DHS Monster Inc Land Coming to Disney's Hollywood Studios

[peter11435]

The burden of evidence/proof is on the person claiming existence, not nonexistence.

I said I get if you don't want to share, but who do I prove the people I know at WDI and Entertainment are not even assigned or involved in this yet?

What would that look like?

I am also not asking or really caring if people believe me or not.

That’s not really how that works. Disney themselves initially claimed existence of this theater show. You’re the one that is posting and contradicting what existing public evidence would support.

Just because the people you “know” are not involved does not mean that no one is working on this. If those people think they know everything that is going on throughout the entirety of WDI then they must not actually be WDI at all.

 

[celluloid]

That’s not really how that works. Disney themselves initially claimed existence of this theater show. You’re the one that is posting and contradicting what existing public evidence would support.

If Disney's word is that good to you for it to happen, then you roll with that it is certainly happening. I hope eventually they start assigning. I am not denying corporate structure or a press release.

We know Disney PR has been told to release that there are plans for it. Does not equate.

 

[peter11435]

If Disney's word is that good to you for it to happen, then you roll with that it is certainly happening. I hope eventually they start assigning. I am not denying corporate structure or a press release.

We know Disney PR has been told to release that there are plans for it. Does not equate.

I’m not basing my stance on Disney’s word. My information is not based on PR.

The point of mentioning the PR is to point out why the burden of proof here lies with you.

 

[celluloid]

I’m not basing my stance on Disney’s word. My information is not based on PR.

The point of mentioning the PR is to point out why the burden of proof here lies with you.

I am not denying the PR though.

So the burden of evidence of anything more than that happening IS on you.

If you don't want to share that is fine.

How am I to prove there is nothing other than the PR?

 

[peter11435]

I am not denying the PR though.

So the burden of evidence of anything more than that happening IS on you.

If you don't want to share that is fine.

How am I to prove there is nothing other than the PR?

You’ve literally claimed in this thread that a theater show was not happening and that one was not announced. Both contradict the PR.

Your claim challenges existing public information thus the burden of proof is on you. I pointed out that what you had already claimed without proof was untrue. You seem to really want to ignore your burden here and pass it on to others that are challenging your own unproven claims.

 

[solidyne]

Celluloid has a point. How do you prove there are NOT space aliens watching us, for example? Isn't burden of proof generally on the positive, not the negative?

 

[the_rich]

Celluloid has a point. How do you prove there are NOT space aliens watching us, for example?

Well, first he said Disney hadn't announced anything. Then he changed it up once that was proved incorrect.

 

[solidyne]

Well, first he said Disney hadn't announced anything. Then he changed it up once that was proved incorrect.

Goalposts are moving for sure, but still.

 

[celluloid]

So tell me we can all understand the difference between a Blue Sky announcement and hope, vs announcement of an actual attraction in design Right? We can argue semantics, and it does not change the fact.

If we just want to spin that into calling me a liar. Sure.

It just negates the truth of everything else.

 

[the_rich]

Goalposts are moving for sure, but still.

That right there makes me not believe them though. The other poster has had good info in the past.

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ֊ᗩζᗩᗰ]

So tell me we can all understand the difference between a Blue Sky announcement and hope, vs announcement of an actual attraction in design Right? We can argue semantics, and it does not change the fact.

If we just want to spin that into calling me a liar. Sure.

It just negates the truth of everything else.

I can tell the difference between concept art and nothing. It's one of my many skills as a rabbit.

 

[celluloid]

I can tell the difference between concept art and nothing.

The overlayed cell over Muppet's Courtyard concept art that executives wanted ready and approved for PR?

Not the same as WDI producers or entertainment producing a show.

Mainstreet Theater had great concept art too. As many things do.


As a fellow practicing person of prestidigitation, I know you also have the skill of knowing what misdirection and magician's choice is.

 

[peter11435]

So tell me we can all understand the difference between a Blue Sky announcement and hope, vs announcement of an actual attraction in design Right? We can argue semantics, and it does not change the fact.

If we just want to spin that into calling me a liar. Sure.

It just negates the truth of everything else.

Except this wasn’t a blue sky announcement and hope.

Nobody is trying to spin anything to call you a lier. However you have made statements in this thread that at best were misinformed or at worst were lies.

 

[JustInTime]

They said it will be a new Monsters show but we don't know anything beyond that. By specifically saying "new" we assume it won't be just moving MILF over, but who knows (could just be an updated version of that), also not clear if film or stage show or what, just "new show"

So weird. Thank you!!

 

[The Leader of the Club]

I’m sure we’ll hear something about the new show at Destination D23 in a few months. Disney won’t open a new land with a large empty building in front…especially if it used to house a fan-favorite attraction.

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ֊ᗩζᗩᗰ]

I’m sure we’ll hear something about the new show at Destination D23 in a few months. Disney won’t open a new land with a large empty building in front…especially if it used to house a fan-favorite attraction.

It also wouldn't be much of a land.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

All we have that is official is a story directly from Disney saying there would be a "New Theater Show" - they didn't have to include that and they definitely didn't have to include the word "new" but they wanted it out there that the intentions to develop a new show for the space

Is that actually developed? Who knows. Could they change their minds? Of course (heck, part of me would prefer putting in a dark ride there instead).

But unless something else official comes out or someone has explicit insider information saying definitely plans have changed, I don't know why we would start operating as if it won't happen

 

[Agent H]

That’s not really how that works. Disney themselves initially claimed existence of this theater show. You’re the one that is posting and contradicting what existing public evidence would support.

Just because the people you “know” are not involved does not mean that no one is working on this. If those people think they know everything that is going on throughout the entirety of WDI then they must not actually be WDI at all.

I would be more surprised to learn that most people at imagineering don’t at least have a basic idea of every project that’s been greenlit by executives,

 

[MisterPenguin]

I miss Donnie saying EU was never going to be built. Fun times.

 

[celluloid]

I’m sure we’ll hear something about the new show at Destination D23 in a few months. Disney won’t open a new land with a large empty building in front…especially if it used to house a fan-favorite attraction.

I get the fan favorite part, and not saying it will happen, but Disney is fine opening new lands in phases.