A Spirited Perfect Ten

DC0703

Well-Known Member
Comparing them based on frozen recent and quick success is a very myopic, and disney-like view on things. Star wars is a long proven successful IP.

The frozen sequel numbers will not touch their first movie. It's an extremely bright flash in the pan.

Star wars box office numbers may not touch frozen but that doesn't make it less successful. Big picture man, it's not rocket surgery.

I agree with you on this one. Frozen was a massive success, but it wasn't a movie with built in sequel potential. To be honest, Disney's track record with sequels to it's major animated films has not been stellar (with the exception of Toy Story). With Frozen, I fear that they may end up with something that feels tacked on, but we'll see.

Star Wars is a much bigger IP for Disney right now, in terms of potential. In addition to the upcoming movie this December, which is easily the most awaited film of this year, they plan to roll out a steady stream of sequels, side stories and other films in the Star Wars universe. That is something Frozen will never be able to do.

Marvel is like that as well with The Avengers and the individual movies (both released and upcoming) from each of the heroes featured. Much more long term money making potential.
 

Phil12

Well-Known Member
I wonder that as well. It wouldn't be hard to get some malware on anyone's machine and explore what's on there. The Chinese are known to stomp out all criticisms. It's within the realm of possibility.
While possible it is still unlikely. When you hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras. I know that '74 is very careful in his selection of words and phrases. Therefore his choice of the most remote and dubious explanation for the problem suggests other motives. May the force be with you.
 

twebber55

Well-Known Member
I'm a huge Star Wars fan, but sometimes being a fan can turn someone blind to a potential reality.

It's not a guarantee that Star Wars will be any more successful than other IPs in DHS. It depends on if they do it right.

There is already a Star Wars presence in DHS, yet we are all calling for billion dollar expansions. If Star Wars brings people to the park, why isn't it doing so now?

While I think it's crazy to say Frozen has a bigger following than an almost 40 year old property that spans generations, it's the quality of the land that will bring people in, not the Star Wars IP itself
Couldnt agree more
Hence my sig
 

wogwog

Well-Known Member
Now I really think they only have one worker with tools at the MK. 7 Dwarfs came back up and now Space is down. Hope the repair person has a golf cart.;) Feel for the family that had PotC, 7 Dwarfs, and Space as fast pass selections today they made many weeks ago.....

It is not raining so they can go to the 3:00 parade.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I'm a huge Star Wars fan, but sometimes being a fan can turn someone blind to a potential reality.

It's not a guarantee that Star Wars will be any more successful than other IPs in DHS. It depends on if they do it right.

There is already a Star Wars presence in DHS, yet we are all calling for billion dollar expansions. If Star Wars brings people to the park, why isn't it doing so now?

While I think it's crazy to say Frozen has a bigger following than an almost 40 year old property that spans generations, it's the quality of the land that will bring people in, not the Star Wars IP itself
Star Wars cannot really be done on the level of Harry Potter. The locations are too vast but also not overly defined beyond a few select places. The way to handle this was Star Tours, and it's recent update with even more places never ignited a lot of excitement. It showed that just because it is built doesn't mean people will come. And maybe, with not being very much about the locations, Star Wars isn't that great a fit for a theme park.
 

NeXuS1000

Well-Known Member
Star Wars cannot really be done on the level of Harry Potter. The locations are too vast but also not overly defined beyond a few select places. The way to handle this was Star Tours, and it's recent update with even more places never ignited a lot of excitement. It showed that just because it is built doesn't mean people will come. And maybe, with not being very much about the locations, Star Wars isn't that great a fit for a theme park.



Star Wars has lots of great locations, and they're easy to expand upon. Just because adding small scenes in a ride refresh didn't create much excitement (it's a refresh of an existing ride, what did you expect) doesn't mean that some of those locations translated to a physical space wouldn't create tons of excitement.

Star Wars has plenty, plenty of material to build theme park locations around, be it indoor or outdoor. Only talent and budget sets the constraints here.
 

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
Comparing them based on frozen recent and quick success is a very myopic, and disney-like view on things. Star wars is a long proven successful IP.

The frozen sequel numbers will not touch their first movie. It's an extremely bright flash in the pan.

Star wars box office numbers may not touch frozen but that doesn't make it less successful. Big picture man, it's not rocket surgery.
I just hope they dont cheapen out and put out a PLANES type release.
where the lack of quality is clearly visible in the script and quite a few scenes.
 

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
People scoff at networks like RT as pure Russian propaganda (not disputing the notion), but they fail to understand that the vast majority of press in this country is bought and paid for by the corporations of this country. I read an interesting piece about the NBC News debacle and among the buried nuggets was that Brian Williams as managing editor of the newscast was regularly snowballing stories that he deemed to be too controversial or provocative. Several of the true serious journalists that were working at NBC have left due to the killing of stories. You have no major sources of discernible free press on television when each and every network is owned by a corporation with many conflicting interests. I'd suggest following McClatchy as they continue to produce some of the investigative journalism in the country and have papers with circulation of a few million per day. Unfortunately, they're an anomaly today.
As a thirdy aparty viewer... I see CNN and NBC international news as much as pro US propaganda as RT for Russian ones.
both sides love to skew to make their point higher than the other.

Big picture man, it's not rocket surgery.
Dont you mean Rocket Science?
 

alphac2005

Well-Known Member
As a thirdy aparty viewer... I see CNN and NBC international news as much as pro US propaganda as RT for Russian ones.
both sides love to skew to make their point higher than the other.

I agree wholeheartedly. U.S. domestic news channels many times simply act like cheerleaders and fail to objectively look at issues. International news is on life support here... if that. As an American, I choose to watch and read news from TV channels and publications abroad to get an much fuller and accurate view of the world.
 

spacemt354

Chili's
Sorry, but that's the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time.

Star Wars has lots of great locations, and they're easy to expand upon. Just because adding small scenes in a ride refresh didn't create much excitement (it's a refresh of an existing ride, what did you expect) doesn't mean that some of those locations translated to a physical space wouldn't create tons of excitement.

Star Wars has plenty, plenty of material to build theme park locations around, be it indoor or outdoor. Only talent and budget sets the constraints here.

Great location doesn't mean great cohesion. And that's what a theme park needs. Not an eclectic variety of terrains that don't fit together.

Lord of the rings has great locations as well. Where is its land in a theme park?

Sure Star Wars has plenty of matierial. And yes I would love to see a fully fleshed out hoth or Endor, etc. But in order to make a cohesive land, you have to pick one planet and flesh it out. Not a much of random planets mixed together. It wouldn't make sense.
 

TalkingHead

Well-Known Member
Star Wars cannot really be done on the level of Harry Potter. The locations are too vast but also not overly defined beyond a few select places. The way to handle this was Star Tours, and it's recent update with even more places never ignited a lot of excitement. It showed that just because it is built doesn't mean people will come. And maybe, with not being very much about the locations, Star Wars isn't that great a fit for a theme park.

I know there's a lot of excitement for SW coming to the parks, but the practicalities seem problematic. Desert planet, swamp planet, ice planet... Not sure those are as park-friendly or as eye-catching as antique "hidden" shopping district in London or Scottish village with castle school on the edge of town.

Short of building a Death Star or some of its interiors, there's not a lot of places I'd want to explore in the SW universe. If I want to see a swamp, I'll go to one of the cypress swamps that hasn't been destroyed by Florida developers. I guess Mos Eisley would be a setting you could explore, but it's not very whimsical.

Maybe that's it. The SW settings that I'm familiar with don't have much whimsy which the Potter settings have ample amounts of. SW will be successful when it's built, I'm sure, but I'm still skeptical about how it's implemented.
 

NeXuS1000

Well-Known Member
Great location doesn't mean great cohesion. And that's what a theme park needs. Not an eclectic variety of terrains that don't fit together.

Lord of the rings has great locations as well. Where is its land in a theme park?

Sure Star Wars has plenty of matierial. And yes I would love to see a fully fleshed out hoth or Endor, etc. But in order to make a cohesive land, you have to pick one planet and flesh it out. Not a much of random planets mixed together. It wouldn't make sense.

Agreed, but that's not what I said. I'm just stating that there's tons of raw material from SW to work on for great locations and theme park areas. Maybe they could pick two central themes for DHS, and some of them could transition, e.g. a Tatooine area with a Mos Eisley indoor area and the entrance to a pod-racing attraction, as an example.

With some decent creativity, you can make some smooth transitions. Without room for theme-to-theme transitions, we would have to be bound with single-land theme parks. SW is easily big enough to encompass two or more lands at DHS.
 

twebber55

Well-Known Member
Star Wars cannot really be done on the level of Harry Potter. The locations are too vast but also not overly defined beyond a few select places. The way to handle this was Star Tours, and it's recent update with even more places never ignited a lot of excitement. It showed that just because it is built doesn't mean people will come. And maybe, with not being very much about the locations, Star Wars isn't that great a fit for a theme park.
i agree....im not sure what location can be done or will be done same with LOTR...HP was perfect for this...there are two quintessential places DA and Hogsmeade, both done wonderfully
im sure it will be well done but maybe not to the level of HP or Carsland for that matter
 

spacemt354

Chili's
Agreed, but that's not what I said. I'm just stating that there's tons of raw material from SW to work on for great locations and theme park areas. Maybe they could pick two central themes for DHS, and some of them could transition, e.g. a Tatooine area with a Mos Eisley indoor area and the entrance to a pod-racing attraction, as an example.

With some decent creativity, you can make some smooth transitions. Without room for theme-to-theme transitions, we would have to be bound with single-land theme parks. SW is easily big enough to encompass two or more lands at DHS.

The problem with your logic is if Star Wars takes over two or more lands in DHS, it would tip the balance scale of IPs and attractions in the park.

Harry Potter works because not only are the lands in two separate parks, they don't overpower the parks they are in. If you put two Star Wars lands in an already small DHS, you've now tipped the park scale.

We can armchair imagineer all we want to say what we would like to see in a Star Wars land(s). But if a Star Wars land ever gets built, it's inevitable that some part of the passionate fan base will be annoyed that their favorite planet isn't being included. You'll never be able to create a Star Wars presence big enough to please all fans. So with that in mind, I would veer away from trying to include transitions that are going to be very abrupt, and just make the best land you can.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom