DAK “Zootopia” is being created for the Tree of Life theater

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
lets take a step back, this is all happening in a forum discussing if disney animal characters belong in a disney animal park that was built by Eisner to draw tourists away from Busch Gardens.

My take is honestly about as deep as Kang and Kudos saying "all rides end in the gift shop" and it's gotten a few true believers really riled up.

I think I'm pretty far from being a true believer -- it wouldn't surprise me if I've been to Disney parks the fewest times of anyone posting here.

I'm just a stickler for logical arguments and hard facts, probably because of my profession.
 
I think I'm pretty far from being a true believer -- it wouldn't surprise me if I've been to Disney parks the fewest times of anyone posting here.

I'm just a stickler for logical arguments and hard facts, probably because of my profession.
lol the hard facts are the wdw resort property sells a lot of bubble wands and this is all silly.
 
My favorite part of this discussion is how many times the goalposts have moved. We’ve gone from “glorified bubble wand strip malls” to “wholly profit-driven enterprise with no artistic merit or intent” to “art, yes, but completely commercial and only meant to instill brand loyalty for long-term gains.” Impressive flexibility. Honestly.

Now we’ve arrived at “People only think this because of nostalgia, despite the fact that they’re stating objectively true things that I'm completely ignoring."
bubble wands are a cheap commodity that drive up a lot of profit. The language is slightly different but no goal posts were ever moved.

I never said the parks had no artistic merit or intent. You drew that conclusion yourself.

Obviously I l've enjoyed going to the parks enough to register an account here. I like Animatronics, I like the architecture of the parks, I like the theming and plussing of areas. But I can also admit its always been one big gift shop. How many posts here are critical of operations or things falling apart, or attractions cheaping out with screens? A lot.

We're allowed to examine and be critical of the things that entertain us.
 

Professortango1

Well-Known Member
Encanto has a bunch of Donkeys. Indiana Jones hates snakes. That's enough to earn their keep in the animal park as well.
That's my issue with Indy. AK is about appreciating animals and learning to live with them and conserve. Every animal in Indiana Jones is seen as an icky obstacle to be overcome. Snakes in Raiders (lit on fire), tarantulas in Raiders, bugs and bats in Temple of Doom, rats in Last Crusade (lit on fire), ants in Crystal Skull, and eels in Dial.

Nothing wrong with that, as Indy is an adventure serial story and that's how those stories are structured. But, this doesn't seem to fit into a park that is about treating animals and nature with respect.
 

andre85

Well-Known Member
That's my issue with Indy. AK is about appreciating animals and learning to live with them and conserve. Every animal in Indiana Jones is seen as an icky obstacle to be overcome. Snakes in Raiders (lit on fire), tarantulas in Raiders, bugs and bats in Temple of Doom, rats in Last Crusade (lit on fire), ants in Crystal Skull, and eels in Dial.

Nothing wrong with that, as Indy is an adventure serial story and that's how those stories are structured. But, this doesn't seem to fit into a park that is about treating animals and nature with respect.

Fair I suppose, though that's not an angle I would have thought of had you not mentioned it. I also don't think it precludes Indy from admiring an animal.

In any case, Dinosaur did much of the same thing as you're saying Indy did, besides the Seeker story.
 

Professortango1

Well-Known Member
Fair I suppose, though that's not an angle I would have thought of had you not mentioned it. I also don't think it precludes Indy from admiring an animal.

In any case, Dinosaur did much of the same thing as you're saying Indy did, besides the Seeker story.
I have never seen Indy admiring an animal. I mean, he's not afraid of the horses or elephant he rides, but other than that, the animals are typically an obstacle to be overcome. And sometimes set on fire.

As for Dinosaur, I think it has a good mix showing scary dinos and regular dinos. The Carnotaurus, and the random pterosaur, are the only ones which pose threats to us. Plus, just like with Everest, we are the ones invading their space and the danger erupts from that; once again fortifying our relationship with animals and natural spaces. We build a tain through the Yeti's habitat, the yeti attacks us. We venture into the world of dinosaurs to save one from a natural disaster and must navigate a world which isn't made for humans.

The focus of Indy has always been about history and folklore and keeping these artifacts out of the hands of corrupt collectors and those who would wield these artifacts to subjugate other humans. Indy about human beings rather than nature or animals. And yes, I know humans are animals too. 🙃
 
Last edited:

joanna71985

Well-Known Member
Here’s my opinion this project should have started happening in 2022 and should have had an up ride instead of encanto it would have been a better fit for animal kingdom and would have filled the same family ride role in the parks lineup but encanto is what’s happening and I’m still very excited to see a great movie get its own ride!

