2021 D23 Expo Moving to 2022/TWDC 100th Anniversary Celebration Announcement

D

doctornick

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
In my experience (and it could certainly be wrong) the MCU doesn't have the level of hardcore fandom that something like Harry Potter does. There are tons of people who enjoy the MCU, but a much smaller percentage of them are totally engrossed in it compared to the percentage of HP fans totally engrossed in that series, and I think it's because the MCU isn't fundamentally escapist the way something like HP is for a number of reasons. There seems to be a much higher level of casual fandom. People absolutely freaked out over the ability to go to Hogsmeade and Diagon Alley because they got to enter that universe in an escapist way. Something like the Avengers campus doesn't have anywhere near that level of excitement, and again, I think a big part of that is the lack of (or at least lesser amount of) escapism.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with everything you say here. I do not think that the MCU has anywhere near the same level of hard core fans as Harry Potter (or Star Wars for that matter). But I think it has a massive amount of casual fans who recognize and enjoy the characters. In fact, I think the MCU is a better comp for Disney and Pixar animated movies -- small numbers of of people obsess over them but lots of people are familiar with them and recognize them and they are part of the fabric our modern culture. So, just like how people will recognize Pooh or Dumbo or Toy Story, I expect the long term prospects of the MCU to be similar.

I'm not sure a property has to have massive hard core fandom to work well as a basis for a theme park attraction. I think it is more important to have a baseline level of culture awareness so that a lot of guests would have a "I recognize and enjoy that" type of response.. Where I think you are underestimating is to the degree that the MCU has permeated popular culture.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
doctornick said:
I'm not sure a property has to have massive hard core fandom to work well as a basis for a theme park attraction. I think it is more important to have a baseline level of culture awareness so that a lot of guests would have a "I recognize and enjoy that" type of response.. Where I think you are underestimating is to the degree that the MCU has permeated popular culture.
Click to expand...

It definitely doesn't. I don't think it needs any fandom at all (or even cultural recognition) to work if the attraction is good enough. It's just that Disney hasn't done an especially good job of that with most of their recent attractions (although Rise is a huge exception, and Flight of Passage is as well).

If Guardians is good enough and doesn't rely heavily on specific knowledge of the characters (and it probably won't as a roller coaster), whether the movies are still popular 15 years from now will be irrelevant.
 
Slpy3270

Slpy3270

Well-Known Member
the.dreamfinder said:
I’m posting it as a joke.

In all seriousness, the next few years will be the most challenging ones for the company since WWII.
Click to expand...

Nah. I'm pretty sure a year or two from now everyone will act like nothing happened and the company will go back to where it was pre-pandemic, albeit with a few changes but nothing as drastic.

That, and leadership is far more competent than that Michael Eisner ever was.
 
Last edited:
D

doctornick

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
As just one random example, the Back to the Future trilogy was massive in the 80s and are one of the highest grossing trilogies ever. Back to the Future made more money (inflation adjusted) than all but 4 MCU films. Ask anyone under the age of 30 if they've seen any of those movies and you're going to get an overwhelming amount of nos. Things just don't maintain the cultural relevance you'd expect and it's hard to see that in the moment. It's not a knock on the MCU; it's just a cultural reality.
Click to expand...

Definitely agree to disagree because I think that's a bad example. My kids have all seen and enjoy BttF and it actually got a bunch of play in 2015 when its future day arrived - and people still talk about hoverboards and talk about Deloreans being time machines. Not to mention that (ironically) the MCU specifically talked about Back to the Future when discussing time travel. Also, this...



This is from Henry Danger, a show on Nickelodeon that I can assure you is not aiming at 40 or 50 years olds as an audience. I don't think you make that sort of reference unless something has achieved a base level of cultural permanence.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
doctornick said:
Definitely agree to disagree because I think that's a bad example. My kids have all seen and enjoy BttF and it actually got a bunch of play in 2015 when its future day arrived - and people still talk about hoverboards and talk about Deloreans being time machines. Not to mention that (ironically) the MCU specifically talked about Back to the Future when discussing time travel. Also, this...



This is from Henry Danger, a show on Nickelodeon that I can assure you is not aiming at 40 or 50 years olds as an audience.
Click to expand...


Yeah, but it's often because people writing these shows/movies are people that grew up watching BttF. That's actually why I used it as an example, but then forgot to mention that in the original comment. That happens quite often in entertainment.

I didn't mean to imply it's been completely forgotten, but it's mostly being kept somewhat relevant by those people. Of course some kids have seen it, but I would bet a huge amount of money that if you could poll everyone under the age of 30 in the US today, at least 75% (and that's probably low) of them would have never seen any of the trilogy.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
Slpy3270 said:
That, and leadership is far more competent than that ******* Michael Eisner ever was.
Click to expand...

Is this satire?

Even if you despise Eisner, it would be incredibly difficult to argue his tenure was anything but massively successful for Disney as a company. It's similar to Iger, actually -- even if you dislike most of what he's done (like I do) he's still been a tremendously successful CEO from an overall company and shareholder standpoint.
 
Slpy3270

Slpy3270

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
Is this satire?

Even if you despise Eisner, it would be incredibly difficult to argue his tenure was anything but massively successful for Disney as a company.
Click to expand...

That was partly helped by his partnership with Katzenberg, who had his own ego issues but nonetheless played his part with propping the studio division. Once he was gone, Eisner ran Disney to the ground as quick as he helped propped it up. He's the reason garbage like Michael Bay's Pearl Harbor movie exists, and had ABC turn down shows like CSI and Monk, which really bit them in the as both have become pop culture phenomenona. That's not even getting into the disastrous Disney's California Adventure and Hong Kong Disneyland launches.

Iger, divisive as he may be, hasn't been anywhere near as careless.
 
Last edited:
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
Slpy3270 said:
That was partly helped by his partnership with Katzenberg, who had his own ego issues but nonetheless played his part with propping the studio division. Once he was gone, Eisner ran Disney to the ground as quick as he helped propped it up. He's the reason garbage like Michael Bay's Pearl Harbor movie exists, and had ABC turn down shows like CSI and Monk, which really bit them in the *** as both have become pop culture phenomenona. That's not even getting into the disastrous Disney's California Adventure and Hong Kong Disneyland launches.
Click to expand...

Shouldn't Roy Disney get some of the blame for that? My understanding is that Eisner wanted Katzenberg to replace Wells as #2 after his untimely death, but Roy Disney was adamantly opposed to it and threatened a takeover attempt if he was given the job. And Eisner is also the one who brought Katzenberg in in the first place, so he should still get credit for making that personnel decision. Plus, Eisner was responsible for Disney's ownership of ESPN, which may have been the most profitable acquisition Disney has ever made. As for Pearl Harbor, while that is an absolute trash heap of a movie, it was also very successful and profitable. It's hard to blame a CEO for decisions that made money for the company.

I don't think it's that easy to make a case that Iger has been demonstrably better than Eisner overall. Iger building Shanghai Disneyland could turn out to be an absolutely massive blunder, for one, although it's much too early to say for sure.
 
Last edited:
ThatMouse

ThatMouse

Well-Known Member
I don't know if Disney would be better without Eisner, but I think he saved Disney from Katzenberg. No one liked Katzenberg. Steve Jobs hated him too.

When Eisner got the news that Frank Wells died, the next person he talked to was Katzenberg giving Eisner an ultimatum that he be Wells' replacement or he's moving on. Like the same day Wells died. No joke. I'm positive that was the moment Eisner thought 'forget' this guy and went to Roy to stop the vote! There was no fight with Roy at all in my mind.

Katzenberg then started Dreamworks and stole A Bugs Life by creating Antz which alienated not just everyone he ever worked with, but the entire animation community.
 
Ldno

Ldno

Well-Known Member
That awkward moment when disney loses hope on Anaheim they planned this event two years from now. I’ll guarantee if it were in Florida this would had happened in 2021.

But then again, what’s there to talk about anyways. 😭
 
mk1971

mk1971

Active Member
Sirwalterraleigh said:
That was the last one in Florida. It was if I recall 2005-2007...but the planning/authorization was at least a couple of years before. Under evil Michael according to the dates.
Click to expand...
The last celebration in Florida was "What Will You Celebrate" in 2008-2009, right after Year of a Million Dreams
 
FigmentFan82

FigmentFan82

Well-Known Member
Sirwalterraleigh said:
But here what I have seen: Bob Iger NEVER authorized one of those “celebrations” in Florida. Not a one. Check the tape of that.
Click to expand...
I don't have any knowledge on Iger not pushing for anniversary celebrations in Florida during his tenure, but that doesn't take away from the fact that Florida has done anniversary celebrations in the past. I don't think it's unreasonable for people to make an assumption that something special would be done for the 50th, a number that is generally associated with a very special anniversary.
Also, I was the proud winner at age 4 of a light up visor for the Magic Kingdom's 15th anniversary. I treasured that thing for quite some time as a little tike.
 
SpoiledBlueMilk

SpoiledBlueMilk

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
It definitely doesn't. I don't think it needs any fandom at all (or even cultural recognition) to work if the attraction is good enough. It's just that Disney hasn't done an especially good job of that with most of their recent attractions (although Rise is a huge exception, and Flight of Passage is as well).

If Guardians is good enough and doesn't rely heavily on specific knowledge of the characters (and it probably won't as a roller coaster), whether the movies are still popular 15 years from now will be irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Star Wars and Potter do have a rabid fan base that will eat up anything that is offered that turns their universe into a tangible experience. That being said, the MCU has something better - an even greater population of casual fans that like the movies enough to make it a point to stop by any land or themed attraction that reflects the films. This is a much wider, more diverse market that can create constant demand for the parks over a longer period of time which should create sustained revenue.

You're right - if Guardians is a decent ride, the GOTG theme will become ancillary over time. Who remembers the TRON movie?
 

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

Back
Top Bottom