DAK “Zootopia” is being created for the Tree of Life theater

[jah4955]

Dunno, you got me there.. OG fastpass was during my 'traveling period' where I didn't visit the parks for about 8yrs. Wasn't until my kids were big enough that we started going back to the parks. During that time I would even be in Anaheim right next to the parks and wouldn't make time for Disney.. Living life faster than Disney pace

...reflecting on it more, it was. I remember delighting, at least once, in walking right on and having to only look at the mural for a moment

 

[jah4955]

Where did you find this?

It's in his biblical commentaries...one or two volumes on most books of the Bible...with his scholarship and application/perspective....very British

 

[DisneyHead123]

I hate to be the one to admit it, guys... But average, normal people in the world truly dont appreciate originality, art, and effort anymore. Most people really do have the mindsets of "I know dat movie! Woo!" and "This ride goes zoom zoom fast! Best ride ever!"

My take is that there is a shadow and a light side to just about everything.

Sure, there is lazy consumerism and mindlessness that happens. I mean - yeah. There’s no denying that’s a thing in the US. That is a problem. But there are also people who go to the parks exhausted who don’t have any water left in their cup to pour, or spoons left, or whatever metaphor you prefer. At certain points in your life you’re just tired as f-. And if people need the parks to rejuvenate more than attend a lecture? I would say that is the “light side” of breezy, fun, non-frontal-cortex-activating entertainment. Similarly, familiarity can be totally understandable when stressed out people need reassurance and predictability, or it can be boring as heck.

I don’t think Disney absolutely needs to choose one road or the other at all times, I just hope they’re willing to pivot when the situation calls for it. There’s only so much IP, and really only so much that’s currently popular and well known. Discussing which of the same handful of movies might get a new ride or land is going to get old fast, in my opinion, especially since most Disney movies have a very similar vibe or tone. Bright visuals, mild humor, hero’s journey where wackiness often ensues, happily ever after. That’s great, but I think it’s also why people go crazy for something like Haunted Mansion, where they’re getting some novelty in the tone.

 

[DrStarlander]

My take is that there is a shadow and a light side to just about everything.

Sure, there is lazy consumerism and mindlessness that happens. I mean - yeah. There’s no denying that’s a thing in the US. That is a problem. But there are also people who go to the parks exhausted who don’t have any water left in their cup to pour, or spoons left, or whatever metaphor you prefer. At certain points in your life you’re just tired as f-. And if people need the parks to rejuvenate more than attend a lecture? I would say that is the “light side” of breezy, fun, non-frontal-cortex-activating entertainment. Similarly, familiarity can be totally understandable when stressed out people need reassurance and predictability, or it can be boring as heck.

I don’t think Disney absolutely needs to choose one road or the other at all times, I just hope they’re willing to pivot when the situation calls for it. There’s only so much IP, and really only so much that’s currently popular and well known. Discussing which of the same handful of movies might get a new ride or land is going to get old fast, in my opinion, especially since most Disney movies have a very similar vibe or tone. Bright visuals, mild humor, hero’s journey where wackiness often ensues, happily ever after. That’s great, but I think it’s also why people go crazy for something like Haunted Mansion, where they’re getting some novelty in the tone.

Yes sameness is boring. You can afford michelin star restaurants and still have incredible delight in discovering an obscure food truck. Texture and variety is what makes things stimulating and exciting.

I think in the modern context where nearly all new attractions and lands at Disney Parks are based on IPs, non-IP offerings could cut through that and -- like the food truck -- feel particularly surprising and delightful. I suspect Mystic Manor and Expedition Everest both benefit from that. In a park like DCA where everything except Grizzly Peak is IP, it makes people grip onto GP even tighter -- "don't take this away."

This is hard to explain to MBAs. It's like explaining the role of silence in music. The MBA mind (superficially) is "if they like the hook, do more hooks!"

I think Disney would be wise to sprinkle in non-IP attractions into a resort every decade or two. It's a chance to spice things up. I'd love an S.E.A.-type Mystic Manor type attraction in any Adventureland, or a Disneyland Tomorrowland dark ride (in PeopleMover styled vehicles?) that has no IP and maybe lots of Easter eggs from Tomorrowland's past. DCA could use a dark-vibe (e.g., Haunted Mansion) attraction. So many possibilities, and I do think (if they were done well) they'd be very popular and may stand the test of time more than many IP attractions.

 

[WorldExplorer]

So guys, I just checked, and Zootopia: Better Zoogether still sucks...

 

[MrPromey]

So guys, I just checked, and Zootopia: Better Zoogether still sucks...

We're relying on you to keep these insightful updates coming!

 

[donaldtoo]

So guys, I just checked, and Zootopia: Better Zoogether still sucks...

You, clearly, haven’t been snorting enough Pixie dust or wearing your Disney assigned, sparkly framed, rose-colored glasses.

And, whoever (team, whatever) came up with “Better Zoogether” needs to be canned, post haste.

 

[WorldExplorer]

We're relying on you to keep these insightful updates coming!

Glad to help.

 

[Brer Panther]

If a ride is great, its going to be great. The fact that it is linked to existing IP/Merchandising opportunities only means that you have a build in potential fan base preexisting to help the ride, and to sell merchandise. It also means you are not paying licensing fees. So the pre-existing IP could help support a less then great ride, only bolsters a great ride, and acts as a potential risk hedge. Why not lean into those advantages?

Again, just because something has an IP attached to it doesn't mean it's gonna be a success. Galactic Starcruiser, anyone?

But average, normal people in the world truly dont appreciate originality, art, and effort anymore.

The reason they do it is a good number of people would give it a shot based on the picture…. And that’s why they do it

So... yes, they COULD just put a giant pile of dung in EPCOT, slap a picture of Elsa or Moana on it, and nothing more, and everyone would still want to see it. Because apparently, we're all dumb hicks who clap like a trained seal whenever we see something with a pre-existing character on it, no matter how low-effort it is.

 

[flynnibus]

So... yes, they COULD just put a giant pile of dung in EPCOT, slap a picture of Elsa or Moana on it, and nothing more, and everyone would still want to see it. Because apparently, we're all dumb hicks who clap like a trained seal whenever we see something with a pre-existing character on it, no matter how low-effort it is.

Yes, kind of like we will get in line for an attraction we can't see at all inside some foreign looking building.. but we know it's a big Disney attraction so we have expectations of being entertained.

Sorry you don't buyer psychology - but that's how we all work. We trust familiarity.

 

[Brer Panther]

Yes, kind of like we will get in line for an attraction we can't see at all inside some foreign looking building.. but we know it's a big Disney attraction so we have expectations of being entertained.

We could always look up a video of the attraction beforehand.

And if just being a big Disney attraction gives us expectations of being entertained, wouldn't it not matter whether it has an IP attached to it or not?

 

[flynnibus]

We could always look up a video of the attraction beforehand.

In today's era - yes. But this tactic has existed long before youtube as well as the response to it.

And if just being a big Disney attraction gives us expectations of being entertained, wouldn't it not matter whether it has an IP attached to it or not?

Have you considered the world is not 'one size fits all'? Why do you insist on this binary yes/no world? it's not reality. The idea of something being attractive to someone is something that can VARY more or less.

Last time I'm replying to this.. you're being obtuse while hiding from literally the entire world around you.

 

[SamusAranX]

It's a joke.

There are plenty of people who seem to follow this mantra. But I personally believe nothing is ever absolute.

Now c’mon. You know that the Sith deal in absolutes

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

Again, just because something has an IP attached to it doesn't mean it's gonna be a success. Galactic Starcruiser, anyone?


So... yes, they COULD just put a giant pile of dung in EPCOT, slap a picture of Elsa or Moana on it, and nothing more, and everyone would still want to see it. Because apparently, we're all dumb hicks who clap like a trained seal whenever we see something with a pre-existing character on it, no matter how low-effort it is.

Again no one said just because it has IP or will be a smash hit. The point is that all things being equal having an already established IP/following helps! There is no reason NOT to use established IP. It can only help a ride. Theres no reason not to use it. It costs nothing in licensing, it creates buzz on its own with its own fan base. It doesn’t detract from a great ride and it might help prop up a ride with some flaws. Is it going to take a horrible ride and make it an amazing experience, no. But it might help an ok ride in popularity simply because its fans will be attracted to it anyway

 

[Trauma]

Again no one said just because it has IP or will be a smash hit. The point is that all things being equal having an already established IP/following helps! There is no reason NOT to use established IP. It can only help a ride. Theres no reason not to use it. It costs nothing in licensing, it creates buzz on its own with its own fan base. It doesn’t detract from a great ride and it might help prop up a ride with some flaws. Is it going to take a horrible ride and make it an amazing experience, no. But it might help an ok ride in popularity simply because its fans will be attracted to it anyway

It can certainly detract from a great ride.

It can prevent that ride from ever existing.

Is it not possible to have an idea for a ride that would be truly amazing, but just doesn’t seem to have a way to jam an IP into it ?

I guess that ride doesn’t get made because it won’t have a “ pre-existing fan base”.

 

[WorldExplorer]

Again no one said just because it has IP or will be a smash hit. The point is that all things being equal having an already established IP/following helps! There is no reason NOT to use established IP. It can only help a ride. Theres no reason not to use it. It costs nothing in licensing, it creates buzz on its own with its own fan base. It doesn’t detract from a great ride and it might help prop up a ride with some flaws. Is it going to take a horrible ride and make it an amazing experience, no. But it might help an ok ride in popularity simply because its fans will be attracted to it anyway

If you care about the parks that used to have actual themes continuing to have actual themes and not just being a random mishmash of crap, there's a reason not to use them.

 

[DisneyHead123]

There is no reason NOT to use established IP. It can only help a ride. Theres no reason not to use it.

I would say the main reason is that IP is naturally constrained out of the gate.

With the new Cars area, for example - it doesn’t particularly fit Frontierland as it was. But it got shoehorned in because there wasn’t an IP that was a better fit. That is kind of a self created problem that is preventable by not having a ubiquitous IP mandate (To be fair Disney might need IP in there for other reasons, like merch sales to keep investors happy. But that’s a trade off situation, looking at pros and cons, not saying there’s absolutely no reason to go non IP ever. They 100% could have had a better thematic fit if they weren’t constrained by available IP.)

I’ve also said before that I think rides centered around a broader theme - pirates, haunted houses, the Himalayas, etc. - can be more atmospheric and instinctively appealing than some (not all) IP based rides because the IP in those rides was created to be presented in movie format. That’s not necessarily going to automatically translate to a ride. Or to take a different format - imagine if the holiday parade was suddenly turned into The Beauty and the Beast Parade. Is there much chance that narrowing the focus to a single narrative in that manner would enhance the experience? Or more chance that adding those additional constraints and moving from a broad archetypal theme to a conscripted one wouldn’t really work (and yes, I know there is IP in the parades, but it’s in an unusual, cross-story format not often seen in rides - also making a general point about going from broad themes to narrow here.)

 

[UNCgolf]

I’d do the actual math to show otherwise … but I don’t think you’d take it in anyway. The averages speak for themselves. For anytime you point out a walk on… you can find times they aren’t. That’s why we use long term data, not anecdotal spots.

So... you're just ignoring the actual data to declare yourself correct?

The averages, and Len's data, suggest it's among the least popular rides in the park. That's the point you're arguing against for some reason, despite lacking any supporting evidence for your position. The math is against you here.

 

[HMF]

Yes sameness is boring.

Which is why the way they have been running 4 parks that are supposed to be completely separate experiences as though the "Magic Kingdom" approach is the only correct way to operate all of them is so frustrating.

 

[HMF]

Again, just because something has an IP attached to it doesn't mean it's gonna be a success. Galactic Starcruiser, anyone?

The fact that that made it past the green light is genuinely amazing to me.