They can’t feasibly fail to this extent because they’ll just generally be larger, more exciting, more desirable attractions. They could be thematic messes for AK and will still be very popular rides, whereas a sit-down show kind of lives and dies by the content.
She's a popular celebrity, she gets voice acting jobs tossed her way left and right. So, no, she's not desperate for work.
The Zootopia land they chose to build in Shanghai does not make me desirous of another no matter what park they opt to put it in, and it's not just because the associated attraction is meh. When translated semi-faithfully to the real world, the film's cities are aesthetic disasters that are neither visually pleasing nor authentic-feeling. This is part of the inherent problem with building facsimile IP lands based on environments that weren't designed to seem real or lived in. Potter, Pandora, and Batuu work because they come from world-building franchises, but Zootopia's core city is just a zany, busy, colorful backdrop.
Personally I think it could stay in Shanghai and never appear anywhere else.
It depends on what your definition of story is. The majority of the WED era attractions were more of a series of experiences building to a climax Not really a story with a main character and a beginning middle and end. The idea of the rides telling explicit stories really was an invention of the Eisner era. The problem with the more recent efforts under WDI is that a lot of the "story" beats of the rides feel contrived and the attractions themselves feel more like elaborate advertisements rather than a loosely-connected series of vignettes like the WED days or the more story driven style of the Eisner era. Iger tells them what to build and what IP it should be, They randomly cram it into a park it often doesn't fit in. They come up with an elaborate backstory or more accurately "excuse" for it to be there. Iger's philosophy is basically that WDI is essentially the most expensive marketing firm in the world and they have outsourced most of the actual production to companies like Garner Holt for AAs. So really WDI now is a handful of creative executives who supervise the projects but have very little creativity because the Iger mantra refuses to let them actually be creative.
It doesn't' really belong there but since DHS lacks a coherent theme now and is really just a random collection of lands and attractions that don't fit anywhere else, I guess anything goes.
Themed Rides can live and die by their content too.
Tiana is an enjoyable ride in a vacuum despite the nothingburger story. It’s the specter of what preceded it that throws a real wrench in the works. If they built something similar in scope and narrative as a new attraction rather than a reskin, absolutely no one would reasonably rate it a D-, to reference your original post. I’d wager Encanto will at least be similar because it’s basically too large to be an abject failure. It can miss on both park theme and narrative and will still be a draw because it will be massive and technically impressive. It also has the advantage of no one having ever cared about Primeval Whirl. By comparison, a 4D show like Zoogether will never have the scope, thrill, or complexity necessary to be enjoyable in spite of its content.
There’s already a popular Lion King show nearby, but yeah, this Zootopia show was far from the best idea.
AP’s form lines for popcorn buckets and pins…. They just don’t want to see this.
Are you a Disney shareholder?
