Is everything just IP mandate quota now?

[Tom Morrow]

That would be brilliant

I did not hit her! I did not. Oh hi Mark! *launch*

 

[Biff215]

We’re talking about if people care more about the IP attached to an attraction than the quality of the attraction experience.

Many of us are here because we like theme parks, not just Disney’s.

I’ll refer you to the OP. That’s the topic at hand and what I was referencing.

 

[Professortango1]

Uh you're in a smaller valley area? I'm sure if you hopped into a random forest on earth, you would be unlikely to find people there currently. We're meant to be in a touristy location anyway technically so its likely the Navi just... don't hang out there because there's no real need for them too. It's the site of an old battlefield and the touristy humans.

So they designed a land to feel like it's away from all of the interesting aspects of the world? That's like a Frozen land in a random wooded valley with no snow or characters Oooo, so magical. Maybe we can get a Coco ride that is just the desert foothills 30 miles from the story

 

[Centauri Space Station]

So they designed a land to feel like it's away from all of the interesting aspects of the world? That's like a Frozen land in a random wooded valley with no snow or characters Oooo, so magical. Maybe we can get a Coco ride that is just the desert foothills 30 miles from the story

You mean Norway…?

 

[Brer Panther]

Even a mediocre attraction with IP seems to be popular. It’s as close to a “can’t miss” as you can get,

I previously named some attractions that were based off IPs but are still unpopular.

Heck, MuppetVision was based on IP and that was apparently unpopular enough for Disney to close it.

What does something like Frozen Ever After inspire?

It inspires riders to buy an Elsa doll and watch the movie on Disney Plus. Obviously.

To be clear, I and everyone who complains about the IP mandate is in no way saying that any and all IP attractions are bad. My current top WDW attraction is Rise of the Resistance, for example. The complaints stem entirely from them shoehorning into places, lands, parks where they don't fit, and that lately many have also been lackluster experiences.

That, and Imagineers aren't allowed to build attractions that aren't based on IPs. It doesn't have to be one or the other. We used to have both.

I’m not sure we can name a similar recent Disney miss.

Uh, Galactic Starcruiser?

Atlantis the Lost Empire came from the directors feeling stuck in Fantasyland (they previously did Beauty and the Beast and Hunchback) and wanting to turn left and go into Adventureland.

Funny thing is, they wanted to put it in Tomorrowland.

 

[Professortango1]

You mean Norway…?

That's a Pavilion designed to encapsulate the cultural heritage of a country for the World Showcase, not a land trying to sell itself on a franchise or group of franchises.

 

[wdwfan4ver]

That's another thing I don't like. Just cause am attraction doesn't have long waits doesn't mean it's bad. Parks need low wait attractions to offset the busy ones.

I agree with that, but low wait time is one of things that WDW Management looks at for getting a rid of an attraction. Liberty Belle was one of my favorite attractions, but crowds aren't great. Some of my favorite WDW shows of all time weren't exactly the highest in wait times such as Enchanted Tiki Room, Liberty belle, COP, World showcase films, Walt Disney Presents, and Muppet Vision 3d.

 

[HMF]

No, it takes place in a made up nation where they took inspiration from old Disney movies.

That didn't stop them with Frozen. Germany makes as much sense as virtually any other western European country for Tangled. just as you could have Frozen take place in any random Scandinavian country and it would still add up, and seeing as how Jose in Gran Fiesta is from Brazil, at this point in order to make more sense they should make World Showcase into various regions rather than individual nations since that seems to be the rules for World Showcase placement we have been reduced to at this point

 

[wdwfan4ver]

Call it what you want, but I can’t really blame them for it. Even a mediocre attraction with IP seems to be popular. It’s as close to a “can’t miss” as you can get, and in today’s business world, that’s what they tend to aim for.

There is a flaw with that. It's Tough to be a Bug was a popular attraction by WDW show standards despite using Bug's Life IP, but got replaced by Zootopia: Zoogether. Zootopia's AK show Zootopia: Zoogether is looked upon as a downgrade to It's tough to be a bug by a lot of people.

I'm one of those people love going to daytime shows in a theme park. What I'm getting at is having an IP even if the attraction is popular, doesn't make it safe from being replaced by another IP.

It's tough to be a Bug went away for 2 reasons with the first being Bug's life is an older Pixar film that that got overshadowed by Toy Story and Zootopia is popular globally.

The 2nd reason Disney looked at getting a rid of It's tough be a Bug due to Disney was worried doing a land in Animal Kingdom on that IP and thought thought there would be less backlash. The fact is Zootopia as an IP is very debatable if it belongs Animal Kingdom due to a nature of the IP

 

[Chef Mickey]

Yes, and you will like it.

 

[FigmentJedi]

Funny thing is, they wanted to put it in Tomorrowland.

Only at Disneyland. The infamous Fire Mountain proposed for Magic Kingdom's Adventureland was an Atlantis ride.

 

[WorldExplorer]

That didn't stop them with Frozen. Germany makes as much sense as virtually any other western European country for Tangled. just as you could have Frozen take place in any random Scandinavian country and it would still add up, and seeing as how Jose in Gran Fiesta is from Brazil, at this point in order to make more sense they should make World Showcase into various regions rather than individual nations since that seems to be the rules for World Showcase placement we have been reduced to at this point

Of course it wouldn't stop them. They'll slap Mulan in Germany if they feel like it. And we'll be assured it makes perfect sense.

But objectively it's a terrible fit and I'm tired of it being suggested.

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

That didn't stop them with Frozen. Germany makes as much sense as virtually any other western European country for Tangled. just as you could have Frozen take place in any random Scandinavian country and it would still add up, and seeing as how Jose in Gran Fiesta is from Brazil, at this point in order to make more sense they should make World Showcase into various regions rather than individual nations since that seems to be the rules for World Showcase placement we have been reduced to at this point

I feel like we've had this same argument before but Pancito is from Mexico, your point is irrelevant.
If you bothered to pay attention to anything other than your usual negative seething, you would understand that they explictly state that they are all on tour because they are in a band. Surprisingly enough, people of different countries ARE allowed to go to other countries. It's Panchito's home country that Jose and Donald are visiting as part of a band. Quite literally the whole plot of the ride so I don't know how it's not incredibly obvious unless you wanted for Panchito as an animatronic to vividly explain to you that "Hi, just you know, my friends Donald and Jose are not from Mexico. I am from Mexico and I am on a tour with my friends through Mexico, notice how we are exclusively going to Mexican landmarks and this story is taking place in Mexico but my friends are not Mexican. I feel the need to explain this because it would be like saying that Princess and the Frog wouldn't belong in an American land because Naveen is from Maldonia, but this is okay because like that story, just because a character is not from the origin country doesn't mean that the story could not be about the country of someone else in the story."

Like I don't even get your point.

 

[Brer Panther]

What I'm getting at is having an IP even if the attraction is popular, doesn't make it safe from being replaced by another IP.

Makes you wonder how long attractions like Guardians of the Galaxy, Better Zoogether, and the Encanto ride are going to have long lines. If A Bug's Life isn't popular enough in the 2020s to justify its presence in the parks, who knows if those IPs have staying power.

Then again, Zootopia and Guardians of the Galaxy have sequels whereas A Bug's Life does not. Could that be the difference?

The 2nd reason Disney looked at getting a rid of It's tough be a Bug due to Disney was worried doing a land in Animal Kingdom on that IP and thought thought there would be less backlash. The fact is Zootopia as an IP is very debatable if it belongs Animal Kingdom due to a nature of the IP

Actually, the original plan was to replace Dinoland with a Moana and Zootopia land, but they decided against it.

If they really cared about whether or not that IP - or any popular IP - belongs in Animal Kingdom, they wouldn't have put Better Zoogether in the Tree of Life. Nor would they be building Indiana Jones and Encanto rides in the park.

Of course it wouldn't stop them. They'll slap Mulan in Germany if they feel like it. And we'll be assured it makes perfect sense.

But objectively it's a terrible fit and I'm tired of it being suggested.

Plus, wouldn't it be weird having a Tangled attraction in EPCOT while having a little Tangled subarea of Fantasyland in the Magic Kingdom?

Oh, who am I kidding? There are two Litle Mermaid attractions in two different parks.

 

[HMF]

Of course it wouldn't stop them. They'll slap Mulan in Germany if they feel like it. And we'll be assured it makes perfect sense.

But objectively it's a terrible fit and I'm tired of it being suggested.

So is most of what World Showcase has been reduced to.

 

[Biff215]

There is a flaw with that. It's Tough to be a Bug was a popular attraction by WDW show standards despite using Bug's Life IP, but got replaced by Zootopia: Zoogether. Zootopia's AK show Zootopia: Zoogether is looked upon as a downgrade to It's tough to be a bug by a lot of people.

I'm one of those people love going to daytime shows in a theme park. What I'm getting at is having an IP even if the attraction is popular, doesn't make it safe from being replaced by another IP.

It's tough to be a Bug went away for 2 reasons with the first being Bug's life is an older Pixar film that that got overshadowed by Toy Story and Zootopia is popular globally.

The 2nd reason Disney looked at getting a rid of It's tough be a Bug due to Disney was worried doing a land in Animal Kingdom on that IP and thought thought there would be less backlash. The fact is Zootopia as an IP is very debatable if it belongs Animal Kingdom due to a nature of the IP

Newer IP replacing older IP isn’t exactly an example of it not working, and the new show is wildly popular compared to the old despite my own feelings towards it.

I previously named some attractions that were based off IPs but are still unpopular.

Heck, MuppetVision was based on IP and that was apparently unpopular enough for Disney to close it.


Uh, Galactic Starcruiser?

Again, MuppetVision is IP replacing IP.

I’ll give you Starcruiser, but that’s a different animal entirely, not a theme park attraction. An experience like that probably would have been more successful in the parks.

 

[Centauri Space Station]

So is most of what World Showcase has been reduced to.

Yeah it’s all IP except for most of France, and all of China, Germany, Italy, USA, Japan, Morocco, UK and Canada.

 

[JD80]

This is exactly what many are complaining about, but you’re not wrong. Disney now has 100+ years of content that they either created or acquired. They could create the next Mansion or Pirates, they just don’t need to.

Call it what you want, but I can’t really blame them for it. Even a mediocre attraction with IP seems to be popular. It’s as close to a “can’t miss” as you can get, and in today’s business world, that’s what they tend to aim for.

I just don't understand what people expect. That WDI makes another ride based off of popular tropes like a haunted house or pirate adventure that becomes popular over time? I really don't understand what the difference between a ride based off a IP made by Disney Studios vs. an IP made by Imagineers.

 

[JD80]

Counterpoint - a new experience that inspires a kid (or anyone!) into being interested in a new topic is just as valuable, if not more valuable, than placating them with things they already know about.

I've talked about this before but I'll say it again - an attraction that inspires people doesn't necessarily have to be an educational attraction either. Attractions like Tower of Terror and Expedition Everest are great because they have layers to the experience for those interested in diving a little deeper.

Tower of Terror:
The golden age of Hollywood
The alure of abandoned places
The idea of something once grand becoming forgotten
The juxtaposition of old analog technology / advanced thrill ride
Exposing young people to a vintage TV show they would likely never watch otherwise
etc etc

Expedition Everest:
Tibetan culture, architecture, standard of living
Mountain climbing treks in general
The way expeditions are handled and how it's become a destructive form of tourism for the Tibetan region
The way a business can insert itself into a region and disrupt the way of life for the locals against their wishes
Habitat encroachment
The fact that the yeti is a real world cryptid legend
etc etc

Just spitballing, but there's a lot to pull from from those attractions, yet someone could also just enjoy them and only take away "ahh spooky hotel" and "ahh a monster / fun roller coaster" and still enjoy them as well.

Like even Rock 'n' Roller Coaster inspired me to get a guitar and try to learn it as a teen (I failed, but I tried!)

What does something like Frozen Ever After inspire? There's basically nothing there other than seeing the characters and scenes you already know from the film. Which, I understand that will still bring joy to a lot of people, but while that may draw people in, it's not the type of experience that resonates and keeps people coming back.



Since WDW's inception, they've always had a big enough library to where every attraction could be IP based, if they wanted. They didn't do it before because the company saw the theme parks as their own unique form of entertainment and not just an extension of their marketing. They understood that the point of a theme park is to have an overarching and cohesive theme and not just be a random assortment of stuff. Bob Iger never cared about making good theme parks, he cared about creating good marketing.



I mean I love that moment too, but the ride as a whole is not great, and I absolutely think a better executed original idea would be more interesting than a lackluster experience that has a few cool elements we love from media.



It truly isn't this though, it's that it's easier to propose tie-ins to popular IP to executives and shareh...


Yeah that.



Yes. To be clear, I and everyone who complains about the IP mandate is in no way saying that any and all IP attractions are bad. My current top WDW attraction is Rise of the Resistance, for example. The complaints stem entirely from them shoehorning into places, lands, parks where they don't fit, and that lately many have also been lackluster experiences.

I'm not sure what your point is, "Kids can be inspired by anything?". That's not directly related to IP or not. You could have the worst attraction in the world with the most hated IP in the world and a kid could get inspired by how the ride vehicle stays on the track and becomes and engineer.

 

[Tom Morrow]

I'm not sure what your point is, "Kids can be inspired by anything?". That's not directly related to IP or not. You could have the worst attraction in the world with the most hated IP in the world and a kid could get inspired by how the ride vehicle stays on the track and becomes and engineer.

I think my point is pretty clear - introducing kids to things they aren't already familiar with expands their worldview in a way that attractions that are just a runthrough of their favorite films do not. Kids (or anyone) still can get inspiration from IP attractions, but more often in a way not related to the content of the attraction. Like perhaps the technology behind making it all work, like you said.