News Disney Not Renewing Great Movie Ride Sponsorship Deal with TCM ; Attraction to Close

RoysCabin

Well-Known Member
There's one part of all of this that does make me stop and consider a couple of factors; I've read a couple accounts here and there of people who are of the mind that the Hollywood "franchise bubble" could potentially burst within the next few years (of course, those analyses also add caveats that things could work out just fine for the current movie business model with the right circumstances), that especially in 2018 we're projected to be in a movie scene that has a tentpole/franchise release coming out for mass release every weekend and that at some point those big ticket movies are going to thoroughly cannibalize each other, leaving only a few standing, likely with the Avengers Infinity War flicks near the top of the survivors list. It was actually Steven Spielberg and George Lucas who posited this, noting how we increasingly live in a world where there are fewer and fewer "mid level" movies like simpler comedies or thrillers, and instead we get bigger and bigger gambles on potential blockbusters.

The question that comes to mind for me is: does this potential for a bubble burst have any possible impact on theme park design, given that theme parks have been moving in the franchise direction to keep pace with what Hollywood is putting out? I'm not trying to play wishful thinking on my part: I'm pretty clearly of the crowd that would prefer to go back to a model where most theme park experiences had less to do with pre-existing properties, even if they were at least partially inspired by them, but I do think there are some serious questions here to consider should the Hollywood trend run into some kind of hiccup within the next few years. It's been mentioned before, for example, that IPs are nothing new in Disney theme parks, but what is new about the modern trend, at least since the late 90s or so, is how "in your face" some of the usage is, particularly with regards to overlaying older attractions and heavily pushing gift shops and merchandising to a degree not seen previous to that time (the irony on the movie side of this being that George Lucas basically has himself to blame, at least in part, for these developments). Do we hit a snag at some point where the call to make more and more large scale attractions of tentpole franchises creates some kind of bubble effect, whether by overshooting consumer demand or by simply running out of space for all of them at current theme parks?

I'm spitballing here, not claiming to have any notion or idea if any of this will happen or what the impact on theme parks might be, but I think it would be wise to at least be considered by those in positions to do so. I know the modern corporate mindset is more "just focus on the next two quarters"...I simplify for effect, I realize...but there are questions to be answered here about what happens if the current Comic Con-ing of the entertainment world doesn't end up having staying power.
 

the-reason14

Well-Known Member
Are you saying DL Splash is better? We are doing our first DL trip after Xmas... WDW Splash is my favorite ride on property. If there's a better version at DL, I just got even more excited

No. The DL version of splash is incoherent in comparison to the WDW one. The story is not as clear, and you move by the scenes too quickly to appreciate that there are more AAs in the DL version. How anyone can think the DL version of splash is better is beyond me, but to each their own. I'm one of the only people in existence to think that WDW's space is superior, but that's mostly the nostalgia talking in me.
 

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
WDW's Space mountain is superior...It has aged, but was a much grander vision from the very beginning...far superior in every way.. Over the years, DL version got on-board audio and a re-track... If we got the same things ours would absolutely be the best version. The DL version of Splash was the first built, but actually for a change, WDW did get the better version..More effects, leapfrog fountains in the laughing place...all in all a better attraction... despite what maintenance issues it might have from time to time.
 

L.C. Clench

Well-Known Member
Honestly until attendance numbers significantly sink and raising prices no longer raises profits the odds are the bare minimum is all we can expect from them. They do just enough to give something "new" without actually having to provide something. I think the main problem is no one in any level of decision making actually understands crowd behavior. They look at lines and think "people love this" when a lot of it is just newness. When you go a Decade with no changes and finally something happens people flock to it.

That said I don't think overlays have to be bad. I think they are often done poorly but as much as I loved Dreamflight I enjoy Buzz more. While that's the only positive one I can think of it is still proof to me that it is possible. Iger has said in terms of the movies he sees plugging in the live action remakes as risk free movies and in much the same way he sees plugging in IPs at the parks as risk free regardless of quality. I've never gotten a feel that he ever really does anything with the parks of consequence and may not even know what makes a quality ride.

They aren't doing anything with GMR anyway so I'm not sure I care about it going away. It's more sad to look at stagnation which is what we've done on he past 15 plus years (sorry I don't see narration and intro movies as updates) than it is to just see something go.
 

Daveeeeed

Well-Known Member
I think the issue is how negativity sucks, no matter what form as it just brings you down.

People seem to use the ways they're running things as an outlet here. Obviously I like many care about the parks and hate the way they're running things, but I still love Disney, the history, and even today I really do enjoy it still.

Maybe instead of initially finding a way to critique something just critique when something happens that absolutely sucks like DCA's Tower of Terror. But the minor things it's just not worth it.
 

wannabeBelle

Well-Known Member
I agree. I am not a negative type normally and with Disney it is the same. In most cases, I am more than willing to take a wait and see approach. There have been exceptions to that when I was friendly with people who were laid off due to the changes ( Off Kilter & Mulch Sweat & Shears most notably) I am looking forward to many of the changes we are hearing about and I love hearing the speculation as to what will be built. The only issue I have right now is with timing. The timing of these projects, mostly in the Studios, is just awful. TSL should have been started a long time ago. When that was done, start on the Star Wars end of things, so the park doesn't have a lack of things to do and real estate to do it in! As mentioned before, this park needs all of it's existing attractions and then some! I just wish that the projects that are being done were better spaced out to allow the further development of the park without taking away from the experience of the guest. Marie
 

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
I think the issue is how negativity sucks, no matter what form as it just brings you down.

People seem to use the ways they're running things as an outlet here. Obviously I like many care about the parks and hate the way they're running things, but I still love Disney, the history, and even today I really do enjoy it still.

Maybe instead of initially finding a way to critique something just critique when something happens that absolutely sucks like DCA's Tower of Terror. But the minor things it's just not worth it.
but that's all subjective...some things are more important to some people than other things...
Critique is good, discussion is good, let's just not attack each other. that's all.
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
I like RnR, not saying I'd love a Guardians overlay, but are we really that attached to Aerosmith? Or just against Marvel? They could do a lot with this coaster.
I'm against not building new for something as important as one of the very select few Marvel IPs that can be used in WDW.
Honestly until attendance numbers significantly sink and raising prices no longer raises profits the odds are the bare minimum is all we can expect from them. They do just enough to give something "new" without actually having to provide something. I think the main problem is no one in any level of decision making actually understands crowd behavior. They look at lines and think "people love this" when a lot of it is just newness. When you go a Decade with no changes and finally something happens people flock to it.

That said I don't think overlays have to be bad. I think they are often done poorly but as much as I loved Dreamflight I enjoy Buzz more. While that's the only positive one I can think of it is still proof to me that it is possible. Iger has said in terms of the movies he sees plugging in the live action remakes as risk free movies and in much the same way he sees plugging in IPs at the parks as risk free regardless of quality. I've never gotten a feel that he ever really does anything with the parks of consequence and may not even know what makes a quality ride.

They aren't doing anything with GMR anyway so I'm not sure I care about it going away. It's more sad to look at stagnation which is what we've done on he past 15 plus years (sorry I don't see narration and intro movies as updates) than it is to just see something go.
Not really or else he wouldn't be throwing so much at Star Wars. In that case, he does see a risk of screwing it up.
 

L.C. Clench

Well-Known Member
Not really or else he wouldn't be throwing so much at Star Wars. In that case, he does see a risk of screwing it up.
Star Wars is about as risk free as you can get and they are already going as low risk as possible with it.

There is 40+ years of evidence that people will throw money at anything that says Star Wars and people are already salivating at playing around in a themed flea market with two new rides and a hotel as an attraction.

If it was Brave Little Toaster land I'd say that's a risk. Star Wars land not so much.
 

L.C. Clench

Well-Known Member
I think the issue is how negativity sucks, no matter what form as it just brings you down.

People seem to use the ways they're running things as an outlet here. Obviously I like many care about the parks and hate the way they're running things, but I still love Disney, the history, and even today I really do enjoy it still.

Maybe instead of initially finding a way to critique something just critique when something happens that absolutely sucks like DCA's Tower of Terror. But the minor things it's just not worth it.
But not everyone thinks that the DCA Tower change sucks. Some people are excited about the change.

Is it just don't be negative unless is something I think is negative and then feel free to be negative.
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
Star Wars is about as risk free as you can get and they are already going as low risk as possible with it.

There is 40+ years of evidence that people will throw money at anything that says Star Wars and people are already salivating at playing around in a themed flea market with two new rides and a hotel as an attraction.

If it was Brave Little Toaster land I'd say that's a risk. Star Wars land not so much.
The risk comes from having to do as much as they're doing to impress people or else they would've had more than just us here berating them on a terrible job. When's the last time they built a single land with two side-by-side E Tickets?

Exactly.
 

jt04

Well-Known Member
But not everyone thinks that the DCA Tower change sucks. Some people are excited about the change.

Is it just don't be negative unless is something I think is negative and then feel free to be negative.

Yes, those who have grown up during the comic book movie era are much more likely to approve of the change. I am sure many see the old tower as old-fashioned.

Of course they should keep the Orlando version as is on the outside at least since it is so much better themed and is timeless because of that fact. IMO.
 

L.C. Clench

Well-Known Member
The risk comes from having to do as much as they're doing to impress people or else they would've had more than just us here berating them on a terrible job. When's the last time they built a single land with two side-by-side E Tickets?

Exactly.
I'll hold my belief on any of it until it's done. We've all seen concept art disappear, things announced never show up and things built that were shells of the original design. At this point I have faith they will call the area Star Wars land and outside of that I'm taking the wait and see approach. I'm actually more confident they'll do a good job on the hotel since they have a plan to get maximum money out of it.
 

L.C. Clench

Well-Known Member
Yes, those who have grown up during the comic book movie era are much more likely to approve of the change. I am sure many see the old tower as old-fashioned.

Of course they should keep the Orlando version as is on the outside at least since it is so much better themed and is timeless because of that fact. IMO.
I don't think it's simply growing up in the comic book movie era. This is one I don't really have a big issue with and unless the comic book movie you are referring to is Flash Gordon I'm probably a bit older. I'd like to see how the ride itself plays out before making a final decision on it but as a surface idea I have much less concern with this than I did the Frozen crud in EPCOT
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Not really or else he wouldn't be throwing so much at Star Wars. In that case, he does see a risk of screwing it up.
The risk comes from having to do as much as they're doing to impress people or else they would've had more than just us here berating them on a terrible job. When's the last time they built a single land with two side-by-side E Tickets?

Exactly.
Every half witted Armchair Imagineering has said to build more Star Wars. Disney has had the theme park rights for decades. Work on the land only came after it was essentially demanded by Wall Street because it is so obvious.
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
Every half witted Armchair Imagineering has said to build more Star Wars. Disney has had the theme park rights for decades. Work on the land only came after it was essentially demanded by Wall Street because it is so obvious.
And it's being done to a level way above the usual "good enough." They don't want to risk screwing it up.

That's my point.
 

Daveeeeed

Well-Known Member
but that's all subjective...some things are more important to some people than other things...
Critique is good, the discussion is good, let's just not attack each other. that's all.
It's hard to have a constructive discussion though when people rail against anything and everything...

I am by no means defending Disney, but I also am going to enjoy the past instead of trying to live in it, even though the past was superior.
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
I think the issue is how negativity sucks, no matter what form as it just brings you down.

People seem to use the ways they're running things as an outlet here. Obviously I like many care about the parks and hate the way they're running things, but I still love Disney, the history, and even today I really do enjoy it still.

Maybe instead of initially finding a way to critique something just critique when something happens that absolutely sucks like DCA's Tower of Terror. But the minor things it's just not worth it.
Negativity is necessary if someone or something feels wronged. The passion on these forums is fueled by an original basis of positive experiences. The negativity exemplified on these boards are when individuals feel that something will affect future positive experiences.

Cynicism is good and healthy. I truly believe that people that see only positive things are delusional.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom