A Spirited Perfect Ten

[FigmentJedi]

That gets me thinking, did they ever mention in JW how much it cost to go there?

No, but I think it's safe to assume it's only the super-rich, as the only people we see out of context are the family who would have been given the VIP trip for free because they're related to the administrator.

Prices are unspecified, but the Standard Package on the website is meant to be an affordable three day option
http://www.jurassicworld.com/tickets/standard/

Plus, Masrani very much shares John Hammond's outlook that as many people as possible should have the opportunity to see live dinosaurs.

 

[TalkingHead]

Did I read correctly that Inside Out had the largest opening of an original non-franchise movie? (Topping Avatar, I believe?)

I can't decide how Bob "Franchises Get Me Hot" Iger will take that news.

 

[Mike S]

Did I read correctly that Inside Out had the largest opening of an original non-franchise movie? (Topping Avatar, I believe?)

I can't decide how Bob "Franchises Get Me Hot" Iger will take that news.

He'll turn it into a franchise, of course

 

[TalkingHead]

And that's the best place for it to go. Pete Docter even worked on the original Cranium Command too

Which is why it's disingenuous to act like that attraction wasn't a huge inspiration for the film. Not that it's being touted that way...

 

[BrerJon]

He'll turn it into a franchise, of course

"Inside Out 2: Outside In", coming to a theater near you soon.

 

[TalkingHead]

He'll turn it into a franchise, of course

Sequel is Outside-In?

That doesn't sound like family fare.

 

[AEfx]

Did I read correctly that Inside Out had the largest opening of an original non-franchise movie? (Topping Avatar, I believe?)

I can't decide how Bob "Franchises Get Me Hot" Iger will take that news.

Duh - by the end of the summer it will be announced that Inside Out 2 will be coming to a theater near you in a couple of years. FRANCHISE BORN!

That said, calling it a "non-franchise" movie is kind of like calling Tomorrowland one - it's tenuous, because to many, "Pixar films" are their own franchise (you don't hear folks saying "I love Warner Bros films" but you do see them say that about Pixar, no matter what they put out).

 

[Mike S]

"Inside Out 2: Outside In", coming to a theater near you soon.

Oh, they sure set up what the sequel would be. But I highly doubt Pixar would cross that line in one of their movies. Huge spoiler of the ending coming!!!!!!

Spoiler

The puberty button

 

[jensenrick]

You just hit on what scares me about this film culturally LOL...the message that inside everyone are multiple personalities battling it out...it reeks of "I can't control my emotions, they control me" and I hope kids don't take any of that seriously.

When you see it, you'll see that is not the message at all.
While there is much that a child has to be rather sophisticated to pickup, the most obvious lesson (literally color coded) is about emotional maturity and how it develops(much spoilers ahead)-

Spoiler

how the emotions have to work together and in balance for someone to deal with life beyond childhood, and not stigmatizing the place of melancholy and fear in a child's life.
While Joy and Sadness are the protagonists, I would argue that the movie deals much more with memories, and how strong emotions can color or fix a memory, not to mention how core memories are the main building blocks of your personality.

It's so much richer and deeper than people realize.
Part of why I consider Cranium Command (while nice) to be like a crayon drawing next to the masterpiece that is Inside Out.

 

[fosse76]

I loved the movie, but it's not without its flaws, the best criticism of it I read was that the first film was 'lessons for smart people', but this one was 'lessons for stupid people'.

Look at the first one - Tim and Lex are both super bright kids, one with paleontology, the other with computers, Grant, Sattler and Malcolm are all super smart.. and in the real world of 1993, smart kids loved the moral questions and read the book - a science-heavy tome about genetics and chaos theory - in their droves.

This one, the only smart characters are the bad guys, and the kids barely show any interest in the multi-thousand dollar vacation they've been given. Imagine if in the first one, instead of decoding Unix systems, Lex had just been pouting over a boy she saw on the jeep tour... and there's almost a fear of spending too long on the 'talky' moral bits in case the audience attention span wanes. The whole thing is rather dumbed down, which is unfortunate, but it's still a fantastic movie nevertheless.

Well to be fair, in the original book, Lex is pretty useless and does nothing but whine the entire time. Tim is actually the smart one and is both the computer and Dino nerd. And while I agree with your assessment of the older boy, the younger boy is obviously supposed to be highly intelligent and does appear to be excited to be at the park.

I think it was already mentioned in this thread, but the purpose of the divorce subplot was the entire reason the boys were sent to Jurassic World in the first place. But it was definitely a lame attempt. The boys were supposed to come back and the parents were going to be all like "Surprise! We're divorced now!" The father did say "so much for our last family breakfast" which more or less confirms that was what was going to happen. It also somewhat mirrors the first film too. Lex and Tim's parents were getting divorced so they
were sent t spend time with their grandfather (Hammond).

Yes, it's very interesting to hear...when I see the film again I'm going to look a lot more closely at that.

As I said in an earlier post, the "City Walk" part of Jurassic World is what was built at Six Flags. It was built in the parking lots. You aren't going to see any remnants of that park in the film.

 

[flyerjab]

Has everyone forgotten Disney already has been there/done that?

Cranium Command.

I should reply that having only vacationed in WDW since 2009, I never experienced that ride. I have heard people mention it, but I still don't have a good idea of what type of ride it was.

Would Inside Out be a worthy way to revive that attraction? Or is it another mistake like adding Frozen. Also, where was it originally located? The WoL Pavilion?

 

[FigmentJedi]

I should reply that having only vacationed in WDW since 2009, I never experienced that ride. I have heard people mention it, but I still don't have a good idea of what type of ride it was.

Would Inside Out be a worthy way to revive that attraction? Or is it another mistake like adding Frozen. Also, where was it originally located? The WoL Pavilion?

Inside Out pretty much runs on the same base premise as Cranium Command, though Cranium Command is more about how the brain runs the human body versus Inside Out's mental realm.

 

[AEfx]

As I said in an earlier post, the "City Walk" part of Jurassic World is what was built at Six Flags. It was built in the parking lots. You aren't going to see any remnants of that park in the film.

Ah, I guess that's why I found it confusing. When they made a big deal about shooting there, naturally I thought that it would somehow be included. Sounds like they could have basically filmed in any empty space in the middle of nowhere then.

 

[Funmeister]

I should reply that having only vacationed in WDW since 2009, I never experienced that ride. I have heard people mention it, but I still don't have a good idea of what type of ride it was.

Would Inside Out be a worthy way to revive that attraction? Or is it another mistake like adding Frozen. Also, where was it originally located? The WoL Pavilion?

The big problem is that you cannot revive the attraction without reviving the entire pavilion. It's not as simple as just re-theming it to Inside Out. It would require a much larger investment than that of just the show.

 

[AEfx]

I should reply that having only vacationed in WDW since 2009, I never experienced that ride. I have heard people mention it, but I still don't have a good idea of what type of ride it was.

Would Inside Out be a worthy way to revive that attraction? Or is it another mistake like adding Frozen. Also, where was it originally located? The WoL Pavilion?

See Tahu's post above - it was a show that was part of the WoL Pavilion. It was generally the highest rated thing there, and is always fondly remembered as a quality production. Not sure reviving it is an option, but it does have a very similar premise.

 

[ChrisFL]

You're not alone, TPR blocked me on all media (twitter, FB, etc) after I pointed out that every single USB port in the Tangled rest area was broken. Which is a shame, because Robb is always really nice to me when we meet in real life...

Interesting, and you're one of the most level-headed people I know, on here and elsewhere. I think that basically proves it to me that Robb is on Disney's "special" people list.

 

[djlaosc]

Just back from seeing Jurassic World - thought it was a good film - would recommend it - better that Jurassic Park III - been too long since I've seen The Lost World and Jurassic Park to compare.

Only thing they had promoting Inside Out was cardboard cut-outs of the 5 emotions - I don't think we have an actual release date here yet (rumoured to be July 24th).

 

[MonkeyHead]

Ah, I guess that's why I found it confusing. When they made a big deal about shooting there, naturally I thought that it would somehow be included. Sounds like they could have basically filmed in any empty space in the middle of nowhere then.

Filming at Six Flags had absolutely nothing to do with it being a theme park. The entire site has become enormously popular with film production companies in the last couple of years.

It's secluded, has large tracks of land on which to build, forested areas, etc.

 

[Mike S]

Made the pilgrimage to Disneyland earlier this year. Now, the site of the 1964 World's Fair.

 

[michmousefan]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/15/us-disney-moms-insight-idUSKBN0OV0DX20150615

So did this article appear because of the Post one. And bring a barf bag when reading this one. Ugh.

Apparently the brigade of moms don't have the interest (or perhaps the ability/capacity) to participate in the discussion here. I'm guessing most of them have only been Disney fans for fewer than ten years, and so don't really have a clue as to how the current level of Disney (particularly in Orlando) service, attraction quality and upkeep pale to that of 15-20 years ago.