News Announced: Mary Poppins Attraction in UK Pavilion

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Considering that is this on the back burner, I wonder if this will ever come to fruition. Kind of blows my mind that Disney makes concepts but never pursues them sometimes. With the massive competition from Universal, you would think they would be better prepared.

The reason is in all of our mirrors

We kept buying more and more as a now proven bad management structure invested less and less for park travelers on a time weighted average.

You let the dog eat and it keeps coming back for more.

It’s not that they don’t throw up a $500,000,000 ride to much fanfare…it’s that it’s the only thing installed in 5 or more years and it handles 1,500 people an hour if you’re lucky.
It’s a math problem.

 

[jpinkc]

Considering that is this on the back burner, I wonder if this will ever come to fruition. Kind of blows my mind that Disney makes concepts but never pursues them sometimes. With the massive competition from Universal, you would think they would be better prepared.

Disney hasnt been well prepared for anything since Roy O died.

 

[owlsandcoffee]

Disney hasnt been well prepared for anything since Roy O died.

I would argue that Frank Wells's death was more the true end of "old Disney" what with Euro Disneyland being the last hurrah of (edit: some of the last people to have been hired when it was called...) WED. I'd argue Eisner on his own just couldn't cut it (no offense to the guy) and Iger is far more of a cutthroat corporatist.

 

[jpinkc]

I would argue that Frank Wells's death was more the true end of "old Disney" what with Euro Disneyland being the last hurrah of (edit: some of the last people to have been hired when it was called...) WED. I'd argue Eisner on his own just couldn't cut it (no offense to the guy) and Iger is far more of a cutthroat corporatist.

Your not wrong on this. Wells and Eisner together were better then anything we have had. Its a shame his passing like that. I still think they jumped the gun on Euro Disney/Disneyland Paris.

 

[FigmentFan82]

They need to realize that at least 3 more WS pavilions need some type of attraction, be it A, B, or C

 

[rioriz]

They need to realize that at least 3 more WS pavilions need some type of attraction, be it A, B, or C

They realize it... but not till AK gets their Moana and MK gets their Encanto. Mass expansion at multiple parks at once is a thing of the past

 

[michmousefan]

Terrifying (if a bit wistful) fun with ChatGPT.
All I wrote was the request:

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

Uncanny and pretty much spot on. The only thing that betrays that as a fake announcement is the line "The ride is set to open later this year". 2000's Disney could never build something that quickly, even a carousel.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Uncanny and pretty much spot on. The only thing that betrays that as a fake announcement is the line "The ride is set to open later this year". 2000's Disney could never build something that quickly, even a carousel.

 

[Ghost93]

I think the box office underperformance and lukewarm reception to Mary Poppins returns somewhat hurt the chances of this attraction happening.

If Disney ever does invest in a Mary Poppins attraction, it should be based on the 1964 classic, not the weak sequel

 

[Surferboy567]

I think the box office underperformance and lukewarm reception to Mary Poppins returns somewhat hurt the chances of this attraction happening.

If Disney ever does invest in a Mary Poppins attraction, it should be based on the 1964 classic, not the weak sequel

I have to say though, I did enjoy the sequel quite a bit.

 

[James Alucobond]

The sequel is perfectly lovely and so narratively reiterative as to likely be functionally indistinguishable regardless of which movie it’s based on. Mary did get a major fashion upgrade in Returns, though.

Also, I retract my statement if Feed the Birds somehow makes it in. If so, original all the way.

 

[Tha Realest]

I think the box office underperformance and lukewarm reception to Mary Poppins returns somewhat hurt the chances of this attraction happening.

If Disney ever does invest in a Mary Poppins attraction, it should be based on the 1964 classic, not the weak sequel

Agreed. Boardwalk cafe doesn’t have pictures of Emily Blunt for a reason.

 

[_caleb]

I think the box office underperformance and lukewarm reception to Mary Poppins returns somewhat hurt the chances of this attraction happening.

If Disney ever does invest in a Mary Poppins attraction, it should be based on the 1964 classic, not the weak sequel

Seems like Disney always has to make tough decisions with these sorts of things. Do they feature the original/classic version of a story/character? Or do they promote their more recent efforts, and leverage “synergy” (hate that word) to tie new attractions to newer iterations?

We saw how it went with Star Wars for SW:GE—they went with their more recent versions. But with all the remakes of animated features, they seem to stick with the originals in the parks. And with Mickey Mouse we see a bit of both (lots of classic Mickey in the parks, but MMRR featuring the Rudish version).

In either case, it seems like they get pushback from fans. Base a new Mary Poppins attraction on the originals, and fans will complain: “They didn’t really even promote the Emily Blunt and Lin Manuel Miranda version!” Base it on the Returns versions, and “They’ve completely turned their backs on the real Mary Poppins/Julie Andrews to promote their cheap new knockoff version!”

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I think the box office underperformance and lukewarm reception to Mary Poppins returns somewhat hurt the chances of this attraction happening.

If Disney ever does invest in a Mary Poppins attraction, it should be based on the 1964 classic, not the weak sequel

Didn't they kind of know it was a box office disappointment by the time it was announced for EPCOT in 2019?

Besides, it would have to be based on Bob Iger's Mary Poppins because Walt Disney's Mary Poppins is not timeless, relevant or Disney enough.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Base a new Mary Poppins attraction on the originals, and fans will complain: “They didn’t really even promote the Emily Blunt and Lin Manuel Miranda version!”

No one would complain about such a thing...except maybe Emily Blunt.

 

[_caleb]

No one would complain about such a thing...except maybe Emily Blunt.

Yeah, maybe not quite like that. But I could see some on here saying something like, “See! Proof that they don’t believe in the new stuff they’re putting out—they know it’s bad!”

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Yet another Iger gem…

A reboot “trilogy” that looked like a bad (-as in unoriginally lame) attempt at a reboot.


Are we still going with “only the brand matters”??
He’s been quiet

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Yeah, maybe not quite like that. But I could see some on here saying something like, “See! Proof that they don’t believe in the new stuff they’re putting out—they know it’s bad!”

The fact it’s true blunts your sarcasm a bit.

But I don’t think Mary Poppins Returns is necessarily “bad”. The problem is it was a 100% remake they swore wasn’t…so they treat the very Disney devoted fans that know/appreciate Mary poppins as idiots.

 

[_caleb]

The fact it’s true blunts your sarcasm a bit.

I wasn’t being sarcastic. It’s true.

But I don’t think Mary Poppins Returns is necessarily “bad”. The problem is it was a 100% remake they swore wasn’t…so they treat the very Disney devoted fans that know/appreciate Mary poppins as idiots.

The dreaded re-imagining of a classic.