Bob Iger: "‘We’ve got some pretty exciting things that we’ll be announcing over the next few months"

[Californian Elitist]

I would argue there are only two answers for DL Tomorrowland 1)Tomorrowland : Starport(Star Wars) 2)Victorian/Steampunk which would mean getting rid of Star Wars/Toons/etc.

The only way number 2 would happen is if they go ahead with a third gate dedicated to Heros/Villains park with a dedicated presence of Star Wars there.

I vote for answer number two.

 

[SirLink]

I vote for answer number two.

They cancelled the 20K Leagues movie they had in production and there is no chance the board would approve a Heroes/Villains park this soon. So your getting Star Wars it is at least more Sci Fi than Toons

 

[doctornick]

An announcement to say you have nothing to say.

But you're going to have something to say later.

I grow ever more weary of this 5-year-old girl, "I've got a secret! I've got a secret!" form of advertising. I guess they call it "teasing", but it makes me less interested in whatever the company is going to do, not more interested. Rather than whetting my appetite, it makes me nauseated, lol.

If they have something to say, then say it.

If not, don't talk.

It's particularly silly because they already "teased" a Star Wars announcement with the stuff at D23. What is the point of another hint. If you don't have anything to announce at this point, then don't say anything.

 

[Californian Elitist]

They cancelled the 20K Leagues movie they had in production and there is no chance the board would approve a Heroes/Villains park this soon. So your getting Star Wars it is at least more Sci Fi than Toons

Given the fact this third gate business hasn't really been brought up in I don't know how long, I'm pretty sure I knew that already.

Star Wars may be more science fiction-related than cartoons, but it still doesn't really fit the theme of Tomorrowland. To add even more things in, in relation to Star Wars doesn't make sense. They need to make the new additions more diverse (Tron, Iron Man, Wall-E, dare I say it, an original attraction). Here's their chance, and they're letting it slip with all this Star Wars.

 

[CinematicFusion]

It's particularly silly because they already "teased" a Star Wars announcement with the stuff at D23. What is the point of another hint. If you don't have anything to announce at this point, then don't say anything.

Iger announced in 2013 ‘‘We’re going to continue to invest in Disneyland,’’ Iger said. ‘‘We’ve got some pretty exciting things that we’ll be announcing over the next couple of months.’’

Iger also announced Avatar Land in 2011.
Here we are in 2013. D23 has just ended, the biggest Disney convention in the World, and Disney shows us a desk with Avatar props. Disney told the imagineers to visually interpret the announcement of 2011 at D23. No big reveal, no look behind the scenes of the creative process...just a visual interpretation of the announcement in 2011. Sad.

Meanwhile Disney buys Lucasfilm in Oct. 2012 and will have a new movie out in 2015. Wow that was fast!
They sure aren't that fast with the parks. Disney announced New Fantasyland in Sept. of 09 and it will be completed in 2014. 6 years later.

In that amount of time Disney will have already released 3 Star Wars movies (spinoff Han Solo adventure and Chp. 7&8) and in production on the thrid and final act of trilogy (chp.9).

If Disney wants to move on something, they can. Stock is at an all time high and the parks are kicking butt. I think they could find a little wiggle room to green light a project or two at WDW this year.

 

[doctornick]

Makes me laugh how people can put 2 and 2 together and be absolutely sure it equals 5.

SW is coming to DHS. Even fast tracked it won't be for a few years.

That's the infuriating thing. Even with something being "fast tracked", it take far too long. DHS needs desperate help yesterday. It's crazy that there are not walls up now building things, let alone last summer. And yet, Disney plods along slowly considering and implementing their options.

 

[KCheatle]

I wish I cared more about Star Wars...and value engineered Carsland....and cruise ships....and timeshares....and what's happening to me?!

I know I'm probably the only one who doesn't hate Star Wars but could care less about a land. And all of the other stuff I mentioned. Bleh.

I'm actually most excited about Avatar. Yep it's true.

I agree with you on everything except Avatar. I don't dislike Star Wars, but I'm certainly not "into" it. Maybe when my DS gets older he'll be into it and then, by proxy, I'll be into it. I'm also not super excited about getting a re-make of Cars Land. Yeah Yeah it's great in DL, but these are the imagineers we're talking about- can't they come up with something, I don't know...imaginative?

I also don't care for cruises (boring) or time shares (especially DVC - how about if you expect me to travel every 12 months or so, you give my kids something nicer to sleep on then a fold-out couch??)

I'm not an "Avatar" person, but that's prob b/c I'm like the only American who didn't see the movie. It's not that I'm anti-Avatar. I'm just not particularly excited about it.

Maybe I'm being a crabby pants...but hey...at some point, everyone wears their crabby pants...

 

[SirLink]

Given the fact this third gate business hasn't really been brought up in I don't know how long, I'm pretty sure I knew that already.

Star Wars may be more science fiction-related than cartoons, but it still doesn't really fit the theme of Tomorrowland. To add even more things in, in relation to Star Wars doesn't make sense. They need to make the new additions more diverse (Tron, Iron Man, Wall-E, dare I say it, an original attraction). Here's their chance, and they're letting it slip with all this Star Wars.

Original attractions or Star Wars only really fit in a Tomorrowland. Tomorrowland should be a Toon free zone, Iron Man doesn't fit, and Tron is the only one.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Original attractions or Star Wars only really fit in a Tomorrowland. Tomorrowland should be a Toon free zone, Iron Man doesn't fit, and Tron is the only one.

Star Wars needs to be put in a separate park, it doesn't belong in Tomorrowland. Iron Man/Stark Expo does fit.

 

[DznyGrlSD]

Yes ma'am, it does! And turning it into Star Wars Land isn't the answer!

Agreed. Squared. Fix or get rid of the peoplemover track/monstrosity is #1 priority (IMO)

 

[Californian Elitist]

Agreed. Squared. Fix or get rid of the peoplemover track/monstrosity is #1 priority (IMO)

Second comes the dreadful Innoventions. Gosh, I can't stand that attraction.

 

[DznyGrlSD]

Second comes the dreadful Innoventions. Gosh, I can't stand that attraction.

I don't like Innoventions at EPCOT let alone at DL. The ONLY reason I even went in there was to see Iron Man 3 exhibit. Otherwise it's the same crap I can see at EPCOT. That's a lot of valuable real estate for an e-ticket.

 

[Admiral01]

And I would completely agree. Walt certainly liked Space, and thinking of an enthusiastic George Lucas pitching to Walt - I could see that happening.

It's so funny how people like to use Walt conveniently support arguments that usually don't actually follow any logic as to what the man really stood for, and when it actually does sound like something he would do they bury their heads in the sand.

I'll give you another example - if Walt had lived to see WDW built, there is no way on God's green Earth (or Tatooines dual-suns) that the Disneyland Castle would stand as it does today. That puppy would not have survived the 70's - Walt would have never stood for such a stark difference in magnificence between the two. It would have never seen the Regan administration. But if you ask most "fans" - they would say doing anything to it after his death would have been akin to urinating on his grave. Sleeping Beauty Castle is adorable, it's historic - at this point, it is what it is and it probably is too late to change - but he simply wouldn't have stood for it being so overpowered by the East Coast castle. Never, ever.

From what I understand of history, Walt didn't like the idea of a large castle, like the one which now graces The Magic Kingdom. Cinderella Castle was built its size despite Walt Disney's wishes. From what I understand, he felt that making it too big would ruin the feeling of the other sections of the park, as the castle didn't fit the theme of turn of the century USA, the future, 1800s USA, or adventures. For Florida, the board of directors wanted something grand for their East Coast Disneyland...which in itself is something that Walt Disney only begrudgingly agreed to build in order to obtain board permission to build his EPCOT. The Magic Kingdom began as nothing more than a means to an end for Walt to get his futuristic city. The castle at MK is not what he wanted.

From what I gather from history, anyway. History doesn't really paint a very romantic picture of the beginnings of Walt Disney World.

 

[SirLink]

Star Wars needs to be put in a separate park, it doesn't belong in Tomorrowland. Iron Man/Stark Expo does fit.

I can't believe I'm saying this but how does the Sci Fi franchise not fit but the non Sci Fi franchise fits?

 

[Californian Elitist]

I don't like Innoventions at EPCOT let alone at DL. The ONLY reason I even went in there was to see Iron Man 3 exhibit. Otherwise it's the same crap I can see at EPCOT. That's a lot of valuable real estate for an e-ticket.

How about both Innoventions go?

 

[Californian Elitist]

I can't believe I'm saying this but how does the Sci Fi franchise not fit but the non Sci Fi franchise fits?

Tomorrowland is about looking to the future, and yes, I guess science fiction falls under that umbrella. However, Star Wars takes place "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away." It's called Tomorrowland, not Yesterdayland.

 

[SirLink]

Tomorrowland is about looking to the future, and yes, I guess science fiction falls under that umbrella. However, Star Wars takes place "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away." It's called Tomorrowland, not Yesterdayland.

Iron Man, actually all the Marvel characters are based out of current New York - so that doesn't fit. Your right Star Wars takes place a "long time ago in a galaxy far, far away" But here is the thing "a long time ago" from when is that message supposed to be set in now or the future itself.

I would take Star Wars in a heartbeat over having Wall-E/Buzz/Captain EO/etc.

 

[GLaDOS]

Tomorrowland is about looking to the future, and yes, I guess science fiction falls under that umbrella. However, Star Wars takes place "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away." It's called Tomorrowland, not Yesterdayland.

That's kind of a cop out excuse, though. "The Long Time Ago" opening was meant to establish Star Wars's fairy tale nature, not to be taken overly literal.

 

[NoChesterHester]

Tomorrowland is about looking to the future, and yes, I guess science fiction falls under that umbrella. However, Star Wars takes place "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away." It's called Tomorrowland, not Yesterdayland.

Oh come on. Now you are just splitting hairs to defend an untenable opinion.

 

[Zweiland]

I can understand why some people are saying they don't want Star Wars in Tomorrowland, but those same people are saying they want Iron Man, which IMO fits even worse.