yep thats the one i saw and i agreeFound this picture. I think the four columns on the right of the picture are the front entrance.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
AVATAR progress
- Thread starter Tim_4
- Start date
WondersOfLife
Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
I find it pretty sad that Disney had to make a Universal move and have to use a film that's not even by Disney to make some money.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
That means Disney became pretty sad in 1987...
cbsav
Active Member
Touché
AEfx
Well-Known Member
That's sooooooooo limited thinking.
Some of the most popular rides are based on non-Disney franchises.
Just a few examples...
TOT, RnR, Star Tours, Indiana Jones (both ride in CA and show at MGM), every Pixar ride pre-2006...
It's so smart. Now, the choice of Avatar - not so smart, IMO, for various reasons discussed many moons ago, but Disney using outside franchises, or acquiring them (like they did with Pixar and now Lucasfilm), is what is keeping the company as much on the cutting edge as they can be (without any significant capital investment in attractions, that is).
i v never minded Disney using outside properties for your reasons stated as well as those properties can bring in a new audience to the disney theme parks
BryceM
Well-Known Member
It's also sad that you failed to recognize that Disney has been doing this for quite some time now, which by the way isn't a bad thing.
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
Disney owned every pre-2006 Pixar movie. That's why Circle 7 was a thing: Because Disney getting the stuff Pixar created in the initial distribution deal. Just like how Disney owns all the original content created for Kingdom Hearts.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
It was a boneheaded move by Iger to try to counter Potter. Unfortunately for his credibility, the announcement of an Avatarland in AK didn't exactly set the world on fire. And if an Avatar attraction ever gets built, I doubt it'll create much heat either.
But if a truly awesome Lion King dark ride were added to AK...then you'd see some excitement from families.
And yeah, Disney has some good attractions based on non-Disney properties...but think about it. Would the Tower be any less awesome if Twilight Zone wasn't attached to it? And couldn't Star Tours have been an ORIGINAL attraction, like Haunted Mansion and Pirates? The fact is, Disney doesn't NEED those properties, or any other non-Disney-created-or-adapted properties, to make money. At all. Both Eisner and Iger never seemed to understand that what people want from Disney is DISNEY. To wit: Which of these two rides is more popular in WDW - Star Tours, or Peter Pan's Flight? I rest my case.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
That may very well be the case - I'm not well versed in the Pixar deals. But they weren't technically "Disney" movies, which is what the person I was replying to meant - as in, created at Disney. That's kind of the point - even when DIsney technically owns something (Marvel, Star Wars) many people still will never consider those things Disney and therefore not "legitimately" Disney and worthy of the parks.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
It was a boneheaded move by Iger to try to counter Potter. Unfortunately for his credibility, the announcement of an Avatarland in AK didn't exactly set the world on fire. And if an Avatar attraction ever gets built, I doubt it'll create much heat either.
But if a truly awesome Lion King dark ride were added to AK...then you'd see some excitement from families.
And yeah, Disney has some good attractions based on non-Disney properties...but think about it. Would the Tower be any less awesome if Twilight Zone wasn't attached to it? And couldn't Star Tours have been an ORIGINAL attraction, like Haunted Mansion and Pirates? The fact is, Disney doesn't NEED those properties, or any other non-Disney-created-or-adapted properties, to make money. At all. Both Eisner and Iger never seemed to understand that what people want from Disney is DISNEY. To wit: Which of these two rides is more popular in WDW - Star Tours, or Peter Pan's Flight? I rest my case.
I agree with you on some level, that they do not leverage their own library enough, but what you don't see is that - if they relied simply on the Disney library, their audience considerably narrows.
And if your case rests on Peter Pan's Flight, it's pretty precarious - because Peter Pan's Flight has such lines because of tiny vehicles and the most antiquated loading procedure in the entire resort.
To answer your question about ToT - yeah, actually. Using a theme like Twilight Zone with that catchy theme music that everyone knows (even if you have never seen the show) immediately sets the tone of the pre-show (you always hear people start to get excited at that point). Could they have used something else? Yes (and originally, they were). But since Disney doesn't have any "creepy" franchises of their own, and certainly none known as well as the Twilight Zone brand, it made sense to make a partner.
And yeah, the original Star Tours would have sucked if it wasn't Star Wars-themed. They tried that - Body Wars. See how well that turned out (although it was cool because eventually it proved its value, it gave them spare parts to fix Star Tours until it finally got remodeled).
Let's face it, the problem is - if they didn't go to outside franchises, all we have are Disney animated films. The only live-action mega-success Disney has had has been PotC - which, ironically, is based on a ride to begin with. So I guess we could have ToT themed around Magica De Spell from Ducktales, or RnR based on The Party (go look that one up kids - I used to swear Damon was going to be my husband some day).
That said - I agree, we need more based on those classic Disney films - but to counter your "Peter Pan, case closed" - what are the most popular attractions at Disney world that have been built in the last 20 years? Most of them are not based on Disney franchises, or franchises that originated with Disney (and they bought them later).
As much as I love TLM ride, and wish we had a dozen more like it based on all the classic animated films - it's not exactly what makes national headlines and brings new blood into the parks, like something like a true Star Wars land just might do.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
...are currently being rounded up as part of the initial clearing of the Avatar site. Can't have an infestation by the time significant construction begins next year.
It all started with the recent removal of a large insect by the name of Jiminy from DAK. Also some ants that were harassing guests were removed. Serious bug problems recently at DAK.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
Well, Disney didn't have any "creepy" franchise (or product) prior to building The Haunted Mansion. And when it did build it, it created the most famous "creepy" theme park ride of all time. Disney didn't NEED to buy the rights to "The Haunting" by Shirley Jackson or anything from Edgar Allen Poe etc. in order to build the magnificence that is the Mansion. It had its own imaginative mojo and creative skills, and that, IMO, should be enough. The Twilight Zone overlay on the Tower is cool, but I think that Rod Serling could have been excised, the story could have been pretty much the same, and the resultant ride would be just as awesome.
And while there is a strong nostalgia factor attached to Star Wars, Disney could have used the same tech and virtually the same storyline and inserted its own original characters. George Lucas didn't create the idea of an intergalactic battle between worlds. Disney could easily have come up with its own sci-fi conflict story and used basically everything else that's in Star Tours and created something original, and while it would not have the aforementioned nostalgia/name recognition factor, it could still have been a cool attraction.
The Little Mermaid ride is a cheap dumbed-down disappointment. I have no interest in more rides like that. I want Disney to build more rides with the same lavish attention to detail and originality as Pirates and Mansion. TDO has to remove itself from the famous name tie-in teat and grow a pair and create ORIGINAL attractions. Like Fire Mountain or Beastly Kingdomme. Only then will WDW, IMO, get its mojo back.
ctxak98
Well-Known Member
Haunted mansion is more creepy in the beginning but more of a fun laugh through the ride IMO. I don't find it scary at all. Its all a build up thing!
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
It was never meant to be a horrifying experience. The Mansion is a haunted house with a sense of humor. But it still has a genuine creepy vibe. That's part of its charm.
SirLink
Well-Known Member
The whole reason why The Mouse courted Lucas was because Disney had a T-E-R-R-I-B-L-E reputation for Sci Fi films and they still can't hence John Carter/Tron/Black Hole/etc.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
So Disney gave up on creativity and tried to buy its way out of the situation. Not the way Walt did things...