flynnibus
Premium Member
Where does DinoLand or Beastly Kingdom have those conservation threads?
My point being.. it's value add and gels better.. but not necessarily a hard requirement.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Cameron has given the OK ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
Where does DinoLand or Beastly Kingdom have those conservation threads?
My point being.. it's value add and gels better.. but not necessarily a hard requirement.
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
I wasn't being serious. If I had been, I wouldn't have mentioned Ewoks.
Although, if you're looking for a conservation message in Star Wars I would refer you to the legendary Holiday Special. It even has a Tree of Life
.
GLaDOS
Well-Known Member
If it kills Avatar, I'm fine with it.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
Just because they haven't always followed the requirment doesn't mean they should keep ignoring it
Just saying that given the choice of the two, Avatar is a better fit for DAK then Star Wars, and Star Wars is a perfect fit for DHS.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Ooh... Shaft land. We can put Samuel L Jackson in two parks.
misterID
Well-Known Member
I could be wrong, but this is still TDO we're dealing with right? There's been no spirited change at WDW management, has there? The same TDO who have not shown any desire to add to their parks outside RSR.
The same company who's had the ability to expand Lucasfilms in their parks all these years but haven't. I'm not saying there won't be something, but what people seem to be thinking here is far beyond anything based in reality, that I can see.
Wasn't Iger's #1 goal for purchasing Marvel the films and merch, correct? Not specifically for a bunch of attractions for the theme parks. How is this different? Outside a single attraction, how far off and how certain is a huge Marvel expansion?
Didnt Spirit, just what? A week ago, say Disney was not interested in expanding Indy's presence (attractions) at WDW?
I'm just not buying that this translates into some mega theme park expansion in WDW. I also don't understand how SW's canceling out either Carsland or Avland is a good thing, outside some obsessive (or semi-obsessive) Avatar haters wishes. If this is the case I would be legitimately concerned. If you have a chance at Carsland for DHS take it. Nothing would stop them from adding something to an already existing Lucasland. And, if this is the case, diverting funds from Avland to anything star wars related is an absolute awful thing for AK. A park that needs some kind of big expansion, besides some (sorry) ridiculous Indy and Endor suggestions.
The same company who's had the ability to expand Lucasfilms in their parks all these years but haven't. I'm not saying there won't be something, but what people seem to be thinking here is far beyond anything based in reality, that I can see.
Wasn't Iger's #1 goal for purchasing Marvel the films and merch, correct? Not specifically for a bunch of attractions for the theme parks. How is this different? Outside a single attraction, how far off and how certain is a huge Marvel expansion?
Didnt Spirit, just what? A week ago, say Disney was not interested in expanding Indy's presence (attractions) at WDW?
I'm just not buying that this translates into some mega theme park expansion in WDW. I also don't understand how SW's canceling out either Carsland or Avland is a good thing, outside some obsessive (or semi-obsessive) Avatar haters wishes. If this is the case I would be legitimately concerned. If you have a chance at Carsland for DHS take it. Nothing would stop them from adding something to an already existing Lucasland. And, if this is the case, diverting funds from Avland to anything star wars related is an absolute awful thing for AK. A park that needs some kind of big expansion, besides some (sorry) ridiculous Indy and Endor suggestions.
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
I agree but I think right now a lot of the excitement centres around the potential this deal has rather than any expectations of what it might bring. If Disney get this right then it could be amazing for the theme parks but with Disney's recent track record it's a case of living in hope rather than expectation.
Well Iger did say pretty clearly that we can expect more Star Wars in the theme parks at some point. I don't know if he ever said that about Marvel but Disney can't do anything with Marvel at WDW anyway. Nothing is certain at this point but given that Iger has gone on the record, people are going to take him at his word. Whether anything comes of it is another matter entirely.
jam814
Member
Why would disney being carsland to DHS than? they want to because it needs help and they sell a bunch of merchandise. I believe the sales are strong on SW merch and would essentially do the same thing as carsland would accomplish. If they are gonna spend the money on expansion to fix DHS, now that they don't have obstacles to go through to use the characters anymore it seems like a no brainer. this is the only franchise that can even come close to competing with potter
WDWLover#1
Well-Known Member
Isn't there a contract that was running out and would have to be renewed soon ~ like 2015 or something. Although I don't know If Disney would want to do that. They could build any attraction based on marvel in their other parks so why dish out money for one park?
If this did happen though Uni could just retheme the marvel land but it could cost uni some money.
And the great thing for Disney is that they could ship over some rides from uni marvel land and place them in their parks. What does anyone else think? If Disney were to do this (which I don't see happening) do they place uni's old rides in Disneys parks or build completely new experiences?
If this did happen though Uni could just retheme the marvel land but it could cost uni some money.
And the great thing for Disney is that they could ship over some rides from uni marvel land and place them in their parks. What does anyone else think? If Disney were to do this (which I don't see happening) do they place uni's old rides in Disneys parks or build completely new experiences?
misterID
Well-Known Member
More star wars in the parks could easily mean characters/M&G and merch. And by theme parks, it may not mean WDW for an attraction. It could mean many things. I'm also talking about people here taking possibilities and turning them into "their" facts, when reality and history says to hold your horses and look at this rationally.
Iger did a pretty big hoopla announcement for Avatar attractions at WDW. We'll see how true his word is.
jam814 said:
Again, they could have expanded Lucasfilms franchise at DHS at any point in the last two decades. They didn't. There was nothing holding them back. There were plans for it, but they had no intention of doing it. And what exactly do you think they would build in Carsland's place? It doesn't mean they would allocate that exact amount of money to a new SW's attraction. We know TDO's track record... You already know what you would get with RSR, and may I add, that it's been said that Carsland would possibly include a Monsters INC coaster. Why would anyone want to give that up based on little more than a possibility? And why in the world wouldn't you want both?
And it's not just about merch, they're already selling Star Wars merch at DHS. There's already a SW attraction at DHS and SW weekends. They wanted RSR because of how popular it was, and the added traffic translates into more food and (current existing) merch sales, which already includes Star Wars merch.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
If you are talking about the Marvel/Universal contract, then no, it has no expiration date.
danv3
Well-Known Member
I agree, although it's probably a better fit in Adventureland.
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
Didn't he specifically mention theme park attractions? I can't remember the transcript word for word but I can vaguely recall something in there about future Star Wars attractions at Disney parks. Maybe I'm wrong. Either way, people are just excited at the potential this deal has for the parks. Rationality will sink in once the hoopla dies down and then it's just a case of waiting to see if anything significant comes of this. But for the next few days, until everything settles down and the deal is old news, speculation is going to run riot.
jam814
Member
Was Lucas not giving them a hard time? it took 20 years to update star tours. They can build freely now and do what they want and since they are supposedly willing to spend on DHS now, why wouldn;t they exploit the property the now own completely. Merch sales was one of the reason they used the cars property in the first place. They have a lasting franchise thats been relevant for decades and will continue to be be now that disney has dedicated to make at least 3 new films along with everything else. Yes, RSR is extremely popular, thats because they spent the money and effort to do it right, an expanded star wars land can continue do the same if they spend the money to build it right.Adding food services and a new Eticket & C ticket and larger merchandise would do the same for DHS that carsland did for DCA. especially with the new films coming out.
The park needs more help then just that area of the park. nd monsters inc wasnt going to be located in carsland it would have been an expansion to pixar place (i would think considering i don't have any blueprint). The point is they should still go foward with monsters. the area that carsland is to go in can be used for another expansion, the park needs it. i wouldnt mind a continued expansion of PixarPlace, a cars d ticket instead of the whole land, incredibles. they have plenty to work with.
I'm just stating that carsland is a big draw for DCA that makes distinguishes it amongst other parks. Not everything needs to be cloned, and Star Wars can do the same for DHS. it also has much more lasting power then cars. So i feel like it's a no brainer to move foward especially if they are going to be keeping it relevent for years. If they put in the money it can be just as good if not better. Carsland would be just a quick add.
regardless i wouldnt mind carsland if it came, i just think that each park needs to have its own attractions that keeps it diffrent and fresh from the rest.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Yes, but it was like the 3rd point.. kind of 'it gives us A, B, C, and opportunities for theme parks.. '. It wasn't high on their agenda to push with the analysts. The message for the investor community was new star wars films and stars wars licensing.
Turtle
Well-Known Member
no stop copying universal with two park connection. what happened to originality?I agree, I was speaking in jest more than anything. I guess it could be possible to spread the franchise between DHS and AK, perhaps theme DHS around Tatooine/Mos Eisley/Coruscant and put Endor/Kashyyk in AK. I find it interesting that one of the predominant complaints about Avatar is the lack of an established global fanbase and now Disney own the franchise with arguably the largest global fanbase. I'm not advocating filling Disney parks with Star Wars attractions at all but when you factor in merchandise possibilities, Disney will presumably want to take advantage of the benefits that Star Wars can bring. The bike coaster planned for Avatarland has been cut and as several people have pointed out, that would make for a perfect Speeder Bike attraction so you can't help but wonder whether Disney might have plans for that down the line. It's far too early to say right now but with Avatarland being scaled back, it will be interesting to see the extent to which Disney might plan to expand SW's presence at the parks. Until then, let the speculation begin
menamechris
Well-Known Member
Shaft....Shut cho mouth!
Exactly.
Disney will make WAY more money producing new SW movies and merchandise than they will adding a new theme park attraction.
As our insiders have noted, Star Tours 2.0 hasn't helped DHS attendance at all.
Disney's new ownership may eliminate any roadblocks to a theme park attraction that Lucas put up. But as others have pointed out, Disney has had decades they could have added new SW and Indy attractions but chose not to. (Disney has countless other properties of their own they've never put in theme parks either)