A Spirited Valentine ...

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Day-to-day comparisons show Cars 3 and Transformers 5 trailing their predecssors in the US (the latter by a very wide margin), neither likely to make $200 million domestically, just like Pirates 5. Pirates 5 will also probably make $200 million less at the foreign box office than the last one and Despicable Me 3 just opened in the US with a total lower than 2. This does not get into how GotG2 made less than Disney hoped,

Wow, the goalposts moved so fast in this paragraph that I got whiplash! ;)

But, in earnest, if you're going to make the point that sequels make less money and then list a bunch of examples, you can not include GotG Vol 2. It made more money than Vol 1. Saying that it made less than what was hoped is not the same thing as making less.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
I couldn't disagree more. Some argue Horizons is the greatest dark ride ever built. See the article http://themeparkuniversity.com/disney/top-10-reasons-epcots-horizons-greatest-dark-ride-time/

The "too much sponsor money" argument is silly.

I understand that you don't like the ride, that is fine. However, it was a very good ride if you liked long, immersive dark rides. A ride that included a suspended RV that took you above the sets, 2 OmniMax screens (kind of a mini-Soarin' experience) and a choose your own ending simulator at the end. It really was unique in so many ways.
The choose your own ending part was really cool. It was something I never experienced in a ride at the time and it stuck with me over the years. I'm a big fan of CoP too and Horizons had some similarities or at least the first half did. I kinda felt like it took CoP one step further. The ride vehicles were pretty cool too with the way they hung down.
I actually have to side a bit with @Phil12 here. I've often said that classic EPCOT Center did suffer from having too much of the same type of experience. Yes, the original attraction lineup was extremely well done individually but there was too much sameness with all the rides basically being slower moving rides with a similar conceit of some lecturing and then some hopeful aspirations.

I also think that Horizons tends to be overrated among the classic Epcot rides. I don't bemoan its loss the way I do World of Motion or especially Journey into Imagination. Those two were rides that I think would be viewed as irreplaceable classics if they had survived to today (though at least Test Track is a good replacement). The choose your own ending was novel (though what did you get -- a dreaded screen!) but I think that the ride would have definitely needed to be replaced or significantly modified as to be unrecognizable. I think the bigger issue is that its replacement just isn't that good despite it's lofty intentions and can't even be ridden by many; hopefully the updates will make M:S a better quality attraction -- or maybe someday they'll do a full blown space pavilion that is worthy for the park.
I acknowledge that as much as I enjoyed the ride it probably wouldn't have held the interest of today's guests. Not enough action, too long for people's "Twiterfied" attention spans. If it did survive it would be struggling to remain relevant and would exist based mostly on nostalgia like CoP does. If Spaceship Earth wasn't in the giant ball it would probably be gone now too.
 

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
I know Spirit doesn't like to talk about box office figures, but "sequel fatigue" is something BOM has mentioned repeatedly, and since a mostly tentpole release schedule is what Disney's entire Studio strategy revolves around, it's worth mentioning.

Day-to-day comparisons show Cars 3 and Transformers 5 trailing their predecssors in the US (the latter by a very wide margin), neither likely to make $200 million domestically, just like Pirates 5. Pirates 5 will also probably make $200 million less at the foreign box office than the last one and Despicable Me 3 just opened in the US with a total lower than 2. This does not get into how GotG2 made less than Disney hoped, or how Furious 8 made less than 6 & 7 in the US, despite doing massive business eleswhere. At a certain point, people get tired of seeing the same thing over and over again, and then there's a scramble to get something else like King Arthur off the ground, or a revival of Independence Day, and we've seen how that goes.

Disney used to have a much better balance of lower budget, sometimes "adult" fare and major releases, and even some series like The Mighty Ducks didn't cost $200 million a piece to make. They should look into doing that more, because outside of Marvel and Star Wars, nothing is a guarantee. Not even Pixar anymore.

I think an argument can just be made towards "bad movie" fatigue, rather than an issue with purely sequels. The domestic audience has gotten wise and rewards movies accordingly these days.

International is a completely different story, but I wonder if we have many examples this year of movies critically well reviewed that severely underperformed expectations versus panned movies that did not disappoint domestically?
 

truecoat

Well-Known Member
This biggest problem for Pandora and it's future prospects is the IP used. It's a beautifully designed land and the rides are fine but at the end of the day it's not a place any of us dream about nor is it based on characters anyone has an emotional connection with ... so it's a beautiful land but it lacks that extra piece that makes it overwhelming, lasting, or impactful.

That's exactly why Hogsmeade and Diagon Allet work and why Star Wars Land will work ... it's about that extra emotional connection which right now Avatar doesn't have so at best it's just a really wonderfully designed experience, superficial but not transformative.

I look at Avatar as something like a first round draft pick. You really can't evaluate one until 3-4 years down the road. After the 5th Avatar movie opens and people still don't think of Avatar the same way as Potter or Star Wars, I'd agree. It's too soon to compare them as IP as both Potter and Star Wars have many movies or books and a history of success.

If they only made one Harry Potter movie, you might be saying the same thing about Potter land. That first HP movie is not that good.
 

NearTheEars

Well-Known Member
I think an argument can just be made towards "bad movie" fatigue, rather than an issue with purely sequels. The domestic audience has gotten wise and rewards movies accordingly these days.

International is a completely different story, but I wonder if we have many examples this year of movies critically well reviewed that severely underperformed expectations versus panned movies that did not disappoint domestically?

I thought Cars 3 was just OK. Better than 2 and it managed to capture some of the magic of the original, but fell flat at the end. I don't want to spoil anything, and I might be called sexist, but I just didn't like the ending.

The whole film was setting you up to see see McQueen have one last hurrah, then boom! I just didn't feel invested enough in the new character to be excited for her to win. Yes it provided a twist, but I just felt shortchanged. Oh well, it's just a kids movie anyway.
 

Sue_Vongello

Well-Known Member
I look at Avatar as something like a first round draft pick. You really can't evaluate one until 3-4 years down the road. After the 5th Avatar movie opens and people still don't think of Avatar the same way as Potter or Star Wars, I'd agree. It's too soon to compare them as IP as both Potter and Star Wars have many movies or books and a history of success.

If they only made one Harry Potter movie, you might be saying the same thing about Potter land. That first HP movie is not that good.

I agree, which is why I had originally qualified the idea with "right now" ... sure the Avatar sequels could change everything. Maybe. But wow, has Sam Worthington been in anything else since? Yikes
 

Chef Mickey

Well-Known Member
The parks are largely a mess. For all the talk about story and theme, Disney throws it away all the time now for IP and merchandise. It's still why I will continue to say DAK is by far the best WDW theme park and one of the best anywhere. I have been saying for 15 years or more that the MK lands are largely meaningless and it is true. The other two parks are just messes.

That said, Pandora is a bad example to use. As much as I would have rather seen something unique, it will fit at DAK and be a very, very kewl addition.
Oh, so you mean the Tomorrowland Dance Party was NOT a great addition to Tomorrowland?

I mean, you could barely even hear the pounding bass inside the Carousel of Progress in the Fabulous 40s.
 

Chef Mickey

Well-Known Member
2 years ago, I estimated that Iger had undercapitalized his domestic theme parks to the tune of $2.5B over his first 9 years.

Updating that for the last 2 years, that number stands at $2.8B.

There's the distinct possibility that by the time all this spending is done, that deficit will be completely erased. :)
But has he/will he spend it on the right things? New Fantasyland, total miss. Frozen, miss. Pandora, seems to be a success. I certainly enjoyed it. All IP all the time, miss.

I want to like him, I really do. However, he's spent nearly nothing and when he has, he's missed until Pandora which JUST opened. In the meantime, he's ruined 2 parks by being an apathetic margin squeezer.
 

trainplane3

Well-Known Member
But has he/will he spend it on the right things? New Fantasyland, total miss. Frozen, miss. Pandora, seems to be a success. I certainly enjoyed it. All IP all the time, miss.

I want to like him, I really do. However, he's spent nearly nothing and when he has, he's missed until Pandora which JUST opened. In the meantime, he's ruined 2 parks by being an apathetic margin squeezer.
Honest question, was New Fantasyland considered a miss? For myself, I really don't hang around MK too much and actively avoid Fantasyland (literal human maze) as a whole so I really didn't see the public's reaction when it opened. Personally, it felt like the mess it made across the back of the park during construction wasn't worth the end result. I thought people loved it but again, no first hand experience there. Feel free to smack me with facts!
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
Happy to put money on this, Who is the bank? For the record this IS a bet I hope to lose, Because I don't confuse what I WANT to happen with what my personal analysis of a situation says will happen.
The forum will hold everyone accountable for this. I lost a similar bet to @Jimmy Thick and was happy to pay up. If we can make some money for a good cause with our petty arguments, then at least we can feel somewhat productive.
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
The choose your own ending part was really cool. It was something I never experienced in a ride at the time and it stuck with me over the years. I'm a big fan of CoP too and Horizons had some similarities or at least the first half did. I kinda felt like it took CoP one step further. The ride vehicles were pretty cool too with the way they hung down.

I acknowledge that as much as I enjoyed the ride it probably wouldn't have held the interest of today's guests. Not enough action, too long for people's "Twiterfied" attention spans. If it did survive it would be struggling to remain relevant and would exist based mostly on nostalgia like CoP does. If Spaceship Earth wasn't in the giant ball it would probably be gone now too.
I wonder if the chose your own ending conversation took place internally when coming up with spaceship earth's descent sequence. Execution was a bit off.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom