DHS Indiana Jones Stunt Spectacular Boulder Incident

[Goofyernmost]

I was making a joke.

I understand/understood much of the y of the ip glut. No one knows 100% of the story. I know it's likely here to stay.

But I'm entitled to joke about it and reminisce on when ip wasn't as prominent as today.

Sorry, I made the mistake of posting off one of your posts, but believe me it was meant in general because that is something you read or hear constantly. IP this and IP that and connected to the downfall of Disney. There is a solid reason why they use so many IP's. IP's sell tickets. The old school Disney fans know that Disneyland was nothing but IP's. There was hardly an original thought in the place. There were original storys spun in Disney fashion but not so many original base concepts. Yet, now it is considered a mortal sin if they use one. Even Sleeping Beauty's castle was one even though the movie didn't come out until after Disneyland opened.

By the way, most of what wasn't an IP were retail stores that carried regular merchandise.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I couldn't care less about "lands" and "immersion." Maybe I'm just weird. I want good attractions. That's it. Sure, walking through Galaxy's Edge and interacting with Storm Troopers is fun, but I still am at Hollywood Studios and no amount of theming and atmosphere is gonna make me feel I'm on another world. Same with Pandora. Just not my thing. Like I said, I just want good, fun attractions.

The problem is that immersion in a swamp in the middle of Florida is something that you have to mentally create. Disney can only set the mood. You have to have the willing suspension of disbelief in order to experience the immersion thing. They spent millions creating the mood, it's up to you to play along. They can't force you to do that. If you want to continue to believe that you are still in DHS, that, my friend is where you are and it is up to you to talk yourself out of DHS and instead into a land far, far away.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I couldn't care less about "lands" and "immersion." Maybe I'm just weird. I want good attractions. That's it. Sure, walking through Galaxy's Edge and interacting with Storm Troopers is fun, but I still am at Hollywood Studios and no amount of theming and atmosphere is gonna make me feel I'm on another world. Same with Pandora. Just not my thing. Like I said, I just want good, fun attractions.

That’s perfectly fine but you should then acknowledge that you don’t care for theme parks. The experiential storytelling at a land or park level is what distinguishes a theme park from an amusement park.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Sorry, I made the mistake of posting off one of your posts, but believe me it was meant in general because that is something you read or hear constantly. IP this and IP that and connected to the downfall of Disney. There is a solid reason why they use so many IP's. IP's sell tickets. The old school Disney fans know that Disneyland was nothing but IP's. There was hardly an original thought in the place. There were original storys spun in Disney fashion but not so many original base concepts. Yet, now it is considered a mortal sin if they use one. Even Sleeping Beauty's castle was one even though the movie didn't come out until after Disneyland opened.

By the way, most of what wasn't an IP were retail stores that carried regular merchandise.

A complete distortion, as per usual.

 

[Chi84]

That’s perfectly fine but you should then acknowledge that you don’t care for theme parks. The experiential storytelling at a land or park level is what distinguishes a theme park from an amusement park.

Sure he does. The theme is Disney and it’s everywhere in the parks.

 

[jah4955]

Sorry, I made the mistake of posting off one of your posts, but believe me it was meant in general because that is something you read or hear constantly. IP this and IP that and connected to the downfall of Disney. There is a solid reason why they use so many IP's. IP's sell tickets. The old school Disney fans know that Disneyland was nothing but IP's. There was hardly an original thought in the place. There were original storys spun in Disney fashion but not so many original base concepts. Yet, now it is considered a mortal sin if they use one. Even Sleeping Beauty's castle was one even though the movie didn't come out until after Disneyland opened.

By the way, most of what wasn't an IP were retail stores that carried regular merchandise.

A complete distortion, as per usual.

It seems (for Opening Day Disneyland) that Tomorrowland, Frontierland, & Adventureland were all generally based on segments of Season 1 of Disneyland TV show, preexisting docs, and featurettes (yes, Davy Crokett was in its peak, and yes, they say Jungle Cruise was based on non-Disney African Queen...but it wasn't overtly saying so at the time.

No one ever debated (or ever had a problem with) IP belonging in Fantasyland.

I believe a reason why many (like myself) likeD WDW was because pre-1988 (not counting costumed characters), IP was largely limited to MKs Fantasyland.

But even 1988's Mickey's Birthdayland (temporary as it was meant to be) was reasonably accepted as adjacent (in geography & concept) to Fantasyland.

[though if memory serves correctly, at the (very) start, it was only accessible by train.]

 

[lazyboy97o]

Sure he does. The theme is Disney and it’s everywhere in the parks.

By that logic there’s no such thing as distinct lands and all parks are theme parks because they’re an expression of their ownership. Not to mention things not owned by Disney.

 

[lazyboy97o]

It seems (for Opening Day Disneyland) that Tomorrowland, Frontierland, & Adventureland were all generally based on segments of Season 1 of Disneyland TV show, preexisting docs, and featurettes (yes, Davy Crokett was in its peak, and yes, they say Jungle Cruise was based on non-Disney African Queen...but it wasn't overtly saying so at the time.

This is like saying Star Wars is based on the novelization because it was published before the movie was released. Disneyland was based on the park, not the other way around.

 

[jah4955]

Disneyland was based on the park, not the other way around.

Sorry for not being clearer. The TV series (especially season 1) was first and foremost a promotion of the park (nm all the other films, etc they promoted). Yet... what would become the park (directly and indirectly) drew in-part from what was filmed up to this point (both TV & film).

For example, I don't think there were really any Tomorrowland films Disney owed prior to 1955 other than the Season 1 episodes filmed & themed to "Tomorrowland."

There was never anything quite like Disneyland before, yet as the previous experiences of most those who built it was mostly filmmaking, not only did they incorporate much of their skills, but, by most accounts, wanted to create a general feel of being IN (various) films in a general way in most cases.

I just started reading a 70th anniversary book, and many of those who helped built it still couldn't fully explain how they were able to build it all in one year.

PS: Just finished my first perusing of the Main Street book you recommended....THANK YOU!

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

That’s perfectly fine but you should then acknowledge that you don’t care for theme parks. The experiential storytelling at a land or park level is what distinguishes a theme park from an amusement park.

No. He doesn’t care for theme parks in the same way you do. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t care about theme parks. Nor does your made up subjective opinion of what makes something a theme park vs an amusement park matter to anyone except you. Look think Disney is a THeme park because it is themed after Disney IP. Look what I did there. Or no, it’s an amusement park because it’s amazing offerings amuse me.

Most people/Main Street America go to WDW to visit Mickey Mouse, and/because they like what is offered there. While there might be certain people that care about theme park vs amusement park distinctions they are such a minority as to be irrelevant to a marketing, sales, or spending perspective for WDW.

 

[jah4955]

This is like saying Star Wars is based on the novelization

Those novels were terrible

 

[Goofyernmost]

By that logic there’s no such thing as distinct lands and all parks are theme parks because they’re an expression of their ownership. Not to mention things not owned by Disney.

It's still broken down by lands, it's just that there are more of them. There was fantasyland, adventureland, frontierland and tomorrowland and somewhere along the way they renamed the area near Frontierland as Liberty Square. Totally removed from frontierland. Now they are building two new ones that are called Piston Peak National Park and Villiansland which has nothing to do with Liberty square or frontierland. Things change. Yea, I know a concept hard to accept but it has been happening for years and I would bet my lunch that it will continue.

 

[WondersOfLife]

bbbbbllaaaaaahĥhhhh.

 

[HMF]

This is like saying Star Wars is based on the novelization because it was published before the movie was released. Disneyland was based on the park, not the other way around.

or that the toys for franchises like Transformers or Power Rangers are designed to sell the TV Shows.

 

[HMF]

Those novels were terrible

He means the novelization of the first film. The old EU or Legends novels despite the occasional bad idea were largely better than most of the stuff Disney has crapped out. In fact, Disney took one of the old Legends worst ideas "Resurrecting Palpatine" and ran with it in Rise of Skywalker.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

and somewhere along the way they renamed the area near Frontierland as Liberty Square. Totally removed from frontierland.

Liberty Square was an opening day land at Magic Kingdom.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Liberty Square was an opening day land at Magic Kingdom.

Ok, then they started with five lands. Sorry, I was never there until 11 years after the park opened. So what land did they link it too. It would be a stretch to attempt to connect it to Frontierland and it certainly isn't any connection to Fantasyland.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Ok, then they started with five lands. Sorry, I was never there until 11 years after the park opened. So what land did they link it too. It would be a stretch to attempt to connect it to Frontierland and it certainly isn't any connection to Fantasyland.

Well I wasn’t alive in 71! Haha.

It’s the same as it is now - Frontierland and Fantasyland both connected. Opening day map lists Diamond Horseshoe as part of Liberty Square - so Frontierland starts at the Frontierland sign that is still there

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Most people/Main Street America go to WDW to visit Mickey Mouse, and/because they like what is offered there. While there might be certain people that care about theme park vs amusement park distinctions they are such a minority as to be irrelevant to a marketing, sales, or spending perspective for WDW.

People liking what WDW offers is the direct result of other people caring about theme parks a lot more than most

The level of thought and effort that goes into a WDW caliber park is what distinguishes it from cheaper, more accessible alternatives.

You may not be able to articulate what makes a "good attraction" but "immersion" is usually a key part of that, along with a long list of criteria that you may feel is unimportant, but ultimately proved to be

[insert Ray Bradbury quote about Disneyland here]

 

[lazyboy97o]

It's still broken down by lands, it's just that there are more of them. There was fantasyland, adventureland, frontierland and tomorrowland and somewhere along the way they renamed the area near Frontierland as Liberty Square. Totally removed from frontierland. Now they are building two new ones that are called Piston Peak National Park and Villiansland which has nothing to do with Liberty square or frontierland. Things change. Yea, I know a concept hard to accept but it has been happening for years and I would bet my lunch that it will continue.

Wut? Liberty Square is and always has been just Liberty Square. Piston Peak isn’t a new land.