• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

DHS Disney Animation-Inspired Experience Coming to Disney’s Hollywood Studios

Figments Friend

Figments Friend

Well-Known Member
I, for one, did not cheer with thunderous applause when WDFA Florida was gutted and closed.

It is still a depressing reminder to me of how there was once a wonderful team there that did some truly great work, and was suddenly scuttled by its own company.
Yes, times change…but art is forever.

It was very sad seeing that department and that building during its last few months of operation after experiencing what it once was many times over many years prior to the closure.
A shame, really.

I still think it was a mistake for the company to close down this wing of the division.
It should have remained.

But back on topic….


-
 
Casper Gutman

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Fox&Hound said:
Exactly! It doesn’t need another E-ticket. Some could argue it doesn’t need Monsters Door Coaster. It needs all-ages stuff like this that has charm and, because of the different drawing experiences, repeatability.
Click to expand...
Why does the “parks need all-age/ kids stuff,” argument only seem to really gain traction when Disney is adding cheap, poorly thought out stuff like playgrounds and… this? Why do the Disney defenders never bring it up when the skeptics are saying the same exact thing in arguments about the proliferation of restrictive thrill rides? (In Foxes defense, they do express skepticism here about the Door Coaster - this is a more general point).

The parks DO need quality family-friendly additions. They DON’T need cheap “family-friendly” band-aids slapped on while they exacerbate the problem by building more coasters.
 
Casper Gutman

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
GenChi said:
Again, anything was better then what was there and still remains so.

And it is not going to be the same live animator & what it was in the 90s-2000s when there is not an entire animation studio in the building anymore. You cannot really complain when their hand drawn animation department was gutted to thunderous applause from everyone. And ironic enough like this Olaf, they will cheer if they replace animators with ai 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
Who applauded????
 
A

AidenRodriguez731

Well-Known Member
Casper Gutman said:
Why does the “parks need all-age/ kids stuff,” argument only seem to really gain traction when Disney is adding cheap, poorly thought out stuff like playgrounds and… this? Why do the Disney defenders never bring it up when the skeptics are saying the same exact thing in arguments about the proliferation of restrictive thrill rides? (In Foxes defense, they do express skepticism here about the Door Coaster - this is a more general point).

The parks DO need quality family-friendly additions. They DON’T need cheap “family-friendly” band-aids slapped on while they exacerbate the problem by building more coasters.
Click to expand...
Why do the "Disney should tear this area down" only come up when its an area people like you don't personally like rather than the usual "oh, we can have both for the people who do like it!" ;)

I imagine these are one in the same.

But it's okay atleast we got rid of one cheap family-friendly band aid.

So by your earlier logic, we're even Stevens!

1771911483645.png
 
Casper Gutman

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Stripes said:
Let’s get this straight, is it your position that if Disney were to add an artist CM that circulates around the room, helping guests follow along and answer questions, thereby adding a “human touch” and labor expense to the experience, this would be a welcome addition?
Click to expand...
It would be better and wouldn’t be another example of a very destructive pattern of behavior Disney has demonstrated for many years. The entire project is fundamentally misjudged and everything they’ve announced reinforces the initial impression that this is a weak rehash of the attraction Launch Bay replaced.

I have to add that your desire to defend this has pushed you into making a very condescending and unattractive argument about the supposed pointlessness, emptiness, and degrading effect of “monotonous” jobs like… being a performer. I think you need to step back and look at how odd and insulting you are being to a lot of people.
 
Casper Gutman

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
AidenRodriguez731 said:
Why do the "Disney should tear this area down" only come up when its an area people like you don't personally like rather than the usual "oh, we can have both for the people who do like it!" ;)

I imagine these are one in the same.

But it's okay atleast we got rid of one cheap family-friendly band aid.

So by your earlier logic, we're even Stevens!

View attachment 908994
Click to expand...
Are you seriously asking why people are more willing to advocate for the removal of things that they don’t like rather than of those that they do?

It goes beyond personal preference, of course. Animation Courtyard has been a dead, extraneous space for decades - since the closure of the actual studio, really. It’s in one of the most central location in the park, blocking a huge expansion pad, features a theme the park has largely abandoned, and blocks a massive expansion space that would also improve guest flow through a park increasingly made up of dead-ends and cul-de-sacs.

None of that is true of Dinoland. In fact, I’m not sure what game you’re playing by invoking Dinoland, an area I expect you know I like more then most but am fine with replacing.
 
Gusey

Gusey

Well-Known Member
Casper Gutman said:
By the way, I think only one poster has responded to what I feel is a very relevant question - how is this attraction superior to the Magic of Disney Animation which was replaced a decade ago?
Click to expand...
At least for me, I'm waiting for it to open before I judge if its better or on the same level as the old Magic of Disney Animation. The main thing that will be different is the lack of the actual animation department (which was missing from 2004 onwards so I never experienced and only saw the models/concept art for upcoming movies in their place instead) and the addition of a playground (which I'm hoping won't look temporary). The animation experience will be similar enough but with an animatronic in a location that never had an animatronic before which I see as the same level/a positive depends on execution. I also expect that there will still be cast members in this experience to operate the attraction/hand out paper & pens so if you were one of those people who physically interacted with the drawer they can ask them questions? From my memories of the original building, there are now more character meet and greet, and the playground will be replacing the interactive games so same level really
 
Figments Friend

Figments Friend

Well-Known Member
Marc Davis Fan said:
I'm curious about the "enchanted art gallery." Will the "animation" be more than a variation of the "moving paintings" that we've seen in the Wizarding World's queues (and elsewhere at Disney)? Since they don't seem to be emphasizing the "enchanted art gallery," I'm guessing it's closer to "filler" than a primary draw?
Click to expand...

Expecting something similar to the ‘changing portraits’ we have already seen via Animators Palette on the Disney Cruise Line.

I would LIKE to think they will come up with something new and creative for this project that we haven’t already seen elsewhere.
But thus far most of what is known about this re-do is ‘recycled’ elements from past efforts.

Call me cynical, but I am willing to bet money the only reason we are getting Olaf involved in this presentation is for primarily two reasons….and the ‘theme’ of ‘Once Upon A Studio’ is not one of them -

To eliminate the role of a performer to streamline operators and trim payroll.
Also reduces the need to fill the position with multiple Cast Members that require the training and talent required for the role.
Money saved.

To use a AA already ‘on the shelf’ and ready to go.
No requirement to design and build something new or unique for this sole Attraction…just ‘recycle’ what is already available.
We have multiple Olaf AAs that already exist that could be adapted for this show.
Money saved.


-
 
Last edited:
Disstevefan1

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
Tha Realest said:
I’m still catching up. But there is an interesting through line here. It was part of the now defunct studio tour and housed numerous actual animators and, as late as the early 00’s, was still actively being used to produce Disney animation. You could actually see real animators animating! It later became that teaching thing they do in a few other parks, and is now apparently a museum of sorts with a decent AA showcasing a passive recording with negligible human input. If that is not a microcosm of the current state of corporate art creation in 2026 then nothing is!
Click to expand...
You’re right. My hope was when you enter a Disneypark we do not see the current state of corporate art creation in 2026.
 
Tha Realest

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
Figments Friend said:
Expecting something similar to the ‘changing portraits’ we have already seen via Animators Palette on the Disney Cruise Line.

I would LIKE to think they will come up with something new and creative for this project that we haven’t already seen elsewhere.
But thus far most of what is known about this re-do is ‘recycled’ elements from past efforts.

Call me cynical, but I am willing to bet money the only reason we are getting Olaf involved in this presentation is for primarily two reasons….and the ‘theme’ of ‘Once Upon A Studio’ is not one of them -

To eliminate the role of a performer to streamline operators and trim payroll.
Also reduces the need to fill the position with multiple Cast Members that require the training and talent required for the role.
Money saved.

To use a AA already ‘on the shelf’ and ready to go.
No requirement to design and build something new or unique for this sole Attraction…just ‘recycle’ what is already available.
We have multiple Olaf AAs that already exist that could be adapted for this show.
Money saved.


-
Click to expand...
I think in a way that’s the current ethos of parks management. I don’t think it’s a necessarily unwise one, mind you. I think they’re looking at things that need a whole scale replacement and are giving those the budget they deserve (TSI, Dinoland, etc). For others that need a little more TLC and marginal improvement (think this unused space, COP, TT) they don’t blow out the budget but use modest/existing tech to get it to a better baseline. As some have pointed out, setting aside what it was decades age and how that fits with the current theme of the park, it was an unused and functionally distressed asset - like a blighted strip mall.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Stripes said:
I can understand why somebody would love the job, but did they find it artistically invigorating?

In the long-run, I can’t fathom a human being’s self-actualization needs being met in a job like that.
Click to expand...
It wasn’t teaching the same thing every single time. They had the option of learning and then teaching dozens of different lessons. New characters were also added. It was also part of a larger set of job opportunities that also included doing drawings for sale in gift shops.
 
D

DCBaker

Premium Member
Original Poster
Brer Oswald

Brer Oswald

Well-Known Member
Figments Friend said:
Expecting something similar to the ‘changing portraits’ we have already seen via Animators Palette on the Disney Cruise Line.

I would LIKE to think they will come up with something new and creative for this project that we haven’t already seen elsewhere.
But thus far most of what is known about this re-do is ‘recycled’ elements from past efforts.

Call me cynical, but I am willing to bet money the only reason we are getting Olaf involved in this presentation is for primarily two reasons….and the ‘theme’ of ‘Once Upon A Studio’ is not one of them -

To eliminate the role of a performer to streamline operators and trim payroll.
Also reduces the need to fill the position with multiple Cast Members that require the training and talent required for the role.
Money saved.

To use a AA already ‘on the shelf’ and ready to go.
No requirement to design and build something new or unique for this sole Attraction…just ‘recycle’ what is already available.
We have multiple Olaf AAs that already exist that could be adapted for this show.
Money saved.


-
Click to expand...
It’s obviously to save money and resources. As the main attraction of the pavilion, the resort’s 4th or 5th advanced Olaf animatronic is far from a draw. It also means 20-40 minutes of “Olaf humour”, the lowest common denominator present at Disney. It’s a shame. This corner of the park could have been something special. A “pavilion” celebrating and embracing the classic roots of the Disney company. It’s what the studio park needs now more than ever. At least we still have 60% of One Man’s Dream.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom