BTW, all this “themed vs. unthemed” conversation is very much on topic for this thread. I’m convinced that Bob Iger’s legacy (at least as far as the parks are concerned) is the departure from Disney’s approach to theming. Instead, he pushed for either “immersion” (one possible approach to theming) or decoration (like with IP-another possible approach to theming), but these are relative departures from Disney’s classic approach, which, to me, was typically much more imaginative.
I agree. Currently, WDI theming seems to be ctrl+v movie scenes and locations. GE kind of ventures away from that, and I will say there is still a lot of creativity within TSL, Pandora, and GE, but they're all familiar. GE may be a new place, but it's still very Star Wars (and tbf, I think GE is
extremely well-done). But it's a different kind of creativity than, say, Tower of Terror. I can't put my finger on it, but they just
feel different.
Love that you have that memory. Those are the environments/moments that make me a fan.
Since you worked there, can you shed any light on this? What was supposed to be the backstory?
I'm actually not a huge TS person, either. I grew up with Monsters Inc. Can't bring myself to watch any of the TS movies though- even looking at pictures from my CP (which was this spring, so cut short) is really sad for me. I know some on this forum will call me a crybaby, but oh well. I'm in Orlando now, and I'm hoping to start working at Disney again once they're hiring again (which I know will likely be at least a year from now).
And we were never really told about the figures. That's definitely a continuity error, but I believe they placed the M&G's out of eyeshot of the figures, so you don't have a figure of Jessie behind Character Jessie.
re: the size difference, since CMs are Andy's toys, I think we're lego minifigure size, and so would the rest of the human visitors, by the transitive property of Theme Park Theming

interestingly enough, we did have a theming class where we went over the basics of the films and characters and we were encouraged to come up with our own toy backstory. Also, a point of great debate at the Woody's Lunchbox breakroom table was what timeframe TSL took place in. General consensus was between 2 and 3, but the placement of TS3 characters and TS4 Bo Peep kinda put a wrench in that, lol.
This idea that immersion is something new and even negative just boggles my mind. It’s been a key goal from the very beginning. It’s what defined the storytelling experience of a theme park, the act of you breaking the fourth wall and entering into the experience.
I would say it is objectively bad in a few aspects. It’s story is completely open ended, being one where anything and everything can fit. A strong story is tight and not everything will fit. It’s also poorly laid out, being one of Disney’s largest lands while featuring little to do, almost no spatial organization and no room for additions with the new restaurant having to be glommed on to the side. That doesn’t mean there is something wrong with liking it or having an emotional attachment to it, but that’s not necessarily relevant. It’s possibly to like something and recognize its creative weaknesses.
Oh, I do definitely think the land has its weaknesses. I can't speak to the layout of the land, but I do believe another attraction would have made it feel tighter. The land itself is huge but each footprint (sans Slinky) is really small. I know at WL, there was never enough seating. And I agree on the disjointed story: it's kind of all over the place, continuity wise (see above). I think that's a weakness of the TS IP itself, though, as choosing one timeframe limits you. There's almost always something left out, whether it be Andy (if you go the later film route) or the characters from 3 or 4. Is this what you mean when you say the story is open-ended?