this completely. If the new show has physical props, live elements and a good movie it'll be a hit. The whole aspect of "OH MY GOD IT'S 3D WOOOO OOOO!!" is eye rolling.

 

[JD80]

You’d run a very efficient Six Flags.

How would you look at the parks for the next 30 years? If you have some old nostalgia based attractions that never run over 50% capacity and use very large show building/space what would you do with them? You would never update or retheme them? Would you continue to spend the capex on maintain infrastructure on non-utilized attractions?

 

[JD80]

This is why Disney's recent trend of removing classic attractions and replacing them with the current most popular thing worries me. The more they continue to focus on this trend the more I feel the parks will lose their identity and appeal.

Define "recent" in this message.

 

[Bocabear]

How would you look at the parks for the next 30 years? If you have some old nostalgia based attractions that never run over 50% capacity and use very large show building/space what would you do with them? You would never update or retheme them? Would you continue to spend the capex on maintain infrastructure on non-utilized attractions?

the only Non-Utilized attraction is Stitch's Great Escape...but no one seems to be talking about that.... these other ones are used and enjoyed (maybe just not as mobbed as others)... Some are placemaking... Some are pure nostalgia which makes than more then the sum of their parts....Part of the beauty of this park...
I don't think any of them have a Large Show Building... Not large enough for anything of note.... HOP Theater is not that big.

 

[JD80]

the only Non-Utilized attraction is Stitch's Great Escape...but no one seems to be talking about that.... these other ones are used and enjoyed (maybe just not as mobbed as others)... Some are placemaking... Some are pure nostalgia which makes than more then the sum of their parts....Part of the beauty of this park...
I don't think any of them have a Large Show Building... Not large enough for anything of note.... HOP Theater is not that big.

Can you use sentences please?

 

[Bocabear]

Can you use sentences please?

I will write as I like... great comeback.

 

[danlb_2000]

But Disney to a large extent IS about nostalgia.
Certainly its classic films, and classic time in America.
Chip away at those more and more, and what have you got?

Yeah, people talk about nostalgia as if it's a bad thing. Yes, new things are needed, but there needs to be a balance. There is comfort in the familiar, so when people make repeat visits to the parks there are things that they want to see or do every time.

 

[Jayspency]

Define "recent" in this message.

Past 5 years

 

[Disstevefan1]

How would you look at the parks for the next 30 years?

Bob, Josh and Hugh are only looking as far as the next quarter.

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ֊ᗩζᗩᗰ]

Bob, Josh and Hugh are only looking as far as the next quarter.

And counting every one of em!

 

[Charlie The Chatbox Ghost]

In fairness, a big reason why people love those older films is the promotion by Disney. Movies like Pinocchio or Alice in Wonderland only became classics because of Disney insisting that they were. They rereleased them in theaters and home video. They were given attractions at Disneyland and those characters were featured in parades and meet & greets. Jiminy Cricket and Tinkerbell especially became synonymous with the Disney brand because Walt chose to leverage them.

There’s no reason Encanto or any other movie can’t be a classic in 20-30 years, but Disney has to put in the work to make it so. The Madrigals need to be in Parades and nighttime spectaculars. Their music needs to be staples on the Disney Hits playlist. They need to keep making Halloween costumes and dolls. And yes, they need to have attractions in the parks.

That's a fair point. We'll see if modern Disney does that old strategy. They definitely have solidified a few of their post-90s movies as classics, so we'll see what's in store for the 2020s films. Given most of them are sequels to 2010s films, we're probably gonna see less new franchises become "classics".

Disney does seem to be insisting that Wish was amazing given how much it's used in everything, from the new World of Color Happiness, to Star being right next to Sorcerer Mickey in the new WDW Snowglobe, to the Epcot F&G topiaries making a return... but I think the general population agrees Wish was, at best, mid.

 

[Casper Gutman]

How would you look at the parks for the next 30 years? If you have some old nostalgia based attractions that never run over 50% capacity and use very large show building/space what would you do with them? You would never update or retheme them? Would you continue to spend the capex on maintain infrastructure on non-utilized attractions?

Without going into detail…

From a utilitarian perspective, parks like Disney need spaces that aren’t constantly running at capacity to absorb crowds and to give guests things to do. They also need to provide guests a variety of experiences. A park full of Tron’s constantly running at capacity would be a miserable place.

On a more profound level, Disney parks are business operations but are also cultural and historical institutions. They are also works of art, a unique kind of art that cannot be effectively archived if the original is destroyed. Effective park leadership would be a balancing act between these factors.

Finally, there is no need to remove anything from WDW. There is more than enough space, including abandoned guest facing space like the Animation Courtyard that actively detracts from the guest experience, that attractions don’t need to be closed to add new ones. It is one of the grim ironies of Disney that WDW, the resort with the blessing of space, is the ONLY Disney park that regularly sees major and beloved attractions shuttered to build new (usually lackluster) replacements. Such occurrences are MUCH rarer in California or Paris or Tokyo or…

Frankly, you seem to be falling into a trap that a majority of American executives, at Disney as well as elsewhere, fall into - you’ve received, formally or informally, a narrow, generalized business education lacking in nuance or specificity and have become convinced that that meager gruel is the sum of all human knowledge and experience.

 

[UNCgolf]

Rataouille was designed and built first, opening in 2014 at WDSP.

Opening the ride in WDW after Pandora, RotR and Runaway Railway made it look worse and showed how fast it aged.

I know, but Ratatouille was also designed to be an E ticket (apparently, even though I would have assumed it was classified as a D).

 

[Disstevefan1]

Without going into detail…

From a utilitarian perspective, parks like Disney need spaces that aren’t constantly running at capacity to absorb crowds and to give guests things to do. They also need to provide guests a variety of experiences. A park full of Tron’s constantly running at capacity would be a miserable place.

On a more profound level, Disney parks are business operations but are also cultural and historical institutions. They are also works of art, a unique kind of art that cannot be effectively archived if the original is destroyed. Effective park leadership would be a balancing act between these factors.

Finally, there is no need to remove anything from WDW. There is more than enough space, including abandoned guest facing space like the Animation Courtyard that actively detracts from the guest experience, that attractions don’t need to be closed to add new ones. It is one of the grim ironies of Disney that WDW, the resort with the blessing of space, is the ONLY Disney park that regularly sees major and beloved attractions shuttered to build new (usually lackluster) replacements. Such occurrences are MUCH rarer in California or Paris or Tokyo or…

Frankly, you seem to be falling into a trap that a majority of American executives, at Disney as well as elsewhere, fall into - you’ve received, formally or informally, a narrow, generalized business education lacking in nuance or specificity and have become convinced that that meager gruel is the sum of all human knowledge and experience.

I totally agree with your post.

Its too bad Bob, Josh and Hugh doesn't

 

[Casper Gutman]

Pandora is quite good; I enjoy that whole area and I've never even seen Avatar (and thus have zero connection to the IP).

I'm not as high overall on Flight of Passage as others, but that's because it's a simulator. I'm not sure a simulator could ever be a truly great attraction to me, but Flight of Passage is about as good a simulator as anyone could ever build. Na'vi River Journey is a fantastic C ticket, and better than other recent attractions like Ratatouille that were designed to be superior.

It's probably the only land they've built recently that doesn't really have any major problems (in terms of what was actually built -- of course it would be nice if it had another attraction).

You’re one of the best posters on this board and I genuinely respect your fondness for Pandora but I can’t share it. Without going into the rides themselves, I feel it suffers from two of the cardinal sins of modern Disney lands: a lack of things to do and a poor layout. It’s a land with one quick-service, a food stand, and a ride-exit gift shop and very little more. It also feels like what it is - a very decorated warehouse and courtyard. There are no twists and turns, no variety in views and perspectives. It’s vastly superior to TSL but that superiority is one of degree, not kind - at a fundamental level, both fail in very similar ways.

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

You’re one of the best posters on this board and I genuinely respect your fondness for Pandora but I can’t share it. Without going into the rides themselves, I feel it suffers from two of the cardinal sins of modern Disney lands: a lack of things to do and a poor layout. It’s a land with one quick-service, a food stand, and a ride-exit gift shop and very little more. It also feels like what it is - a very decorated warehouse and courtyard. There are no twists and turns, no variety in views and perspectives. It’s vastly superior to TSL but that superiority is one of degree, not kind - at a fundamental level, both fail in very similar ways.

Beastly Kingdom would have been much better!

 

[HauntedPirate]

You’re one of the best posters on this board and I genuinely respect your fondness for Pandora but I can’t share it. Without going into the rides themselves, I feel it suffers from two of the cardinal sins of modern Disney lands: a lack of things to do and a poor layout. It’s a land with one quick-service, a food stand, and a ride-exit gift shop and very little more. It also feels like what it is - a very decorated warehouse and courtyard. There are no twists and turns, no variety in views and perspectives. It’s vastly superior to TSL but that superiority is one of degree, not kind - at a fundamental level, both fail in very similar ways.

Pandora is just another Iger Special© - One land with an E-ticket, a C-ticket, and a bunch of quick service/merch locations of various kinds. At least it's visually impressive at night. TSL offers even less. The Fantasyland expansion is on-par. GE, same. Because Bob and his henchmen/Yes-men KNOW what guests want... Of course, people keep showing up and paying for the snakeoil they are selling, so there's that to consider as well.

To tie that into the topic at hand - Monsters, Inc. Land feels very much like yet another Iger Special© - An E-ticket, a C-ticket, and bunch of filler designed to make money.

 

[JD80]

I will write as I like... great comeback.

That's fine. I'll choose to ignore the posts then.

 

[Gusey]

Pandora is just another Iger Special© - One land with an E-ticket, a C-ticket, and a bunch of quick service/merch locations of various kinds. At least it's visually impressive at night. TSL offers even less. The Fantasyland expansion is on-par. GE, same. Because Bob and his henchmen/Yes-men KNOW what guests want... Of course, people keep showing up and paying for the snakeoil they are selling, so there's that to consider as well.

To tie that into the topic at hand - Monsters, Inc. Land feels very much like yet another Iger Special© - An E-ticket, a C-ticket, and bunch of filler designed to make money.

I would say TSL has at least attempted to break out of the 2 attraction land model. It has 3 attractions (yes 1 was already there but they were able to change the entrance to the other side of the building and it already being there probably helped allow the budget to include that parks only flat ride Alien Swirling Saucers). Since it opened in 2018, they added a store at the end of TSMM in 2022, and Roundup Rodeo BBQ in 2023. That's 3 attractions, a QS, a TS, and a shop. It's also recommend by many travel sites to visit TSL at night because of the lighting package they added with the fairy lights. I think it was a really good addition to the park, and there's more to do in TSL than SGE, despite it being the smaller land