James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
There are IP attractions that have been around since the parks opened.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Rumor Stitch's Great Escape Replacement— Don’t Hold Your Breath
- Thread starter Magic Feather
- Start date
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
Sort of … There are better parts and worse parts.
MagicHappens1971
Well-Known Member
Sleeping Beauty castle called and it’s still around. The parks have been leveraging IPs since day one. They are vehicles for IP.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Disneyland was always going to have a castle and its name waffled around. The name was secondary and it bore no resemblance to the film’s aesthetic. Sleeping Beauty was not driving the anything.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
In limited capacities. Most were confined to Fantasyland. Frontierland got Davey Crocket canoes and the Mike Fink Keel Boats; neither of which took us through a narrative of the TV show.
As for how they will age, 2-D Animated films have a much longer shelf life than 3-D animated films. Plus the older films went after a more timeless quality to the writing rather than the ultra modern and hip new animated films.
Live Action films age even worse. Most kids I know think Star Wars is old and lame. Heck, I thought the OT was pretty dated while I grew up in the 90's.
It will be interesting to see how well GotG attractions play in 20 years.
Abstract original ideas like ghosts or pirates or dinosaurs are easier to keep relevant by updating tech. The 30-40 year old franchise about some guy and a talking raccoon might fare differently.
Rich Brownn
Well-Known Member
But the park wasn't designed to be exclusively IP-based attractions.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
The direction for the park until Eisner was a vehicle to give guests unique experiences to share with their family. Be it exploring exotic jungles or voyaging to the moon, or riding a mule through the wild west.
These were big ideas. All-encompassing. They left places for our mind to explore and find interest. Even the Darkrides, which were meant as C-Tickets, were not literal translations of the films. They were experiences. Tied more cloesly to a narrowed experience, but that works in a smaller type attraction. Experience being chased by the Wicked Witch. Experience flying to Neverland. Experience a wild and crazy car chase through the world of Mr. Toad.
With Star Tours, we got the chance to experience being in our favourite film trilogy. And since the success of that, the parks have leaned more and more towards experience being in this movie franchise.
So instead of varied experiences, we now have similar experiences with different themes and vehicles. Frozen Ever After, Incredicoaster, Rise of the Resistance, Smuggler's Run, Tiana's Bayou Adventure, Mission BO...these all have the same experience. Be welcomed by characters you know from movies and then see things you recognize set to music you recognize.
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
Exactly. Nor even predominantly IP.
I once read a summary of Disneyland that was incredibly useful for illustrating this. Disneyland was designed to combine a zoo, a national park, a world's fair, and an amusement park/gardens. To this I would add a living history site. I found this to be a really useful way of thinking about the lands of the original Disneyland.
The original 5 lands were Main Street USA (living history site in the style of Henry Ford's creation), Adventureland (zoo), Frontierland (national park), Fantasyland (amusement park/gardens), and Tomorrowland (world's fair). These lands each had a specific purpose within the Disneyland concept.
Overtime, the identity of each of the lands has eroded. This is true for both the Magic Kingdom and Disneyland. It's difficult to tell the difference between each land besides surface level scenery. Some of that was the natural adaption to the realities of operating a theme park (animals in Adventureland would prove infeasible). But a great deal of it has been related to a lack of care and poor understanding of Disneyland or Magic Kingdom.
The Magic Kingdom is dedicated to the life and philosophy of Walt Disney. It's a celebration of his upbringing (Main Street USA), his imagination (Fantasyland), his love of progress and technology (Tomorrowland), his fascination with history (Frontierland), and his appreciation of nature (Adventureland). The basic standard for any attraction in the Magic Kingdom should be its relation to Walt Disney. Not that new stories can't be told, but that they should be harmonious with the life and philosophy of Walt Disney.
But how many realize this today? To many guests (and Imagineers!), Disneyland and Magic Kingdom are an eclectic mix of lands all surrounding a castle. You can put anything in those lands as long as the basically look right. You can also replace one of the lands with something else. Why? Because as long as there's a castle in the middle, Mickey Avenue is just as good as Main Street USA!
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
On an unrelated note, Magic Feather's post aged phenomenally. We're approaching 8 years without anything solid. Hopefully we get something concrete soon.
I'm glad I didn't hold my breath, or else I wouldn't be here today!
I'm glad I didn't hold my breath, or else I wouldn't be here today!
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
This erosion is not exclusively the result of a lack of care or understanding, even if it sometimes is. In Magic Kingdom in particular, some of the missions were offloaded to other parks that executed the concept far better. EPCOT is/was a better World’s Fair than Tomorrowland, and World Showcase is a better vehicle for presenting the history of not just the United States but many other countries as well. Animal Kingdom is a better zoo. It makes sense for them to shift more toward a “fantasy tomorrow” or a “fantastical adventure” than to stick with something that now looks diminished and redundant.
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
The fact that this is happening at Disneylands around the world indicates that they really don't know what they're doing, or just don't care. There's no Epcot next to Disneyland, and the same process has occurred there. And I think even if that was the justification, it's not a good one. Could Tomorrowland exist alongside Epcot? Absolutely. They did for many years, so we know it's not an impossibility or that there is a dearth of content. Moreover, the parks that might have replaced those lands themselves are being eroded. Epcot has become meaningless and Disney's Animal Kingdom is becoming meaningless.
I think today's Imagineers would struggle to explain Disneyland and Magic Kingdom's purpose and role. Imagineers really don't get it. The situation is becoming worse. The rumored plan to ruin one of the best parts of the park with a cheap New Orleans Square knockoff (that completely misses the point as to why New Orleans Square has become so beloved) is case in point.
It's sad. Tomorrowland could actually be a cool place to explore the dangers and potential of technology through science fiction like you suggested. I've thought of that myself. Attractions could demonstrate the risks and rewards of things like AI and robotics. Lessons could be taught through these stories.
But Tomorrowland today has nothing to do with tomorrow. It doesn't make sense on any level. What does Buzz Lightyear (Andy's toy) have to do with Monster's Inc Laugh Floor? Why are they associated with "tomorrow?" Space Mountain remains the one iconic attraction in the land that still retains a connection to the wonderment of space exploration.
Besides that, Tomorrowland can be defined as the place where IPs are put when they don't fit in a desert, a jungle, or a European village because there's no where else to put them. The same goes for Star Tours in Disneyland. It makes no sense. Nothing says "tomorrow" like something that occurred "a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away..."
Brer Panther
Well-Known Member
Don't forget his claim that Expedition Everest was just "some nondescript coaster" because it wasn't based on an IP.
S.I.R. the Robot
Active Member
- In the Parks
- No
And when we say quality, we mean cartoon starbursts.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
Nothing wrong with that. The cartoon starbursts in Riger Rabbit and Mr Toad work well..
EricsBiscuit
Well-Known Member
DL’s is not better. The Neverland scene looks like it was squeezed onto a 4x8 sheet of plywood. WDW’s is more detailed and much larger. A few SFX that don’t work half the time don’t overcome the smaller sets.
Bocabear
Well-Known Member
I guess the times I was there, the effects were all working. Yes our neverland island is bigger...
With the popularity of PPF it would make sense to do a longer better version and add an expanded Neverland section. Maybe even a new, double-tracked version kind of like the old MK Mr Toad did... As long as it is better than what it is replacing and has double the capacity it would be a win/win... an added M&G space for Peter, Wendy and Tink would be the icing on the cake...Walk-through Pirate ship....
S.I.R. the Robot
Active Member
- In the Parks
- No
I thought you meant WDW Snow White. The jagged-edged cartoon starbursts at the end of the 1971 version are a blessing and reminiscent of Wile E Coyote cartoons. You also forgot to mention cartoon starbursts are in the Buzz Lightyear rides.
Brer Panther
Well-Known Member
Somebody on Reddit claimed that they might be putting an Edna Mode show in the Stitch building. Anyone know if there's any truth to that?
Not the worst idea for the space. Do you have a link to the post?