I'm in the camp that I don't think IPs are bad in and of themselves, but the problem comes when Disney relies on the IP to do all the heavy lifting. As long as an attraction is based on a recognizable franchise, making the ride itself unique or interesting is often seen as secondary. Have there been exceptions recently? Sure. I really enjoy both Star Wars rides in Galaxy's Edge. Rise has such a fun ride system and has genuinely impressive show pieces. Smugglers isn't as exciting a ride, but at least they tried something new by making it an interactive and somewhat collaborative experience.
But the "slap a current IP on it and people will love it" model has been so pervasive lately. The biggest example I can think of is the Pixarization of Paradise Pier in DCA. I loved DCA in the 2010's. I viewed it as a love letter to old-time Southern California, and it worked really well that way. And while I dislike Cars as a franchise, I enjoy Cars Land. It's well-themed and, due to the movie being inspired by Route 66 and Southwest Americana, it still felt on-theme for the park. It's an IP that makes sense to be there and was designed with intention.
But Disney execs looked at DCA and saw that we needed MOAR IPs! And so they slapped new paint on every attraction, snack cart, and trash can, renamed everything, and called it good. So now we have Primary Color Overload and rides that had to be re-skinned in order to be "on brand." California Screamin was a fun, classic roller coaster that didn't need to be anything more than that. And while I don't think adding the Incdredibles IP "ruined" the ride, I found that the dialogue and the attempt at fitting a story into the ride detracted from the simple fun of just riding a coaster over the boardwalk. The rest of the rides simply got a new name (I don't know what it is about it, but my eye twitches every time I see the name "Pixar Pal-Around" on the Ferris wheel), and Pixar characters added to it. There was no effort or innovation to the change. It was just rebranding for the sake of adding IPs.
And I think that's where the problem is. It's not that IP-based attractions can't be good. It's when they're shoehorned in or slapped together with no real thought that's frustrating.
Things have gotten really messy now that Disney owns so many IPs. They have to have a place to put their Star Wars stuff, and their Marvel stuff, and their Fox stuff. So IP "lands" and attractions get placed wherever there's room for them, and other rides are pushed out in favor of more "profitable" IPs (i.e., GotG replacing DCA's Tower of Terror, or the retheming of the 20,000 Leagues subs in DLR to Finding Nemo). It's getting harder and harder to keep lands cohesive when they're essentially sitting on a hoarder house worth of IPs.
I do wish that we could have more original rides. I work at a preschool within a couple hours' drive of DLR. Kids go there for Birthdays or special occasions. And when they come back, the rides they always talk about are Pirates and Haunted Mansion. Neither of them are IP-based, yet they remain iconic and relevant, even for the youngest kids. It would be great to get something truly original again. Sadly, that ship seems to have sailed.
