Is everything just IP mandate quota now?

[LivingwiththeSpam]

Disney used to be a good company, making good products for good people,

but everything has been really, REALLY bad lately

I mean, let's be completely honest. The last original attraction that wasn't tied in to a movie franchise was Expedition Everest at Animal Kingdom in 2006.

That's 20 years ago.

And they just took out Tom Sawyer Island

They've just given up completely, no?

 

[sedati]

Disney used to be a good company, making good products for good people,

but everything has been really, REALLY bad lately

I mean, let's be completely honest. The last original attraction that wasn't tied in to a movie franchise was Expedition Everest at Animal Kingdom in 2006.

That's 20 years ago.

And they just took out Tom Sawyer Island

They've just given up completely, no?

Good people?

 

[tanc]

I think the last original IP was mystic manor, but regardless I doubt D’Amaro is going to care. Iger’s legacy will forever be IP or bust and I doubt any new CEO will ever see it any other way.

 

[mergatroid]

Disney used to be a good company, making good products for good people,

but everything has been really, REALLY bad lately

I mean, let's be completely honest. The last original attraction that wasn't tied in to a movie franchise was Expedition Everest at Animal Kingdom in 2006.

That's 20 years ago.

And they just took out Tom Sawyer Island

They've just given up completely, no?

I've been going for around 50 years and would say that Guardians, Tron, Ratatouille and Rise are all good products and have been added fairly recently. It's all subjective though and you're entitled to think they're really, REALLY bad if you want to.

They do seem to want to add IP's into the parks a lot which sometimes feels a bit overkill however they're not necessarily bad attractions because of that though I would prefer a mixture of IP and original attractions in a perfect world.

 

[marni1971]

For your thread title, under Iger, for the parks TWDC owned, yes.

 

[Biff215]

Original attractions aren’t always good. IP attractions aren’t always bad. When a company is investing billions on IP, you can bet they’re going to want to capitalize on that, for better or worse.

“Good” attractions are all we can all hope for at this point, which is a matter of opinion. I’d argue the past decade has been pretty good for the parks, far better than the stagnation that followed Everest.

 

[Tha Realest]

I think the last original IP was mystic manor, but regardless I doubt D’Amaro is going to care. Iger’s legacy will forever be IP or bust and I doubt any new CEO will ever see it any other way.

Yep. Did Josh ever deliver on an original IP attraction in all his years over various parks?

 

[phillip9698]

Making non-IP based attractions is what makes a company good?

An IP base attraction can't be good?

The body of your topic makes no sense.

 

[Professortango1]

Making non-IP based attractions is what makes a company good?

An IP base attraction can't be good?

The body of your topic makes no sense.

Having IP lead over ride design and storytelling is the issue.

IP attractions, especially modern ones, tend to rely heavily on their IP and your familiarity with it. Star Tours 1.0 was a solid Space Adventure with fun characters. Star Tours the Adventure Continues is just three video game cut scenes where we can all do the DiCaprio meme and say "I know that from the movie!"

The Guardians attractions at both parks exemplify this half-hearted surface level themeing and execution. Tiana's and Tron are able to under deliver because of the window dressing on a good ride system. Look at the Nemo downgrade of Stormrider at TDS.

Does SWGE have a lot of great attractions that feel inspired or a solid ride themed to Star Wars and something else they had to put in because they can't have a land with only 1 ride? It reminds me of those cheap film companies who just churn out vague slop to coincide with whatever is "in." People like Witch movies? Quick, make a witch movie and it needs to be ready in 6 months. When story comes last, the audience suffers.

The original Disney attractions hold up because they draw off simple classic ideas. Exploring a haunted house. Sailing through a pirate adventure. Zooming through space. Ride a runaway mine train.

No complex back stories to learn. Preshows were a function of the queue/ride relationship rather than something required to dump exposition

Simple tone poems that tie to the things that interest/fascinate us as a society.

 

[Jsellav]

Having IP lead over ride design and storytelling is the issue.

IP attractions, especially modern ones, tend to rely heavily on their IP and your familiarity with it. Star Tours 1.0 was a solid Space Adventure with fun characters. Star Tours the Adventure Continues is just three video game cut scenes where we can all do the DiCaprio meme and say "I know that from the movie!"

The Guardians attractions at both parks exemplify this half-hearted surface level themeing and execution. Tiana's and Tron are able to under deliver because of the window dressing on a good ride system. Look at the Nemo downgrade of Stormrider at TDS.

Does SWGE have a lot of great attractions that feel inspired or a solid ride themed to Star Wars and something else they had to put in because they can't have a land with only 1 ride? It reminds me of those cheap film companies who just churn out vague slop to coincide with whatever is "in." People like Witch movies? Quick, make a witch movie and it needs to be ready in 6 months. When story comes last, the audience suffers.

The original Disney attractions hold up because they draw off simple classic ideas. Exploring a haunted house. Sailing through a pirate adventure. Zooming through space. Ride a runaway mine train.

No complex back stories to learn. Preshows were a function of the queue/ride relationship rather than something required to dump exposition

Simple tone poems that tie to the things that interest/fascinate us as a society.

To each their own, but personally, I would respectfully strongly disagree. All of those rides you mention happen to be the favorites of a lot of people.

Tron, Guardians, Starwars I think represents some of the industries best work and not just their own.

Just providing a different perspective because I think there is a narrative some people have that these rides under perform for the masses and I don’t think that’s true.

I also don’t believe that IP leads over design in the above mentioned examples.

Lastly, these linear “story book” rides don’t speak to everyone. Newer generations consume content differently than we do. It’s something to consider.

 

[Professortango1]

To each their own, but personally, I would respectfully strongly disagree. All of those rides you mention happen to be the favorites of a lot of people.

Tron, Guardians, Starwars I think represents some of the industries best work and not just there own.

Just providing a different perspective because I think there is a narrative some people have that these rides under perform for the masses and I don’t think that’s true.

I also don’t believe that IP leads over design in the above mentioned examples.

I'll give people Rise due to the scale and number of great moments throughout the experience.

Tron and Guardians succeed off the coaster moreso the storytelling and IP. Luckily Tron is such an unliked franchise the ride is just a different version of Space Mountain with generic Tron themeing, so no huge expo dumps. But Cosmic Rewind is like is Disney rode Revenge of the Mummy and Gringotts and thought "what if we did this but without all the physical sets, animatronics, beat changes, and storytelling?"

They could pump quips and dad rock onto night rides of Stardust Racers and it would be just as "themed."

IP has long been a crutch to lean on when you don't want to put the money or effort into making something stand alone.

 

[Jsellav]

I'll give people Rise due to the scale and number of great moments throughout the experience.

Tron and Guardians succeed off the coaster moreso the storytelling end IP. Luckily Tron is such an unliked franchise the ride is just a different version of Space Mountain with generic Tron themeing, so no huge expo dumps. But Cosmic Rewind is like is Disney rode Revenge of the Mummy and Gringotts and thought "what if we did this but without all the physical sets, animatronics, beat changes, and storytelling?"

They could pump quips and dad rock onto night rides of Stardust Racers and it would be just as "themed."

IP has long been a crutch to lean on when you don't want to put the money or effort into making something stand alone.

Well. Guardians imo is the best themed coaster I ever been on and is my favorite Disney ride right now. I personally think Disney killed it with this ride. 10/10.

I’ll stop here though because we just have different perspectives and that’s fine too.

 

[JD80]

What is the difference between a ride with an original IP by WDI and a ride with an original IP by Disney Studios?

 

[Casper Gutman]

What’s really incredible is that the company that made blockbuster Pirates of the Caribbean and Jungle Cruise movies doesn’t understand that IPs can originate in theme parks.

A huge amount of the problem is that being the head of a film studio is cool and sexy but being the head of a theme park is silly and boring. Of course, being a tech CEO is cooler and sexier then either, leading Disney to make even dumber decisions…

 

[Enjoy the ride]

Disney used to be a good company, making good products for good people,

but everything has been really, REALLY bad lately

I mean, let's be completely honest. The last original attraction that wasn't tied in to a movie franchise was Expedition Everest at Animal Kingdom in 2006.

That's 20 years ago.

And they just took out Tom Sawyer Island

They've just given up completely, no?

You do know that Tom Sawyer is an IP right. The story has been around since the 1850s. It’s not like Disney just created it. Yes the movies came out after but everyone knew who Tom Sawyer was before that.

To play devils advocate on the IP mandate. Disney owns the rights to thousands of characters and IP’s. Many more now than when the parks were first created. Why wouldn’t they want to use these well known characters. I know people argue a lot on here about IPs but that is from an adult perspective. I can tell you my daughter would much rather go an attraction with characters from a movie she loves than a ride where she doesn’t know the characters. I could go either way if the ride is well done.

 

[Professortango1]

Well. Guardians imo is the best themed coaster I ever been on and is my favorite Disney ride right now. I personally think Disney killed it with this ride. 10/10.

I’ll stop here though because we just have different perspectives and that’s fine too.

You must have really loved Space Mountain: Ghost Galaxy. Same projections of a giant space monster, but it had two physical objects to see rather than one.

The moon is better lit though, so I guess one well lit sphere in one element of the coaster is the best themeing ever applied to a coaster. Suck it Big Thunder and Taron and Expedition Everest and all of you other themed coasters with sculpted scenic design! You just needed one and voice over! Oh, and some dad rock. If only RnRC could have swapped out the multiple things you fly past for one globe, it would be as well themed as Cosmic Rewind's coaster.

RnRC: Disney's Icarus. It simply tried too hard.

 

[Professortango1]

You do know that Tom Sawyer is an IP right. The story has been around since the 1850s. It’s not like Disney just created it. Yes the movies came out after but everyone knew who Tom Sawyer was before that.

To play devils advocate on the IP mandate. Disney owns the rights to thousands of characters and IP’s. Many more now than when the parks were first created. Why wouldn’t they want to use these well known characters. I know people argue a lot on here about IPs but that is from an adult perspective. I can tell you my daughter would much rather go an attraction with characters from a movie she loves than a ride where she doesn’t know the characters. I could go either way if the ride is well done.

Iger has entered the chat!

Well Bob, putting Miguel from Coco in The Haunted Mansion may initially pique your daughter's interest because she knows Miguel better than the Ghost Host, but that doesn't make it a better attraction or more broadly appealing.

Thank God we got World of Avatar with all of those iconic characters rather than something lame like Beastly Kingdom. Who wants to see a generic dragon or discover a magicial unicorn when you can see those things from that one movie we saw awhile ago.

Unless is was a unicorn voiced by Awkwafina in a Disney movie, then yes. we definitely want that because then I can buy the toy and the shirt that said I saw the thing from that movie! And everyone will be so jelly because they also know the thing from the movie.

 

[Enjoy the ride]

Iger has entered the chat!

Well Bob, putting Miguel from Coco in The Haunted Mansion may initially pique your daughter's interest because she knows Miguel better than the Ghost Host, but that doesn't make it a better attraction or more broadly appealing.

Thank God we got World of Avatar with all of those iconic characters rather than something lame like Beastly Kingdom. Who wants to see a generic dragon or discover a magicial unicorn when you can see those things from that one movie we saw awhile ago.

Unless is was a unicorn voiced by Awkwafina in a Disney movie, then yes. we definitely want that because then I can buy the toy and the shirt that said I saw the thing from that movie! And everyone will be so jelly because they also know the thing from the movie.

Sorry Facts get in the way of your individual preference. I never said everything needs to be IP. But I did say I understand why. I also never stated they should through in random IP into an existing ride but I know that taking peoples comments and exaggerating them is what some do here.

About avatar. Do you like the land? What if they created that land and the movies had never been made would you like it then? I could care less about the movies but the land is very unique and visually stunning. Yes the boat ride is too short. I get it.

My daughter is 4 so don’t think haunted mansion is in the cards either way.

All I was implying is IP is a much safer bet when you are investing 300 million into a ride. Sometimes we think as fans and they think in business sense. But just so we are clear Disney has always used IP. Just more now cause they have more IPs.

 

[drizgirl]

I feel like the real problem is that they assume the IP will be the draw, and allow themselves to skimp on delivering as great a product as they might otherwise. They assumed that just slapping "Star Wars" on it would make it a home run. Today they are assuming that slapping "Bluey" on it will do the same. And it did for the first days. But that won't be sustained. GOOD attractions maintain despite the IP over the long haul.

 

[Professortango1]

Sorry Facts get in the way of your individual preference. I never said everything needs to be IP. But I did say I understand why. I also never stated they should through in random IP into an existing ride but I know that taking peoples comments and exaggerating them is what some do here.

About avatar. Do you like the land? What if they created that land and the movies had never been made would you like it then? I could care less about the movies but the land is very unique and visually stunning. Yes the boat ride is too short. I get it.

My daughter is 4 so don’t think haunted mansion is in the cards either way.

All I was implying is IP is a much safer bet when you are investing 300 million into a ride. Sometimes we think as fans and they think in business sense. But just so we are clear Disney has always used IP. Just more now cause they have more IPs.

The Iger comment was simply in reaction to using the exact same justification as him. "People would pay us millions to use these IPs we own, do we'd be dumb not to take advantage of these IPs in everything we do." (Paraphrased from memory.)

As for risk, sure. It's much safer to make an IP attraction because if the ride sucks, people might still enjoy the attraction due to the familiar stuff you already like (Nemo). Without an IP, the ride has to be enjoyable and attractive on its own. One requires more effort and talent, the other allows more shortcuts.

And then there's the subsidizing aspect. Have movies costing millions and not making it back? Have Disney+ subscriptions you need to push? Well, take the most successful aspect of your company (theme parks) and use them to exclusively push these franchises and IPs. You may convince people they like them. You may also convince people to breakdown and buy that streaming subscription to revisit the movie they marketed towards you in the themed experience.

Always be selling! Walt used to use TV to work as marketing for the parks. Now, parks are used as marketing for the "content."