News Announced: Mary Poppins Attraction in UK Pavilion

Rob562

Rob562

Well-Known Member
wserratore1963 said:
Being from Westchester myself, I would hope Disney could do much better than this. Yes it is deceptively faster than it looks.
Click to expand...

I find it sad that the horses on Rye's version no longer slide forward and back like originally designed. I believe the one at Cedar Point still does (though as I recall, it's not as fast at the one in Rye)

-Rob
 
trainplane3

trainplane3

Well-Known Member
Rob562 said:
I find it sad that the horses on Rye's version no longer slide forward and back like originally designed. I believe the one at Cedar Point still does (though as I recall, it's not as fast at the one in Rye)

-Rob
Click to expand...
Yes, Cedar Points still move but it's not as fast. There was a time when it was really slow but they seem to be pretty close to Rye now. Not as fast, but better then past years.
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
peter11435 said:
It’s needs a mixture of all. Major headliners AND a supporting cast of A-C attractions. The park is currently receiving two major attractions. It needs more of those but it also needs additional and updated minor attractions to be a well rounded experience. The end of your post is just you being ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I am well known for the ridiculous... But seriously... the park needs everything, and each pavilion needs it's headliner... I think the idea of a carousel as the attraction in the UK pavilion is dreadfully sad... No attraction at all like it has been is worse...
But I don't want to applaud TDO for very least they can do...but applaud them when they meet or exceed expectations...
We agree a mix of things are needed... and three attractions in 30 years is pretty dismal (FEA, Guardianss Of The Galaxy, and Ratatouille) especially since two of those are replacements as opposed to additions.
 
peter11435

peter11435

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
I am well known for the ridiculous... But seriously... the park needs everything, and each pavilion needs it's headliner... I think the idea of a carousel as the attraction in the UK pavilion is dreadfully sad... No attraction at all like it has been is worse...
But I don't want to applaud TDO for very least they can do...but applaud them when they meet or exceed expectations...
We agree a mix of things are needed... and three attractions in 30 years is pretty dismal (FEA, Guardianss Of The Galaxy, and Ratatouille) especially since two of those are replacements as opposed to additions.
Click to expand...
So you’re not counting soarin, test track or mission space?

The park needs everything and this is part of everything. If the only new item being added to Epcot was a UK spinner I would agree with you. But it’s not.
 
P

Purduevian

Well-Known Member
mikejs78 said:
That's a bit of a stretch. 30 years ago was 1989. Soarin? Mission Space? Test Track?
Click to expand...

30 years would also give you:
Honey I shrunk the Audience (1994)
Circle of Life (1995)
Ellen's Energy Adventure (1996)
Journey into imagination with Figment (2002)
Turtle Talk with Crush (2004)
Gran Fiesta Tour Staring the Three Caballeros (2007)
Sum of all Thrills (2009)
Agent P's World Showcase Adventure (2012)
Disney and Pixar short Film fest (2015)
The Guardians of the Galaxy-Awesome Mix Live! (2018)
 
Magenta Panther

Magenta Panther

Well-Known Member
Purduevian said:
Disney media is currently rehashing a lot of old media... but most of it doesn't have a large presence in the park. Aladdin has a spinner and meet and greet, Incredibles have a dance party, Ralph is non-existant, ect. On top of that there is an extreme back log of popular IP that could use a larger park presence such as Jungle book, Hercules, Tarzan, Mulan, Pocahontas, Stitch, Tangled, Moana, and many many more even if it isn't "current" IP. Finally Disney does have original movies still coming out such as Onward and Soul next year. Basically if they choose every ride to have a popular IP (and I get that strategy), they can do it without needing to get repetitive for a long long time.

Going back to Mary Poppins, the idea of this attraction kind of baffles me because
1)It is not a "hot" IP to get people to visit WDW/Epcot (box office numbers show that)
2)It is not going to be something unique you just have to go back to ride again (like Tot or Everest) based on the rumors
So why are they building it?
If they wanted to add a cheap C-ticket on that side of world showcase with an IP, put Big Hero 6 in Japan or move Aladdin into Morocco [I know neither of them fit perfectly, but they fit about as well as Frozen]
Click to expand...

So...is Peter Pan a "hot" IP? No? Let's rip out the ride then and put, oh I don't know, Loki in it! And hey, who cares about Snow White, that movie is SO old. Let's get rid of the Mine Ride and put in Ant-Man! Or maybe some Ewoks! Or hey, the Hulk! Better than a yeti!

Dude, the question of whether or not a Mary Poppins ride ought to happen has nothing to do with the crappy sequel's box-office numbers. It has to do with the fact that the REAL Mary Poppins film was Walt Disney's crown jewel. It was a huge hit and major award-winner. It's a part of the Disney legacy, and the only real question is why an actual Poppins attraction hasn't already been built. If you don't dig that legacy, then you don't dig Disney. Period.
 
P

Purduevian

Well-Known Member
Magenta Panther said:
So...is Peter Pan a "hot" IP? No? Let's rip out the ride then and put, oh I don't know, Loki in it! And hey, who cares about Snow White, that movie is SO old. Let's get rid of the Mine Ride and put in Ant-Man! Or maybe some Ewoks! Or hey, the Hulk! Better than a yeti!

Dude, the question of whether or not a Mary Poppins ride ought to happen has nothing to do with the crappy sequel's box-office numbers. It has to do with the fact that the REAL Mary Poppins film was Walt Disney's crown jewel. It was a huge hit and major award-winner. It's a part of the Disney legacy, and the only real question is why an actual Poppins attraction hasn't already been built. If you don't dig that legacy, then you don't dig Disney. Period.
Click to expand...

I am simply attempting to view things from Disney's perspective. From that perspective, I'm surprised Disney is going with Mary Poppins over something more current. Why would they not look at the remake to see how large of a fan base there is for Mary? Why would they ignore relevant and current data on an IP to make a multi-million dollar decision?

Also with the argument about ripping out of popular rides, you are engaging in Appeal to Extremes. I never stated anything about ripping out old rides or replacing existing features on already popular rides. This is a common tactic to make the other side of an argument look ridiculous even though nothing was ever said regarding that. There are tons of reasons for Disney not to rip of older, popular attractions that have nothing to do with how hot the current IP is. My discussion was focused on new additions to the park that would attract the Millennial (22-37 year olds) to the parks and why Disney would probably be going after that market right now.

If you don't believed Disney is currently targeting Millennials or the Millennials are driving the entertainment industry, look at the films Disney is remaking, and look at how they are doing in the box office.

Incredibles 2 (2004 OG) $608,000,000
Beauty and the Beast (1991 OG) $504,000,000
Finding Dory (2003) $486,000,000
Toy Story 4 (1994 OG) $357,000,000
Aladdin (1992 OG) $335,000,000


Compared to remakes of older movies:
The Jungle Book (1967 OG)$364,000,000
Cinderella (1950 OG)$201,000,000
Mary Poppins Returns (1964 OG) $171,000,000
Dumbo (1941 OG) $114,000,000
Christopher Robin (1977 Disney OG) $99,000,000
Pete's Dragon (1977 OG)$76,000,000

Finally, it's really sad I'm not able to "dig Disney" because I am not a big fan of 1 of the ~200 movies Disney has made. Everyone has an opinion on everything, I don't think Disney cares about yours or mine... They care about the masses of people that have not yet decided where to spend money on their next vacation.
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
peter11435 said:
So you’re not counting soarin, test track or mission space?

The park needs everything and this is part of everything. If the only new item being added to Epcot was a UK spinner I would agree with you. But it’s not.
Click to expand...
those were all remodels or replacements...not really net gains...
Why defend the fact that the prices continue to rise and the attraction count doesn't...
FINALLY they are starting to add some attractions... and I am glad, but I think they could do better than a carousel I nor any of my family or friends will ever ride...
 
jt04

jt04

Well-Known Member
Purduevian said:
I am simply attempting to view things from Disney's perspective. From that perspective, I'm surprised Disney is going with Mary Poppins over something more current. Why would they not look at the remake to see how large of a fan base there is for Mary? Why would they ignore relevant and current data on an IP to make a multi-million dollar decision?

Also with the argument about ripping out of popular rides, you are engaging in Appeal to Extremes. I never stated anything about ripping out old rides or replacing existing features on already popular rides. This is a common tactic to make the other side of an argument look ridiculous even though nothing was ever said regarding that. There are tons of reasons for Disney not to rip of older, popular attractions that have nothing to do with how hot the current IP is. My discussion was focused on new additions to the park that would attract the Millennial (22-37 year olds) to the parks and why Disney would probably be going after that market right now.

If you don't believed Disney is currently targeting Millennials or the Millennials are driving the entertainment industry, look at the films Disney is remaking, and look at how they are doing in the box office.

Incredibles 2 (2004 OG) $608,000,000
Beauty and the Beast (1991 OG) $504,000,000
Finding Dory (2003) $486,000,000
Toy Story 4 (1994 OG) $357,000,000
Aladdin (1992 OG) $335,000,000


Compared to remakes of older movies:
The Jungle Book (1967 OG)$364,000,000
Cinderella (1950 OG)$201,000,000
Mary Poppins Returns (1964 OG) $171,000,000
Dumbo (1941 OG) $114,000,000
Christopher Robin (1977 Disney OG) $99,000,000
Pete's Dragon (1977 OG)$76,000,000

Finally, it's really sad I'm not able to "dig Disney" because I am not a big fan of 1 of the ~200 movies Disney has made. Everyone has an opinion on everything, I don't think Disney cares about yours or mine... They care about the masses of people that have not yet decided where to spend money on their next vacation.
Click to expand...

Is it even up to TWDC? I know Martin said Brazil might be privately financed but I'm not sure that is the case with the UK pavilion.

Will Brazil -if it happens - be the exception or the norm?

We need a list of which are private and which are gov't tourist bureaus.
 
peter11435

peter11435

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
those were all remodels or replacements...not really net gains...
Why defend the fact that the prices continue to rise and the attraction count doesn't...
FINALLY they are starting to add some attractions... and I am glad, but I think they could do better than a carousel I nor any of my family or friends will ever ride...
Click to expand...
Remodels or replacements are still improvements in most cases and they are still new attractions.

Nobody is defending price increases. That’s not what this is about.

They are doing better than a carousel. Again the UK project is not the only attraction coming to epcot. If it was I would agree with you. But it’s not.
 
RobbinsDad

RobbinsDad

Well-Known Member
So again, about this ride... I'm seeing a lot of press about the launch of the Inside Out spinner/swings hybrid ride at Pixar, so I'm thinking Disney may want to clone this one - maybe with kites and balloons, tying the two Poppins films together. Boring but it makes sense as a C-ticket.
 
mikejs78

mikejs78

Premium Member
Bocabear said:
those were all remodels or replacements...not really net gains...
Why defend the fact that the prices continue to rise and the attraction count doesn't...
FINALLY they are starting to add some attractions... and I am glad, but I think they could do better than a carousel I nor any of my family or friends will ever ride...
Click to expand...
Soarin replaced a relatively small theater show. So I'd put that one as a net gain.
 
peter11435

peter11435

Well-Known Member
RobbinsDad said:
So again, about this ride... I'm seeing a lot of press about the launch of the Inside Out spinner/swings hybrid ride at Pixar, so I'm thinking Disney may want to clone this one - maybe with kites and balloons, tying the two Poppins films together. Boring but it makes sense as a C-ticket.
Click to expand...
That attraction had already been operating in the park for nearly two decades. I think if they were interested in cloning it would have happened years ago.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom