Imagineering and Lucasfilm dreamed up 2 different Star Wars lands for Disneyland and Disney World - OCR/SCNG

SSG

SSG

Well-Known Member
Darkbeer1 said:
www.ocregister.com

Imagineering and Lucasfilm dreamed up 2 different Star Wars lands for Disneyland and Disney World

What were the two different versions of Galaxy’s Edge? Were other Star Wars attractions mocked up? Walt Disney Imagineering creative executives discuss early plans for the twin Star Wars themed lan…
www.ocregister.com www.ocregister.com
Click to expand...
I think Brady is overstating the case in saying Imagineering dreamed up 2 different Star Wars lands for Disneyland and Disney World.

It seems closer to say Imagineering briefly considered having different Star Wars lands for Disneyland and Disney World, but Disney quickly rejected this idea as too expensive.
 
PostScott

PostScott

Well-Known Member
I've heard many arguments for the "why didn't they build a planet from the movies? harry potter did that". While I think building a well known planet from the star wars universe would have been more captivating to some, it wouldn't impress the entire audience. The reason Harry Potter did so well is because literally all the movies are based around Hogwarts Castle. Diagon alley was also visited many times by the characters during the movies. However, once a planet is done in a star wars movie, you never really go back to it. With this, everyone has a favorite planet and has a different opinion than other fans. Personally I'd love to have a Coruscant area or a Hoth area, but I know that others wouldn't have that as their first choice.

Now I know that the imaginners were going to do a Tatooine area and got far into development but it got scrapped due to high level exes and Kathleen Kennedy wanting it to tie into the sequel trilogy. However, if Tatooine was built, it wouldn't of satisfied everyones idea of what a story wars story is. It would have put you into the world of star wars yes, but not an ideal version of everyones star wars story. I like the idea of an outside star wars story planet. It brings something new to the universe that is not based in a movie, but based in a fictional but tangible experience.

But yeah, they should've made two different lands. I'd be much more excited and more willing to spend my money if I knew that Florida had a different Galaxy's Edge. But Disney knows that most people will either just go to DL or WDW, not usually both, at least not the GP.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
SSG said:
It seems closer to say Imagineering briefly considered having different Star Wars lands for Disneyland and Disney World, but Disney quickly rejected this idea as too expensive.
Click to expand...
Which is really more damning of Walt Disney Imagineering given the huge amount spend on Galaxy's Edge. The funds were definitely there to build two unique lands.

I'd love to see a serious audit of trying to simultaneously design and build nearly identical lands. Beyond the obvious differences like some different paint choices, there are things like the structure, building envelope, attachment, gutters and even bathrooms that are different and those things all have ripple effects that impact coordination and design.
 
L

LastoneOn

Well-Known Member
PostScott said:
I've heard many arguments for the "why didn't they build a planet from the movies? harry potter did that".
Click to expand...
Potter basically has 4 locations: Hogworts, Hogsmead, Diagon Alley, London.
Hogworts is an attraction not a land. Hogsmead is a brown/gray single street with tiny shops not really a land. Diagon Alley is more fleshed out, has Gringots, a land but not a large one - more along the lines of Main Street but not linear. London is an outside street and a tube station, not a land. So overall, not much "land" about most of it. My opinion of course.

Star Wars has a universe with many galaxies and who knows how many races and planets and all of that. Not sure I agree with their choice, haven't been there yet, but I think it best they didn't lock themselves into a specific movie location - although they clearly got caught up in the "its going to be like a big cosplay zone" thing too much with the concept, atmosphere and general marketing push.
My opinion of course.
 
Robbiem

Robbiem

Well-Known Member
I really can’t understand why Disney didn’t build two different lands, fans would have visited both. The rides and experiences could have been the same but change out some of the theming so you have theming which is exotic for the locale its based in. ,maybe lush forest planet (Endor or Maz’s bar planet) in dry California and desert planet (Tatooine. Jedda or Jakku) in swampy Florida?

id also have made it more of a timeless land so you could have whatever characters you wanted wandering around. Most people wouldn’t care about timeline they want to see their favourite characters like Maul, vader, the droids, Mando etc. I dont see people complaining that woody is in frontierland when he is from the 1950s and not the 1850s!
 
Sharon&Susan

Sharon&Susan

Well-Known Member
Robbiem said:
I dont see people complaining that woody is in frontierland when he is from the 1950s and not the 1850s
Click to expand...
I've complained before about Woody being in Frontierland before. Especially since Woody is a cowboy in name only and doesn't advance the Western theme at all. Same thing for Buzz, but at least he acts like a spaceman in the first movie.

Keep them away from Disneyland, there's enough places to meet them in California Adventure.

Not that I mind having Star Wars characters from the "Wrong time period" in SWGE. Just keep Star Wars out of the other lands and I'm happy.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Sharon&Susan said:
I've complained before about Woody being in Frontierland before. Especially since Woody is a cowboy in name only and doesn't advance the Western theme at all. Same thing for Buzz, but at least he acts like a spaceman in the first movie.

Keep them away from Disneyland, there's enough places to meet them in California Adventure.

Not that I mind having Star Wars characters from the "Wrong time period" in SWGE. Just keep Star Wars out of the other lands and I'm happy.
Click to expand...
I too have complained. At the very least they should be the characters, not the toys. Sheriff Woody and Jessie as actual people (face characters) would be a lot better than giant toys. Same for Buzz Lightyear, he should be the actual Space Ranger and not someone suffering from delusions of grandeur (this goes for the ride as well).
 
PostScott

PostScott

Well-Known Member
Robbiem said:
I really can’t understand why Disney didn’t build two different lands, fans would have visited both.
Click to expand...
Well... money. Even though they were cloned, DHS's galaxys edge was rumored to be $800mil while DL's galaxys edge was rumored to be $1B. While creatively this was a missed opportunity, the Disney company would never have spend more money than what they already did. The reason alot of the proposed cancelled aspects of the land (ie robots and walk around characters) was due to budget cuts.

LastoneOn said:
Best decision they made with the whole thing.
Click to expand...
...why
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
PostScott said:
Well... money. Even though they were cloned, DHS's galaxys edge was rumored to be $800mil while DL's galaxys edge was rumored to be $1B. While creatively this was a missed opportunity, the Disney company would never have spend more money than what they already did. The reason alot of the proposed cancelled aspects of the land (ie robots and walk around characters) was due to budget cuts.
Click to expand...
"Budget cuts" is a bit of a misnomer these days. It does not mean the overall budget was reduced like we saw in the late 1990s. Instead it means elements were cut to stay within the budget. Cutting operating expenses is also different as their development is part of the initial budget but they also have ongoing posts carried by the park.
 
mickEblu

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
"Budget cuts" is a bit of a misnomer these days. It does not mean the overall budget was reduced like we saw in the late 1990s. Instead it means elements were cut to stay within the budget. Cutting operating expenses is also different as their development is part of the initial budget but they also have ongoing posts carried by the park.
Click to expand...


Well whatever we want to call it the $ they are spending is not getting them the result they want nor is it making the fans excited other than giving APs something new to do for a couple months until they fall back into their old habits like riding POTC for the millionth time or standing in line for a Toy Story alien popcorn bucket. Unless I’m wrong of course and they consider GE, Pixar Pier and GOTG:MB massive successes and worth the hassle, effort and $.


871157B7-CF84-4F25-BE5C-373721E134A5.jpeg
 
J

J4546

Well-Known Member
Maybe they will make star wars land in paris different. theres still 3+ year till they start building it, so ya never know
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
mickEblu said:
Well whatever we want to call it the $ they are spending is not getting them the result they want nor is it making the fans excited other than giving APs something new to do for a couple months until they fall back into their old habits like riding POTC for the millionth time or standing in line for a Toy Story alien popcorn bucket. Unless I’m wrong of course and they consider GE, Pixar Pier and GOTG:MB massive successes and worth the hassle, effort and $.


View attachment 512671
Click to expand...
You’re right. Under Iger the return on investment has become significantly worse. This though is largely a problem of process. It’s worth the hassle because it aligns the parks to a specific vision of them as a franchise platform.
 
mickEblu

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
You’re right. Under Iger the return on investment has become significantly worse. This though is largely a problem of process. It’s worth the hassle because it aligns the parks to a specific vision of them as a franchise platform.
Click to expand...

To a specific vision...regardless of how misguided that vision is
 
J

J4546

Well-Known Member
i like the star wars area in disneyland in california. I dont think its 10/10 but I give it a solid 7. I think RotR is one of the best rides ive ever been on, a great dark ride imo. Smugglers run in meh.

I dont think its the pinnacle of imagineering, i look at tokyo disneysea and what theyve accomplished and also props for how they incorporated indiana jones into disneyland, its such a great ride with a cool que and it fits right in. Cars land in CA is pretty damn great too and I dont care about the cars ip at all.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom