A sequel? Nah, not this one

[UNCgolf]

I thought OLC owned the Tokyo resort in its entirely and paid for everything itself?

I think that's right, but if they are able to design something for both TDL and WDW, then OLC is paying part of that cost for the TDL version. Disney can just clone it into WDW instead of having to spend more money to design something specifically for WDW.

Basically the issue is that the Splash in DL and WDW are different and can't just be cloned.

 

[LittleBuford]

I think it has to do with the money involved. Disney doesn't want to keep Song of the South in any of their parks because they don't want to be associated with it.

Disneyland and WDW's Splash Mountains are different, so whatever they design for Disneyland can't just be cloned into Disney World. The Splash Mountain in Tokyo basically is a clone of the one at WDW though, so they could do one design for both. Since OLC isn't interested in the PatF version, they'd want to design something else that can replace the Splash at both WDW and TDL instead of having to redesign PatF for WDW and also design something totally different for TDL to get rid of their Splash.

Easier to just design one thing that can work at both WDW and TDL.

Ah, now I get it. I didn’t understand before that Disney was so adamant that Tokyo’s Splash Mountain also change.

 

[MisterPenguin]

I thought OLC owned the Tokyo resort in its entirely and paid for everything itself?

They still get WDI to do stuff for them and they collaborate on projects to share cost... when they want to.

This is why OLC can simply say 'no' to retheming SM. Or, if OLC becomes convinced that not getting on board with ditching SM would hurt their bottom line from U.S. visitors, protests, or condemnation that would give them a bad rep; then the OLC would then be amenable to ditching SM, and thus, sharing the cost of the imagineering to make it happen. This also gives OLC the veto power over what goes there, and in delicious irony, they have... 'reasons'... why they would prefer it to not be PatB.

 

[UNCgolf]

Ah, now I get it. I didn’t understand before that Disney was so adamant that Tokyo’s Splash Mountain also change.

Yeah, that seems to be the case. And it makes sense -- even though they don't run Tokyo Disney, their name is still on it and the general public doesn't know/isn't going to notice the difference. Leaving an original Splash Mountain in an overseas park just doesn't work from a PR perspective after the push they made.

 

[Chomama]

Oh my goodness. I just read his "profile" over there.

I have racked my brain...need another hint to figure out which board this is please!

 

[LittleBuford]

Yeah, that seems to be the case. And it makes sense -- even though they don't run Tokyo Disney, their name is still on it and the general public doesn't know/isn't going to notice the difference. Leaving an original Splash Mountain in an overseas park just doesn't work from a PR perspective after the push they made.

I really wish Disney had lined everything up properly before making the announcement. I’m amazed that they’ve backed themselves into such a messy corner.

 

[AmishGuy91]

I really wish Disney had lined everything up properly before making the announcement. I’m amazed that they’ve backed themselves into such a messy corner.

It's almost like it wasn't in planning for the past year.....

 

[easyrowrdw]

Yeah, that seems to be the case. And it makes sense -- even though they don't run Tokyo Disney, their name is still on it and the general public doesn't know/isn't going to notice the difference. Leaving an original Splash Mountain in an overseas park just doesn't work from a PR perspective after the push they made.

I think that makes sense in theory, but I really don't think the general public knows there is a Disney in Tokyo. My kids were asking me about the other Disney (land) and I was trying to remember all the different ones that exist. I forgot two and I'm a major Disney fan! I couldn't name but a handful of rides across any of those other parks.

If Disney wants to change the ride at World and Land, have at it. But not doing it because one of your partners doesn't want to help you pay for it? That's just weak. Either have conviction or don't.

 

[Parker in NYC]

Nisseman lives at Epcot Norway!...

It's rare to read such uplifting information in this day and age but today's been lovely!

 

[LittleBuford]

It's almost like it wasn't in planning for the past year.....

Several insiders have confirmed that it was indeed being planned for a while, though only for Disneyland.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Several insiders have confirmed that it was indeed being planned for a while, though only for Disneyland.

I believe it was planned for all SMs, but, only taking DL's place-setting into account.

 

[LittleBuford]

I believe it was planned for all SMs, but, only taking DL's place-setting into account.

My understanding is that it was planned for Disneyland in much the same way as their retheme of the Tower of Terror—in other words, without any real concern for whether WDW would follow suit or not. Either way, the claim that the PatF overlay was cooked up at the last minute because of recent events seems unfounded, even if those events did indeed affect the timing and breadth of the announcement.

 

[Brer Oswald]

Either World Showcase will continue to be "based on real places, but with remotely-related IP thrown in," or these additions are the beginnings of a move toward replacing some/all of the real-world-based places with entirely fictional places (Wakanda). I think they'll straddle the line with the hybrid approach for now. With this approach, Wakanda wouldn't be a standalone pavilion, but rather an attraction/sub-pavilion within a proper pavilion themed to specific African-country/countries.

I would only hate a Wakanda boat ride in a Mozambique pavilion about as much as I hate Arendelle in Norway, which is to say-only a little. For some reason, I love the idea of Coco in Mexico. Not a big fan of Aladdin in Morocco, but Ratatouille in France somehow works for me.

For the record, I'm still a World Showcase purist at heart- I think the places based on real-life with some representation of authentic food, music, and culture is the best and most Epcot approach.

The visual aspect of Coco is something I’d like to see in Mexico. However, the music and characters of the Three Caballeros really appeals to me more than the same components of Coco. I also think Three Caballeros is a better choice given that the setting of the film is the real country.

If I was in charge of redesigning a hypothetical attraction, I’d feature real Mexican architecture and landmarks, with the music from Three Cabs, Panchito as a host, and a Day of the Dead section based on Coco. Not sure it’d fit the foot print, but it’s an armchair Blue Sky idea.

 

[Brer Oswald]

I still don’t fully understand why OLC’s decision has any bearing on what happens (or doesn’t happen) at WDW.

Tokyo’s facility is a “clone” of Florida’s (heavy on the quotation marks). California’s facility is different enough that they would have to put in effort to make a new attraction in Florida, as opposed to cloning it 1:1. They’re retheming one of their most popular attractions. They obviously want it to be as cheap to do as possible, or else it will appear to be a waste of money and resources.

 

[Brer Oswald]

I really wish Disney had lined everything up properly before making the announcement. I’m amazed that they’ve backed themselves into such a messy corner.

Whether you’re for or against the decision to retheme, the way they announced it is one of the dumbest things they’ve done in recent years. Everything should have been thought out beforehand. I don’t think 2 weeks of “bad press” on Twitter compares to the damage control they’re probably going to have to do, but that’s just me.

 

[britain]

The visual aspect of Coco is something I’d like to see in Mexico. However, the music and characters of the Three Caballeros really appeals to me more than the same components of Coco. I also think Three Caballeros is a better choice given that the setting of the film is the real country.

If I was in charge of redesigning a hypothetical attraction, I’d feature real Mexican architecture and landmarks, with the music from Three Cabs, Panchito as a host, and a Day of the Dead section based on Coco. Not sure it’d fit the foot print, but it’s an armchair Blue Sky idea.

Yes, but having 3 Cabs in Mexico sort of gives Jose’s Brazil the short shrift at best / leads audiences to think he’s Mexican at worst. It ain’t the Latin America pavilion.

I like them and the ride is fine, but it’s a bit like having... hmm... what’s it like? Lady, Trusty and Jock at a Scotland pavilion?

 

[Model3 McQueen]

Either way, the claim that the PatF overlay was cooked up at the last minute because of recent events seems unfounded, even if those events did indeed affect the timing and breadth of the announcement.

With all due respect, they're years away from closure and that concept art looks like a one-day photoshop project. They clearly, IMO, took advantage of that ridiculous change.org petition, and sign of the times, and it does look like this idea came from an outside source rather than inside.

I mean in your defense, I remember a member here saying Disney has a useless division that puts all of these dumb ideas on paper but a majority, if not all of them, don't see any real momentum. I would've bet this would've been one of those scrapped ideas, considering a post covid world, but Iger wants to look good, advertise some more IP, and somehow got his people to agree.

 

[LittleBuford]

With all due respect, they're years away from closure and that concept art looks like a one-day photoshop project. They clearly, IMO, took advantage of that ridiculous change.org petition, and sign of the times.

I'm merely paraphrasing what has been shared by others who know more than you or I. Yes, the timing and nature of the announcement were opportunistic, as I already state in the post you quoted. But, if our insiders are to be believed, there seems to be no legitimate basis for the claim that such a retheme wasn't already in the works, at least as far as Disneyland is concerned.

 

[Model3 McQueen]

I'm merely paraphrasing what has been shared by others who know more than you or I. Yes, the timing and nature of the announcement were opportunistic, as I already state in the post you quoted. But, if our insiders are to be believed, there seems to be no legitimate basis for the claim that such a retheme wasn't already in the works, at least as far as Disneyland is concerned.

Yes sir you're not wrong, but someone on the outside looking in - the average disney park goer - wouldn't know this. They would understandably think this idea came from that petition.

 

[seabreezept813]

The visual aspect of Coco is something I’d like to see in Mexico. However, the music and characters of the Three Caballeros really appeals to me more than the same components of Coco. I also think Three Caballeros is a better choice given that the setting of the film is the real country.

If I was in charge of redesigning a hypothetical attraction, I’d feature real Mexican architecture and landmarks, with the music from Three Cabs, Panchito as a host, and a Day of the Dead section based on Coco. Not sure it’d fit the foot print, but it’s an armchair Blue Sky idea.

Too bad they just don’t build the Brazil pavilion. Three cabs could go there and Coco in Mexico.