Nah, I prefer Encanto over Up
 

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
So, how does this work with the other animated films using anthropomorphic characters like Robin Hood, Great Mouse Detective, The Rescuers..Etc?
Robin Hood and Great Mouse Detective are just human stories with anthropomorphic animals overlaid. The characters never act like animals and humans essentially do not exist. The world they inhabit is, again, completely divorced of any genuine human-animal dynamic and any believable animal behavior. In Rescuers, there are at least prominent human characters the animals have to contend with, and in Rescuers Down Under in particular, there could actually be a lot of material to work with.
Or having Mickey and Friends not allowed and can only be at Epcot, Studios and MK....
Mickey and friends are explicitly named as exceptions because their only real purpose is to meet and greet, not to further the mission of the park or anchor attractions in a fully-featured land.

EDIT: Oh, weird. The post I was responding to disappeared. Sorry about that.
 

Cmdr_Crimson

Well-Known Member
Robin Hood and Great Mouse Detective are just human stories with anthropomorphic animals overlaid. The characters never act like animals and humans essentially do not exist. The world they inhabit is, again, completely divorced of any genuine human-animal dynamic and any believable animal behavior. In Rescuers, there are at least prominent human characters the animals have to contend with, and in Rescuers Down Under in particular, there could actually be a lot of material to work with.

Mickey and friends are explicitly named as exceptions because their only real purpose is to meet and greet, not to further the mission of the park or anchor attractions in a fully-featured land.

EDIT: Oh, weird. The post I was responding to disappeared. Sorry about that.
Yeah, I accidentally deleted while I was editing it..No biggie🙂
 

Professortango1

Well-Known Member
Robin Hood and Great Mouse Detective are just human stories with anthropomorphic animals overlaid. The characters never act like animals and humans essentially do not exist. The world they inhabit is, again, completely divorced of any genuine human-animal dynamic and any believable animal behavior. In Rescuers, there are at least prominent human characters the animals have to contend with, and in Rescuers Down Under in particular, there could actually be a lot of material to work with.

Mickey and friends are explicitly named as exceptions because their only real purpose is to meet and greet, not to further the mission of the park or anchor attractions in a fully-featured land.

EDIT: Oh, weird. The post I was responding to disappeared. Sorry about that.
Great Mouse Detective does exist within our human world. It's kind of Mr. Toad-esque with animals being animals, but acting as tiny people in a world where humans also exist.
 

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
Great Mouse Detective does exist within our human world. It's kind of Mr. Toad-esque with animals being animals, but acting as tiny people in a world where humans also exist.
Right, but, while I admit my memory is hazy, my recollection is that there are essentially no named human characters aside from Sherlock Holmes, who is only ever silhouetted and really just named as a parallel to Basil. Humans are otherwise fairly irrelevant aside from being architects of the larger city around their smaller one, and all narrative focus is given to human-like intrigue. That's in contrast to, say, Rescuers Down Under where there is a larger naturalistic story about Marahute where genuine concerns of the animal world, the environment, and human-animal relations are explored.
 

WaltWiz1901

Well-Known Member
What is even going on? Is someone trying to claim that the Disney theme parks suck and so we're not allowed to complain when they shoehorn unfitting IP into them?
that's...not far off from the impression I'm getting. I don't think I've ever seen anyone (here or elsewhere) who's peddled the narrative that the parks were always just a business peddle it with such self-centered arrogance
 

Advisable Joseph

Well-Known Member
Who is "we"?
@TrainsOfDisney, and serveral others who see how this fits, if you think theater-building bugs fit.

The characters are more animal than you remember: burrowing rabbits, wolves tracking critters by scent, jaguars who like sleeping up in trees, etc.

Also, these characteristics are inherited from ancestors which were basically our animals. They can discuss our animals elegantly by discussing themselves!

IF Zootopia was focused outside the city and the different "animals" took us to where they grew up and showed us the natural environment
You've almost got it!😀

Keep in mind that the concept art featured a park. We could see the natural environment in the parks in the various districts.

Now, what could help is bringing up evolution, as in the beginning of the movie and the natural history museum, especially since the show is in the Tree of Life.
 

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
The characters are more animal than you remember: burrowing rabbits, wolves tracking critters by scent, jaguars who like sleeping up in trees, etc.

Also, these characteristics are inherited from ancestors which were basically our animals. They can discuss our animals elegantly by discussing themselves!
These are nothing more than Highlights for Kids factoids, and also, again, do not constitute a unique thought as to how the franchise could be bent to sort of fit as long as it is relegated to a single inconspicuous attraction and not an entire land or large part of a land (as it mercifully has been). It is what I have been suggesting all along as a mitigating strategy. It doesn't mean that I still don't think there were way better options that fit with park more seamlessly. It's pretty clear that there's just a push from management to get the franchise represented due to international popularity.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom