A Spirited Valentine ...

the.dreamfinder

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
29755038-1B16-4600-8049-D429ECE10A90.jpg

https://twitter.com/MarvelStudios/status/864622157313081344
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
njDizFan said:
Is that really true? Honestly I do not know whether most park attendees are theme park fans first of Disney film fans?(I'm sure there is a huge crossover-that's what branding is all about). Personally, I have very little interest in most Disney movies and outside of Fantasyland(where they belong) seeing the original IP on film certainly is not a prerequisite.
Click to expand...
It's definitely true of a lot of Disney park fans. You see it comments like "I expect to see Disney rides at Disney parks." They're primary interest is in what they already know as Disney.
 
Nj4mwc

Nj4mwc

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
It's definitely true of a lot of Disney park fans. You see it comments like "I expect to see Disney rides at Disney parks." They're primary interest is in what they already know as Disney.
Click to expand...
That's because the vast majority don't think of it as a theme park they think of it as Disney World, not Epcot, not animal kingdom and some think of it as that place with Harry Potter,
 
Kman101

Kman101

Well-Known Member
AJH219 said:
I am the same way. I have little to no interest in Disney/Pixar films (I still haven't seen Moana :eek:). The films that were already out during my 08 trip, when I became Disney park super fan, played no role in my blossoming love for the parks.
Click to expand...

I enjoy Disney movies but I'd label myself a Park fan first. But movies being rides has been a thing long before the IP/Franchise mandate. Peter Pan, Alice, Snow White ... but I do prefer when they make original attractions not based on movies. But movies used as rides has been around for decades.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Kman101 said:
I enjoy Disney movies but I'd label myself a Park fan first. But movies being rides has been a thing long before the IP/Franchise mandate. Peter Pan, Alice, Snow White ... but I do prefer when they make original attractions not based on movies. But movies used as rides has been around for decades.
Click to expand...
Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland and most of the other films that made up the first film-based attractions were box office disappoints and would never get an attraction built today.
 
Last edited:
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
the.dreamfinder said:
Do you see that as a messaging/education problem on Disney's part?
Click to expand...
I think it more has to do with a deep, widespread insecurity. As I previously stated, this type of attitude is not limited to just Disney park fans but fans of the wider amusements industry. There is a social acceptability in being a film nerd that does not exist when it comes to amusements. You can be a cool Star Wars nerd but you can't be a cool roller coaster nerd. We see aspects of the lack of social acceptance repeatedly on these very forums with threads where people ask if they tell others how often they visit, or people seeking advice on how to handle people who mock visiting Walt Disney World, and so forth.

The origins of such social lowliness are also not new. Marx was quite influential on sociology and architectural theory (and architects seem to be lousy sociologists and historians). To the intelligentsia, the spectacle of the amusement park was long ago cast as not just mere popular entertainment, but a sinister new form of "bread and circuses," the superstructure in a mesmerizing built form. Themed entertainment is also superficially in visual contrast to Modernism, which remains the dominant architectural philosophy of the day. Even Postmodernism, which is no longer in favor, never truly shook off the biases of such Modernism.

Amusements are not proper, sophisticated entertainments; they are not venues of "high" culture. The natural result of such conditions is Disney's own executive leadership being people who do not understand or appreciate theme entertainment. Even to Michael Eisner, who clearly enjoys himself at theme parks, they are silly amusements and thus his complete befuddlement regarding EPCOT Center.

This deep insecurity is also referenced in the notion of espacism. The theme parks are reframed as a place of comfort and a place to hide. Attachment to the amusement aspect would only further the social divide that create the need for such escape whereas attachment to the films provides its own reassurance of social acceptance.
 
Mike S

Mike S

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
I think it more has to do with a deep, widespread insecurity. As I previously stated, this type of attitude is not limited to just Disney park fans but fans of the wider amusements industry. There is a social acceptability in being a film nerd that does not exist when it comes to amusements. You can be a cool Star Wars nerd but you can't be a cool roller coaster nerd. We see aspects of the lack of social acceptance repeatedly on these very forums with threads where people ask if they tell others how often they visit, or people seeking advice on how to handle people who mock visiting Walt Disney World, and so forth.

The origins of such social lowliness are also not new. Marx was quite influential on sociology and architectural theory (and architects seem to be lousy sociologists and historians). To the intelligentsia, the spectacle of the amusement park was long ago cast as not just mere popular entertainment, but a sinister new form of "bread and circuses," the superstructure in a mesmerizing built form. Themed entertainment is also superficially in visual contrast to Modernism, which remains the dominant architectural philosophy of the day. Even Postmodernism, which is no longer in favor, never truly shook off the biases of such Modernism.

Amusements are not proper, sophisticated entertainments; they are not venues of "high" culture. The natural result of such conditions is Disney's own executive leadership being people who do not understand or appreciate theme entertainment. Even to Michael Eisner, who clearly enjoys himself at theme parks, they are silly amusements and thus his complete befuddlement regarding EPCOT Center.

This deep insecurity is also referenced in the notion of espacism. The theme parks are reframed as a place of comfort and a place to hide. Attachment to the amusement aspect would only further the social divide that create the need for such escape whereas attachment to the films provides its own reassurance of social acceptance.
Click to expand...
If I had a nickel for every time I heard, "why do you go so much? It's the same every time."
 
Last edited:
ford91exploder

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
matt9112 said:
Doubtful. People don't go backwards. It's easy to make life easier (legally) but to take things away? Much much harder....europeans would rather watch there countries burn than realize there lifestyle is unsustainable.
Click to expand...

Really just look how a once sacred holiday like Thanksgiving became just another shopping day in 5 years it will be a 'floating' holiday in 10 it will be on par with Arbor day.

The unions will do their corporate masters bidding because now union leadership has more in common with CEO's than the rank and file membership
 
njDizFan

njDizFan

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
I think it more has to do with a deep, widespread insecurity. As I previously stated, this type of attitude is not limited to just Disney park fans but fans of the wider amusements industry. There is a social acceptability in being a film nerd that does not exist when it comes to amusements. You can be a cool Star Wars nerd but you can't be a cool roller coaster nerd. We see aspects of the lack of social acceptance repeatedly on these very forums with threads where people ask if they tell others how often they visit, or people seeking advice on how to handle people who mock visiting Walt Disney World, and so forth.

The origins of such social lowliness are also not new. Marx was quite influential on sociology and architectural theory (and architects seem to be lousy sociologists and historians). To the intelligentsia, the spectacle of the amusement park was long ago cast as not just mere popular entertainment, but a sinister new form of "bread and circuses," the superstructure in a mesmerizing built form. Themed entertainment is also superficially in visual contrast to Modernism, which remains the dominant architectural philosophy of the day. Even Postmodernism, which is no longer in favor, never truly shook off the biases of such Modernism.

Amusements are not proper, sophisticated entertainments; they are not venues of "high" culture. The natural result of such conditions is Disney's own executive leadership being people who do not understand or appreciate theme entertainment. Even to Michael Eisner, who clearly enjoys himself at theme parks, they are silly amusements and thus his complete befuddlement regarding EPCOT Center.

This deep insecurity is also referenced in the notion of espacism. The theme parks are reframed as a place of comfort and a place to hide. Attachment to the amusement aspect would only further the social divide that create the need for such escape whereas attachment to the films provides its own reassurance of social acceptance.
Click to expand...
What suggestion could you offer that would bring themed entertainment into the world of high art( I would imagine the original Epcot Center came the closest to this status)? Could you ever see a theme park that did not pander to children and was designed for a more progressive/adult audience? Because I think that is the crux of the matter and the mindset of many people. Theme parks are for children and it's fantastical. Which is also a big issue with taking any type of speculative fiction seriously.
 
the.dreamfinder

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
Mission:BREAKOUT impressions from @imaginat1on on Twitter.

#GuardiansBREAKOUT on the inside looks… exactly how you’d expect it to look from the garbage WDI glue and stapled to the outside.
https://twitter.com/imaginat1on/status/864933471281487872
Click to expand...

#GuardiansBREAKOUT lobby has Figment & Matterhorn’s Harold (course) and all sorts of other eye-roll fan-service cheap “collector” theming.
https://twitter.com/imaginat1on/status/864933693604864000
Click to expand...

“Theming” an attraction using leftover props decaying in a warehouse is what I’d expect from Six Flags, not Disney. Come on… Demand better.
https://twitter.com/imaginat1on/status/864933809774514177
Click to expand...

#GuardiansBREAKOUT on-ride experience is 100% screenzzz. No more physical sets like ToT had. Cheap, easy, replaceable. The new mandate.
https://twitter.com/imaginat1on/status/864933982768513024
Click to expand...

#GuardiansBREAKOUT is WAY MORE intense/thrilling than ToT ever was. Elevator is CONSTANTLY in motion of some sort. Not in a good good way.
https://twitter.com/imaginat1on/status/864934074153975809
Click to expand...

#GuardiansBREAKOUT made several people physically ill who really used to love ToT. Here’s hoping it doesn’t happen to you…
https://twitter.com/imaginat1on/status/864934189665144832
Click to expand...

One bright spot in #GuardiansBREAKOUT is the raccoon AA in the library which people described as “extremely well done” and “very cool.”
https://twitter.com/imaginat1on/status/864934327133417472
Click to expand...

#GuardiansBREAKOUT continues the new WDI tradition of only needing one good AA figure in new rides. Pandora, Roaring Rapids, Toy Story…
https://twitter.com/imaginat1on/status/864934469689417728
Click to expand...

I’m not at all looking forward to #GuardiansBREAKOUT. Still haven’t seen the movies. I’ll ride it but meh… Not getting a lot of confidence.
https://twitter.com/imaginat1on/status/864934559644753920
Click to expand...

And that’s what I’ve got on #GuardiansBREAKOUT. Enjoy.
https://twitter.com/imaginat1on/status/864934715777728512
Click to expand...
 

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

Back
Top Bottom