A Terror-rific Spirited 13th (ToT fans have lots to fear)...

[Brer Oswald]

Smarter idea which would've made sense was to change Pandora to a full fledge Zootopia...a little too late for that.

We could still see that in the north east corner of Animal Kingdom. Replace Rafikis train ride with a train ride into Zootopia like in the beginning of the movie.

 

[RSoxNo1]

This line of thinking is the problem. When any attraction is viewed as being sacrosanct, all objectivity and rationality goes out the window. As I've said before, it makes perfect sense to use GoTG in ToT at DHS. Twilight Zone belongs in a rest home.

Alright, so per you all attractions should be replaced. I look forward to your reign as head decision maker where Pirates of the Caribbean, Haunted Mansion, Spaceship Earth, Splash Mountain, Jungle Cruise, It's a Small World, Space Mountain, Thunder Mountain and many others are replaced with new and exciting intellectual properties.

There must be something about the name Phil where you're downright insistent on messing up the parks. @jt04, is your name Phil?

 

[RSoxNo1]

Wow some people never get out do they? "I'm in Hollywood" ? Wow, no you aren't. Hollywood is a bit more gritty to say the least.

"The Hollywood that never was, and always will be" remains one of the best concepts for a park ever created. They pulled it off w/Hollywood Boulevard and Sunset Boulevard and then it went south (technically Southwest).

 

[Pi on my Cake]

We could still see that in the north east corner of Animal Kingdom. Replace Rafikis train ride with a train ride into Zootopia like in the beginning of the movie.

That would actually be really cool! my big problem with zootopia in animal kingdom has been that I don't want a modern city plopped into the park. But having it take over Rafiki with a train ride to it would separate it from the jungle area. they can even walk the whole thing in. From the inside, those walls are just the zootopia skyline, but from the outside its green and natural looking so it will blend into the jungle and. I still don't think a zootpia land is what they should go with (I love the movie and it is certainly an inviting world, O just dont feel like that movie is "timeless." It feels very modern and that doesn't always lead to a lot of staying power), but if they did it this way, i wouldn't mind at all!

 

[RSoxNo1]

There are other IPs out there. As has been so skillfully demonstrated at TDS. Isn't everyone always saying we want WDW to be more like TDS?

And IPs are creeping into TDS potentially diminishing the cohesive themes of that park. Any other things you have no knowledge of that you'd like to further comment on?

 

[RSoxNo1]

Do you consider the ToT at TDS a failure? I think it is by far the best tower out there. Doesn't look shoehorned at all.

Have you been on it? Great theme, great story in a great land. But ultimately it's the DCA ride profile. DHS's is still superior.

 

[RSoxNo1]

The truth will remain long after I am gone. And a few will still proclaim it. For instance, they will explain that the ToT at TDS is the best and most cohesive of all the towers and it has nothing to do with the TZ IP.

Keep in mind it was purpose built for the area that it was in. As was DCA's Tower and as was DHS's Tower. The Twilight Zone story wouldn't have made much sense in the New York section of TDS's American Waterfront.

 

[ogryn]

Hearing Steve Jobs talk about Sales & Marketing people makes me think of the current state WDW is in: https://twitter.com/ow/status/792284416286523392

 

[GoofGoof]

"The Hollywood that never was, and always will be" remains one of the best concepts for a park ever created. They pulled it off w/Hollywood Boulevard and Sunset Boulevard and then it went south (technically Southwest).

This^^^

 

[RSoxNo1]

It appears they are motivated to make the most fan pleasing attractions possible. At least judging by reaction and buzz around things like Frozen and Pandora and Star Wars Land etc.

No, they are motivated to make the most marketable attractions, hence the push for intellectual properties. If they were interested in making the best attractions they would pay more attention to thematic fit.

 

[Quinnmac000]

That would actually be really cool! my big problem with zootopia in animal kingdom has been that I don't want a modern city plopped into the park. But having it take over Rafiki with a train ride to it would separate it from the jungle area. they can even walk the whole thing in. From the inside, those walls are just the zootopia skyline, but from the outside its green and natural looking so it will blend into the jungle and. I still don't think a zootpia land is what they should go with (I love the movie and it is certainly an inviting world, O just dont feel like that movie is "timeless." It feels very modern and that doesn't always lead to a lot of staying power), but if they did it this way, i wouldn't mind at all!

It fits the theme of animal kingdom and would allow them to include animals such as polar bears in an artic region, create a walk through rain forest with rain that makes sense, and desert animals in an easy theme that makes sense and is attached to an IP.

 

[MagicHappens1971]

"The Hollywood that never was, and always will be" remains one of the best concepts for a park ever created. They pulled it off w/Hollywood Boulevard and Sunset Boulevard and then it went south (technically Southwest).

Although DHS has never had a ton of attractions, it's always been my second favorite park. I completely agree that "The Hollywood that never was, and always will be" is one of the best concepts for a theme park ever.

 

[Beholder]

Why wouldn't the Disney parks be world heritage sites? Disneyland is one of the most striking, most American, most famous expressions of the 20th century USA.

In Vienna they have an amusement park that dates back to 1766, some attractions date back to the 19th century. The Wurstelprater, it is considered a cultural institute, part of the cultural landscape of Vienna.


If Disney destroys its heritage, it runs the risk of losing its status as America's default amusement park, a cultural mainstay like apple pie and baseball, a rite of passage for many. Universal would wish it had the history and heritage of Disney, meanwhile Disney for its part wantonly destroys it to resemble Universal more.

Well said, well said.
I've always thought that the post Walt inheritors of "Disney" are more in effect, caretakers, rather than the career minded profit centric CEO's we have now. Breathing life into a legacy and quietly and efficiently bringing new ways to tell timeless stories is the hallmark of what I would consider responsible stewardship. As you say, much like Superman, apple pie, and fireworks, Disney is indeed part of our culture, good or bad, it's part of the American identity.

 

[RSoxNo1]

The last ten pages or so are dumb.
Energy is just as untouchable to me as the tower. And more so if it were redone along its original lines. I prefer Marvel in DHS over Future World.

GotG Tower is akin to 'Jeopardy Energy', it leaves a certain base more or less intact. GotG in EPCOT will be Horizons all over again, razing perhaps the second most iconic structure of EPCOT.

I disagree with the premise on Energy, but that's just my opinion. My objection to Guardians in Epcot is that it's a bad fit. What's weird is that prior to the Guardians of the Tower rumor, most of us were on board with the new direction of DHS. The park was broken and they were making positive steps to fix it. Then they got greedy and wanted to mess up one of the few things that were good about it.

With Epcot, I think many people were fearful of the future of that park already and Guardians going to Future World just further ecarcabated that. While I don't like it, I'd rather have Guardians replace Energy than Tower. It's largely because I've already conceded that EPCOT Center is dead and that EPCOT will become the new disjointed "catch all" park. Sure I wish they would actually define themes and park identities, and give things a proper home. But current management has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt they're either incapable of or unwilling to do that.

There are ways to drive attendance at all four parks in ways that are logical and thematically appropriate. When proper theming is observed it increases the overall guest experience which can only be favorable to Disney's bottom line. Disney seems to be willing to spend money now, but non-creatives are still making too many "creative" decisions. That's the problem and until it stops, theme will continue to be an after thought.

 

[Beholder]

I disagree with the premise on Energy, but that's just my opinion. My objection to Guardians in Epcot is that it's a bad fit. What's weird is that prior to the Guardians of the Tower rumor, most of us were on board with the new direction of DHS. The park was broken and they were making positive steps to fix it. Then they got greedy and wanted to mess up one of the few things that were good about it.

With Epcot, I think many people were fearful of the future of that park already and Guardians going to Future World just further ecarcabated that. While I don't like it, I'd rather have Guardians replace Energy than Tower. It's largely because I've already conceded that EPCOT Center is dead and that EPCOT will become the new disjointed "catch all" park. Sure I wish they would actually define themes and park identities, and give things a proper home. But current management has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt they're either incapable of or unwilling to do that.

There are ways to drive attendance at all four parks in ways that are logical and thematically appropriate. When proper theming is observed it increases the overall guest experience which can only be favorable to Disney's bottom line. Disney seems to be willing to spend money now, but non-creatives are still making too many "creative" decisions. That's the problem and until it stops, theme will continue to be an after thought.

I agree with your position relative to GotG and EPCOT, after Nemo and Frozen, it's all pointless now to pretend any original intent still exists. Other than Spaceship Earth and the Land pavilion, it's all random place settings.

It's funny, using the "it's outdated" argument, ToT was past it's due date before the first rider ever experienced it, considering it was intentionally designed in a 30's-40's time period. It's timeless, as DESIGNED.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Just some thoughts since some people, including some I respect like @marni1971, are hearing conflicting information.

Went back to the two top sources on this. I asked last night what percentage chance do they give of it happening. After talking or corresponding with them, I'm saying the chances are over 70%. If you recall, when I (and I alone much like when I released the entire SDL lineup, or Georgie K taking over at WDW or, in my LP.com days, Harry Potter taking over Amity and a train connecting both UNI parks, or SDL not opening on time and the reasons why or ... well, I just like patting myself on the tushie when I don't have a fanboi minion here to do it for me!) broke the GotG news to start with I gave a 90% chance in Anaheim and a 50% chance in O-Town. See how that worked out.

Oh, and please tell my fans in the Twitverse that I never said Disney was getting a fifth gate (ever) or attractions based on the Disney Villains etc. And that Disney did indeed search for potential buyers/investors for P&R beginning in 2007 or right after Bob Iger became comfortable as the head of TWDC. The fact it didn't happen and Disney didn't put out a press release in no way changes things. Truth is truth, even if it happens in a forest with no one around to see or hear.

Also, I don't know who (maybe @WDWFigment or @RSoxNo1? was someone familiar ...) said my batting average was about .500. While that would be impressive, indeed, the reality is it's much closer to .900. And when I am wrong about something, almost -- but not -- everytime, it is because decisions change late in the game. If I had been posting on a Disney site in 1972 and was gushing about the amazing Thunder Mesa expansion coming to the MK, ask yourself would I have been wrong? It really is that simple.

I am trying to ascertain why people still are pushing the Guardians to UoE deal and without any solid info all I can do is speculate that some folks' employment might ride on whether their version of misplacing Iger and Chappie's prized IP gets selected. Believe me, I am not saying plans don't exist. I have seen them. But that means nothing. The WRE had plans ... so did the DVC resort where the Four Seasons sits. Both of those examples were much further developed than any dancing trees at EPCOT when the plug got pulled.

It also may help if you get some basic fundamental points. For instance, despite how negative reactions have been to DCA's makeover, the sales at DCA's Tower gift shop have more than tripled this fall. Again, I'll let an 'insider' take over the narrative:

"Colglazier and Chapek were both caught off guard by the blowback on the Guardians remake, but it's important to remember these are two men who have no real passion for the theme park industry, they very rarely visit Disneyland in their time off, and they have no personal experience working in a Disney theme park with paying guests. They simply have no idea what Disney theme park customers like, and they have no gut instinct to go off of when it's time to decide on something like this. This decision was based on IP investment and potential future merch sales, and not much more. WDI is happy to go along because a big E Ticket project like this allows Imagineers to stay on the payroll, pad their portfolio, and prevent themselves from being laid off just after a new theme park opens (Shanghai). Disneyland Resort attendance and spending has continued to be up over forecasts by low double digit percentages since the 60th ended in September; the truth is Anaheim's numbers continue to be wildly successful while WDW is stagnant. Those big Anaheim numbers continue to thrill Chapek and make Colglazier feel he's making the right decisions, regardless of what the fans are saying online."

How many UoE "Ellen's Final Adventure' shirts do you think they can sell? How many mugs, pins and keychains? How much work would the design studio need? You pull a ToT GotG makeover and all that work is covered.

Everything comes down to $$$ with Disney (RapidFill anyone?), like most companies. You may look at EPCOT's laughably outdated Future World attractions like they exist for satire. But all Disney sees is that EPCOT is phenomenally profitable and busy due to its food, beverage and merchandise sales. There is absolutely nothing at wrong with EPCOT if you look at it from a strictly financial viewpoint. The staleness and emptiness are all washed away by the vomit of tourists and bumpkins who have spent the day drinking around the world.

Now, look at plans for adding GotG to EPCOT at a cost that would make RSRs look cheap by comparison.

Now, look at DHS from Disney's perspective. It is a construction zone and despite any public bravado is getting hammered in the Guest satisfaction surveys and Disney is giving people freebies left and right when they complain that the park is a construction pit with nothing to do.

Now, think about how little it will cost to reskin the ToT. Look at Anaheim for the simplicity of it all. Ask yourself if you really think Disney wants to spent over $400 million to build an attraction at EPCOT or a tiny fraction of that to bring the GotG to DHS.

For everybody here who will be ******** about Tower leaving, think about all the newbies and one-and-dones who aren't expecting ToT to exist to begin with. They'll all be running to that park for the new Marvel ride. Sad and pathetic, but also the reality.

You are working in Burbank. You have no experience or passion for theme parks. You care. But you care in a certain construct. Why would you ever pick EPCOT and largely new build that would take years versus this no-brainer? You know you wouldn't. The fact these people shouldn't be in positions to make such decisions is another matter entirely.

Finally, want to be crystal clear, Disney CAN use GotG in WDW. In any park. And they can well after they make any appearance in any Avengers films. I know people get hooked on that point. But the lawyers on both side have gone over this. We wouldn't be having this discussion at all if they couldn't.

My site only tracks the Disney World rumors and while you've had some misses, historically you're still clearly tapped in to the Disney company. What I will say though (And it very well may just be circumstantial), you've seemingly had more accurate information on Disney and themed entertainment projects outside of Walt Disney World in recent years.

Having said that, when you post information I trust that it comes from a good source. I do feel though that with you and @marni1971 having conflicting information I have to wonder if Disney is trying to squash a rumor source. More likely, I suspect that because the project isn't necessarily happening tomorrow, they haven't truly made a decision making both options still possible.

 

[Phil12]

Please go back and read what I actually wrote. I am not a doom and gloom person here who loses their mind over every little change and constantly complains. If anything I lean towards the pixie dust side still. I didn't have a problem with adding Starbucks in the Bakery on Main Street, I don't have any issues with Avatar in AK (looking forward to it opening soon), I enjoyed a cold beer at BoG in MK (and enjoyed using the Tangled Toilets just after) I actually think FLE overall is pretty decent (Mine Train is a little short but still a huge upgrade over Snow White), I never got the love for Mr Toad (Pooh is a better fit even if the ride itself could be a little better) and I have even come somewhat around to various IPs in EPCOT World Showcase (although I think Frozen would have been better served with a bigger ride with more capacity). You have to be careful in these discussions with quickly labeling all posters as being one extreme or the other. There are plenty of folks here somewhere in the middle. Not everyone here is complaining just to complain. Not in this case.

All that being said, I don't view this as a minor change. It's not just the ride but a whole land being impacted. This isn't just adding Groot in a bell hop costume to the end of the ride. I never said ANY change they made would be an abomination, just this particular change. If they removed everything Twilight Zone IP from the ride but kept the ride itself and the exterior mostly the same I would be more on board. There are probably some creative ways to work a backstory without using the Twilight Zone IP. Then the ride would be "freshened up" without defacing the iconic show building and destroying a whole land that actually works in a park in desperate need of more of everything.

The Tower itself is also a park icon. It's what you think of when you think of the park. It anchors an entire land and that land and the ride are really well themed. As close as we have to perfect at WDW. When you walk down the street towards the tower it looks like it's been there for years and it belongs there. This crazy eye soar they want to build will be an abomination in that setting. I just don't see how you can think adding a current IP to the existing attraction "works well". I know some here are critical of Disney for having too much focus on creating backstories for every little thing (like a shopping mall), but how do they explain the existence of this "GoTG building" in classic Hollywood.

As you requested, I reread what you wrote. I still don't think of the ToT as a park icon. As a matter of fact, the DHS icon mess needs to be addressed in the new build.

All the other parks have one single icon per park. It's clear in each park. In DHS you had the water tower, then the Chinese Theater and then the BAH. And Disney itself created this mess. And yes even the ToT was used to advertise the park and play the icon role. It just goes to show how badly DHS needs a central icon.

By changing the appearance of the ToT it would help to erase the old image and allow DHS to create a new icon for the park that would not be confused with all the previous "icon of the month club" attempts. The current ToT looks like a horror hotel that Disney made to compete with Universal.

But moving on from the icon problem, I see no reason why the building would really need to be changed. I don't think it would be a problem for the GotG crew to show up in a 1930's Hollywood hotel and save any number of galaxies, universes, time warps and other dimensions from total destruction. And I'm sure that both Groot and Rocket Raccoon could carry out such a mission with good humor as well and make it all family friendly.

So there you have it. We can change the appearance of the building or leave it the same and that solves the appearance problems. As for the Twilight Zone problem, I've always wondered how a 1960's TV show doesn't ruin the "theme" of a 1930's hotel. The answer is of course that people will overlook anything if it fits their notion.

Therefore if a 1950's TV show can show up in a 1930's hotel, then it's not a stretch for GotG to show up. Time travel is common place with the new iPhone and android devices. All the kids know that.

 

[RSoxNo1]

At least Avatar was replacing LITERALLY NOTHING!

It was replacing a themed area whose biggest attraction was relocated. But to many people Avatar was replacing an alternative concept (either Mysterious Island or Beastly Kingdom)

 

[The Empress Lilly]

It's funny, using the "it's outdated" argument, ToT was past it's due date before the first rider ever experienced it, considering it was intentionally designed in a 30's-40's time period. It's timeless, as DESIGNED.

Very much so. Fifties B&W tv was not exactly hot property in the mid-nineties.

The TZ was chosen not because it was timeless, but precisely because it wasn't, because it was a product of a bygone era. Just as Golden Era Hollywood. For that reason too, the TZ chosen is not the colour tv mid-eighties series, but the vintage one.

 

[Pi on my Cake]

It fits the theme of animal kingdom and would allow them to include animals such as polar bears in an artic region, create a walk through rain forest with rain that makes sense, and desert animals in an easy theme that makes sense and is attached to an IP.

Yeah, but all those animals are housed in a 2016 city, use cheesey apps, have iPod minis, and worship Shakira (jokes and visuals that are great now, but will be incredibly dated in 5 or so years). You can't have any actual animal exhibits because the plot of the movie is that the animals acting like regular animals is bad.

I think the movie was really good (I had some problems with it, but they were mostly minor). But I think it's definitely not the slam dunk for animal kingdom some people think it is.

BUT I think the idea of it being separated from the rest of the park and taking over Rafiki is great. It can be a big city without messing up the rest of the park visually. It can be like Animal Kingdom's Toon Town.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I agree with your position relative to GotG and EPCOT, after Nemo and Frozen, it's all pointless now to pretend any original intent still exists. Other than Spaceship Earth and the Land pavilion, it's all random place settings.

It's funny, using the "it's outdated" argument, ToT was past it's due date before the first rider ever experienced it, considering it was intentionally designed in a 30's-40's time period. It's timeless, as DESIGNED.

I'd actually add Test Track to the EPCOT Center grouping. The ride itself feels a bit too sterile to me, but the preshow vehicle design and post show area scream EPCOT Center to me.