Rumor Pixar's Coco coming to the Mexico Pavilion

[Kman101]

But the real box office numbers don’t point to longterm recognition/viability. And that’s Disney’s thing.

Little mermaid premiered in 1989...we had rides installed in 3 parks 2008-10.

Beauty and the beast 1991...restraurants slapped in Orlando 2010.

Toy story - 1995 - being added over the last decade.

With very few exceptions - you gotta wait at least 10 years.

Rides are used to push product and build brand loyalty...in the longterm.

Exactly. Which is why I think they've ultimately realized they could "circle back around" to Coco (and because of all of the "issues" that go along with it, which we already discussed). Not saying they will, of course, but clearly an expansion is seen as better than an overlay. For once I'd love to jump on board with that, but I was partial to the Coco refresh (though an expansion is needed more) but it also shouldn't be an either/or situation.

Kind of ironic they cut an overlay. Sometimes an overlay isn't the cheaper or easier option.

 

[Mickey5150]

The problem with the Gran Fiesta boat ride isn't theming, it's location. If the entrance to the boat ride was visible from the walkway then the ride would always have a ride. Coco wouldn't change that. Stick Peter Pan in its place and it becomes a walk on.

 

[Kman101]

The problem with the Gran Fiesta boat ride isn't theming, it's location. If the entrance to the boat ride was visible from the walkway then the ride would always have a ride. Coco wouldn't change that. Stick Peter Pan in its place and it becomes a walk on.

They did add that sign outside

But it's simply meant to be a small boat ride. It's not really meant to be a major attraction. I can see them wanting it to be a major attraction, but the reality is a lot of work needs to be done to make that happen.

I usually hit it right at 11 and walk right on. It's often got a minimal wait. Of course it depends on the day and crowds. Does it spill outside on a truly busy day? Just wondering, I haven't been to the parks on like, Christmas or holiday weeks. It seems pretty ignored despite the pavilion being busy.

 

[Spash007]

The problem with the Gran Fiesta boat ride isn't theming, it's location. If the entrance to the boat ride was visible from the walkway then the ride would always have a ride. Coco wouldn't change that. Stick Peter Pan in its place and it becomes a walk on.

In this case, that's a good problem to have since there isn't any place for the line to go. I've seen the line spilling out into the plaza, and it was still less than a 10 minute wait. Anything longer, and it becomes a crowd control/foot traffic issue. To make any additional update a worthy investment would mean re-configuring the ride to put the entrance outside, or re-configuring the plaza/shops. Which then builds up the investment itself, and begs the question of would it ever be worth it?

 

[Kman101]

In this case, that's a good problem to have since there isn't any place for the line to go. I've seen the line spilling out into the plaza, and it was still less than a 10 minute wait. Anything longer, and it becomes a crowd control/foot traffic issue. To make any additional update a worthy investment would mean re-configuring the ride to put the entrance outside, or re-configuring the plaza/shops. Which then builds up the investment itself, and begs the question of would it ever be worth it?

Likely one of the many reasons it's not happening right now. Hopefully someday ... but I can see now why they don't want to do that kind of undertaking when expansion is needed. Just a shame an actual fitting overlay gets pushed off, but I 'get it'.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I know, and I didn’t mean it in that way, my point is that winning that proved that at least at the moment the movie has impacted people and gotten fans, it might not indicate long term viability, that will be measured by the popularity of the Annual Coco/Day of the Dead Celebrations that will happen in different resorts.

And I agree, at the moment, I prefer the UK project to happen, and postpone Coco to mid 2020s, as that would let the Nostalgia grow, and maybe even let them look at the project in a bigger scope with no need to cut the budget at some point due to other investments. I just hope that they improve the screen integration into the story of the attraction, it’s one of the things that bother me with the current Three Caballeros ride...

Points taken

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Exactly. Which is why I think they've ultimately realized they could "circle back around" to Coco (and because of all of the "issues" that go along with it, which we already discussed). Not saying they will, of course, but clearly an expansion is seen as better than an overlay. For once I'd love to jump on board with that, but I was partial to the Coco refresh (though an expansion is needed more) but it also shouldn't be an either/or situation.

Kind of ironic they cut an overlay. Sometimes an overlay isn't the cheaper or easier option.

Exactly...

Which means, dear friends, the next time a movie gets good critic reviews/rotten tomatoes and does well at the box office...

Cough....COUGH....

Pump the brakes on the ride development discussions/plan spitballing.

Blue sky is always there - which means we won’t ever be able to physically touch it - and Most of it goes nowhere...
Talking rumors is great...but then the obtuse always start treating it as fact and using it as “evidence” in other discussions ...and buzz around like gnats.

No movie other than sequels will meet the immediate development criteria. Don’t look at the weirdness of frozen (and even that doesn’t look as “no brainer” now as it did for a busy 6 months in 2012) for the standard.

Might be best to pump the brakes a little and ask why things do or DO NOT make sense?

 

[rle4lunch]

Exactly...

Which means, dear friends, the next time a movie gets good critic reviews/rotten tomatoes and does well at the box office...

Cough....COUGH....

Pump the brakes on the ride development discussions/plan spitballing.

Blue sky is always there - which means we won’t ever be able to physically touch it - and Most of it goes nowhere...
Talking rumors is great...but then the obtuse always start treating it as fact and using it as “evidence” in other discussions ...and buzz around like gnats.

No movie other than sequels will meet the immediate development criteria. Don’t look at the weirdness of frozen (and even that doesn’t look as “no brainer” now as it did for a busy 6 months in 2012) for the standard.

Might be best to pump the brakes a little and ask why things do or DO NOT make sense?

Maybe if they spent a little more time on asking the question if they 'should' rather than if they 'could'...

Subpar attractions... uh.... find a way....

 

[JohnyKaz2078]

But the real box office numbers don’t point to longterm recognition/viability. And that’s Disney’s thing.

Little mermaid premiered in 1989...we had rides installed in 3 parks 2008-10.

Beauty and the beast 1991...restraurants slapped in Orlando 2010.

Toy story - 1995 - being added over the last decade.

With very few exceptions - you gotta wait at least 10 years.

Rides are used to push product and build brand loyalty...in the longterm.

Actually many of Pixar rides in the parks opened a few years after their respective movies were released:

Toy Story (1995) - Buzz Lightyear (1998)
A Bug's Life (1998) - Bug's Land (2002)
Monsters Inc. (2001) - Monsters Inc. in DCA (2006)
Nemo (2003) - The Seas and Submarine Voyage (2007)
Cars (2006) - Cars Land (2012)
Ratatouille (2007) - Ratatouille: The Adventure (2014)

This hasn't happened to Pixar movies but also to original Disney ones too:
Mr Toad (1949) - Mr Toad's Wild Ride (1955)
Peter Pan (1953) - Peter Pan's Flight (1955)
Alice in Wonderland (1951) - Teacups (1955)
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1954) - Submarines (1959)
Tarzan (1999) - Tarzan's Treehouse in DL (1999)
Avatar (2009) - Pandora (2017)
Tron 2 (2010) - Tron in SDL (2016)
Frozen (2013) - FEA in Epcot (2016)
Big Hero 6 (2014) - Big Hero 6 flat ride in TDL (2020)

So I don't think that there are "very few exceptions". Disney sees when a movie is successful and they capitalize on that and sometimes short-term. The real box office numbers don't lie sure. Avatar for example made $2.7 billion and has left absolutely no mark in pop culture like the Titanic, Star Wars or Avengers. No Na'vi figures sold in stores, no Banshees etc. Almost 10 years later many people don't know that Avatar is the highest grossing movie of all time (and with a huge difference from the second one). So then Disney builds Pandora which is amazing nonetheless. That's not nostalgia. That is sheer commercialism as a way to boost DAK with an extremely successful movie and a way to integrate more IPs into the parks.

 

[rle4lunch]

Actually many of Pixar rides in the parks opened a few years after their respective movies were released:

Toy Story (1995) - Buzz Lightyear (1998)
A Bug's Life (1998) - Bug's Land (2002)
Monsters Inc. (2001) - Monsters Inc. in DCA (2006)
Nemo (2003) - The Seas and Submarine Voyage (2007)
Cars (2006) - Cars Land (2012)
Ratatouille (2007) - Ratatouille: The Adventure (2014)

This hasn't happened to Pixar movies but also to original Disney ones too:
Mr Toad (1949) - Mr Toad's Wild Ride (1955)
Peter Pan (1953) - Peter Pan's Flight (1955)
Alice in Wonderland (1951) - Teacups (1955)
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1954) - Submarines (1959)
Tarzan (1999) - Tarzan's Treehouse in DL (1999)
Avatar (2009) - Pandora (2017)
Tron 2 (2010) - Tron in SDL (2016)
Frozen (2013) - FEA in Epcot (2016)
Big Hero 6 (2014) - Big Hero 6 flat ride in TDL (2020)

So I don't think that there are "very few exceptions". Disney sees when a movie is successful and they capitalize on that and sometimes short-term. The real box office numbers don't lie sure. Avatar for example made $2.7 billion and has left absolutely no mark in pop culture like the Titanic, Star Wars or Avengers. No Na'vi figures sold in stores, no Banshees etc. Almost 10 years later many people don't know that Avatar is the highest grossing movie of all time (and with a huge difference from the second one). So then Disney builds Pandora which is amazing nonetheless. That's not nostalgia. That is sheer commercialism as a way to boost DAK with an extremely successful movie and a way to integrate more IPs into the parks.

Nearly every ride had a 3-6 year latency from the movie. Interesting.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Actually many of Pixar rides in the parks opened a few years after their respective movies were released:

Toy Story (1995) - Buzz Lightyear (1998)
A Bug's Life (1998) - Bug's Land (2002)
Monsters Inc. (2001) - Monsters Inc. in DCA (2006)
Nemo (2003) - The Seas and Submarine Voyage (2007)
Cars (2006) - Cars Land (2012)
Ratatouille (2007) - Ratatouille: The Adventure (2014)

This hasn't happened to Pixar movies but also to original Disney ones too:
Mr Toad (1949) - Mr Toad's Wild Ride (1955)
Peter Pan (1953) - Peter Pan's Flight (1955)
Alice in Wonderland (1951) - Teacups (1955)
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1954) - Submarines (1959)
Tarzan (1999) - Tarzan's Treehouse in DL (1999)
Avatar (2009) - Pandora (2017)
Tron 2 (2010) - Tron in SDL (2016)
Frozen (2013) - FEA in Epcot (2016)
Big Hero 6 (2014) - Big Hero 6 flat ride in TDL (2020)

So I don't think that there are "very few exceptions". Disney sees when a movie is successful and they capitalize on that and sometimes short-term. The real box office numbers don't lie sure. Avatar for example made $2.7 billion and has left absolutely no mark in pop culture like the Titanic, Star Wars or Avengers. No Na'vi figures sold in stores, no Banshees etc. Almost 10 years later many people don't know that Avatar is the highest grossing movie of all time (and with a huge difference from the second one). So then Disney builds Pandora which is amazing nonetheless. That's not nostalgia. That is sheer commercialism as a way to boost DAK with an extremely successful movie and a way to integrate more IPs into the parks.

A lot of those rides are rehabbs and overlays...which makes it much more likely

Coco fits that bill...but the buzz appeal never felt like the others on that list.

And to be honest - cocos box office splits (domestic vs foreign) doesn’t serve the domestic interests of Disney quite as much. The core clientele is still the core clientele.

This link shows in more real time something disney would look at:

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?id=tangledcoco.htm

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Nearly every ride had a 3-6 year latency from the movie. Interesting.

There’s a lot of contextual details there we could discuss that doesn’t make it as black and white.

 

[rle4lunch]

There’s a lot of contextual details there we could discuss that doesn’t make it as black and white.

I know there are many logistical pieces to things that differ from one thing to another, I'm just pointing out that movie/book/IP's starting back in the 40's still took years to develop into an attraction in the parks. People nowadays think this is a new thing. They always use the initial build time of DL as a benchmark, which is a mistake.

 

[JohnyKaz2078]

A lot of those rides are rehabbs and overlays...which makes it much more likely

Coco fits that bill...but the buzz appeal never felt like the others on that list.

And to be honest - cocos box office splits (domestic vs foreign) doesn’t serve the domestic interests of Disney quite as much. The core clientele is still the core clientele.

This link shows in more real time something disney would look at:

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?id=tangledcoco.htm

Yeah I know that Coco made less domestically than internationally (around the same as Tangled) but I don't have a problem with that. It's a movie that deserves a ride (so do many other movies) and $200 million domestically isn't so bad.

By the way what do you mean "the buzz appeal"?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Yeah I know that Coco made less domestically than internationally (around the same as Tangled) but I don't have a problem with that. It's a movie that deserves a ride (so do many other movies) and $200 million domestically isn't so bad.

By the way what do you mean "the buzz appeal"?

I mean that you would have to admit that coco doesn’t have the potential to sell product, longer, than Nemo, cars,
Toy story, etc.

That’s not a knock - just a reality. Those are better for rides. The one with surprising legs is Moana...I’d say that is much better traction potential than coco.

And it’s not Whether you or i care about domestic gross...it’s disney...and that’s part of the equation.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I know there are many logistical pieces to things that differ from one thing to another, I'm just pointing out that movie/book/IP's starting back in the 40's still took years to develop into an attraction in the parks. People nowadays think this is a new thing. They always use the initial build time of DL as a benchmark, which is a mistake.

You have to discount the original Disneyland rides...there as story there.

And anything built in China or Japan...becised they don’t have to fit the bill...

Lots of context. I kinda base ride potential around the 90’s franchises...that’s when things seemed to change.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Actually many of Pixar rides in the parks opened a few years after their respective movies were released:

Toy Story (1995) - Buzz Lightyear (1998)
A Bug's Life (1998) - Bug's Land (2002)
Monsters Inc. (2001) - Monsters Inc. in DCA (2006)
Nemo (2003) - The Seas and Submarine Voyage (2007)
Cars (2006) - Cars Land (2012)
Ratatouille (2007) - Ratatouille: The Adventure (2014)

This hasn't happened to Pixar movies but also to original Disney ones too:
Mr Toad (1949) - Mr Toad's Wild Ride (1955)
Peter Pan (1953) - Peter Pan's Flight (1955)
Alice in Wonderland (1951) - Teacups (1955)
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1954) - Submarines (1959)
Tarzan (1999) - Tarzan's Treehouse in DL (1999)
Avatar (2009) - Pandora (2017)
Tron 2 (2010) - Tron in SDL (2016)
Frozen (2013) - FEA in Epcot (2016)
Big Hero 6 (2014) - Big Hero 6 flat ride in TDL (2020)

So I don't think that there are "very few exceptions". Disney sees when a movie is successful and they capitalize on that and sometimes short-term. The real box office numbers don't lie sure. Avatar for example made $2.7 billion and has left absolutely no mark in pop culture like the Titanic, Star Wars or Avengers. No Na'vi figures sold in stores, no Banshees etc. Almost 10 years later many people don't know that Avatar is the highest grossing movie of all time (and with a huge difference from the second one). So then Disney builds Pandora which is amazing nonetheless. That's not nostalgia. That is sheer commercialism as a way to boost DAK with an extremely successful movie and a way to integrate more IPs into the parks.

Did someone say 'chart'?

 

[Andrew C]

Did someone say 'chart'?

View attachment 304130

Stop using the licensed copy of excel from your work for personal use!

 

[MisterPenguin]

Stop using the licensed copy of excel from your work for personal use!

I'm still using EasyCalc in DOS.

 

[JohnyKaz2078]

I mean that you would have to admit that coco doesn’t have the potential to sell product, longer, than Nemo, cars,
Toy story, etc.

That’s not a knock - just a reality. Those are better for rides. The one with surprising legs is Moana...I’d say that is much better traction potential than coco.

And it’s not Whether you or i care about domestic gross...it’s disney...and that’s part of the equation.

Yeah I wouldn't say that Coco doesn't have a big potential to sell products like other Pixar and Disney movies. It has the potential for a ride though and a good place to fit it. Neither Avatar nor Ratatouille for example have become great merchandise sellers but they have become absolutely great rides. In regards to Moana the only place that I can see it fit in WDW is in MK's Adventureland and I'm not really fond of that since it would mean another IP ride.