Rumor Coco attraction coming to DCA

TP2000

TP2000

Well-Known Member
Rich T said:
No, let’s NOT add more Non-Disney creations to DCA. Unless you reeeeally think Disney’s message should change from “Look what we created!” to “Look what we bought! Money is more important than imagination!”

And I love Book of Life, but Coco’s a better movie. Book of Life takes more risks, but unfortunately is saddled with those AWFUL unnecessary present-day field-trip scenes that keep it from being the classic it could have been.
Click to expand...

I completely understand your argument here. And yet, it would be easy to say in 2004 "Don't add Pixar crap to Disneyland!", but in 2019 Pixar is Disney and Disney is Pixar. The two are combined, especially for people under the age of 25.

And 10 years from now many folks will equate Fox crap/characters with "Disney", and 25 years from now it will all be the same.

It's just the way it's going, it's reality. I only hope they take a more sophisticated approach with stuff in the future compared to some of the sloppy/cheap ways they first incorporated Pixar and Marvel into the parks.

Heck, it's taken them a decade to even get some decent Marvel stuff into Anaheim. The rest was just cheap meet n' greets in front of plywood sets. Tacky and cheap is how they treated Marvel for the first decade or so. Why?
 
Rich T

Rich T

Well-Known Member
TP2000 said:
I completely understand your argument here. And yet, it would be easy to say in 2004 "Don't add Pixar crap to Disneyland!", but in 2019 Pixar is Disney and Disney is Pixar. The two are combined, especially for people under the age of 25.

And 10 years from now many folks will equate Fox crap/characters with "Disney", and 25 years from now it will all be the same.

It's just the way it's going, it's reality. I only hope they take a more sophisticated approach with stuff in the future compared to some of the sloppy/cheap ways they first incorporated Pixar and Marvel into the parks.

Heck, it's taken them a decade to even get some decent Marvel stuff into Anaheim. The rest was just cheap meet n' greets in front of plywood sets. Tacky and cheap is how they treated Marvel for the first decade or so. Why?
Click to expand...
The “Pixar isn’t Disney” argument was always stupid, because Disney not only released the Pixar features, but contributed to their creation and scriptwriting from the beginning.

Yes, Disney is losing its identity and becoming a soulless, faceless, greedy monstrosity of a corporation. I’d like the parks—for as long as possible—to represent the actual “Disney” magic that people loved for decades. I don’t want the San Diego Zoo turned into a casino resort. I don’t Disneyland to become WhatWeBoughtLand.
 
Last edited:
TROR

TROR

Well-Known Member
TP2000 said:
I completely understand your argument here. And yet, it would be easy to say in 2004 "Don't add Pixar crap to Disneyland!", but in 2019 Pixar is Disney and Disney is Pixar. The two are combined, especially for people under the age of 25.

And 10 years from now many folks will equate Fox crap/characters with "Disney", and 25 years from now it will all be the same.

It's just the way it's going, it's reality. I only hope they take a more sophisticated approach with stuff in the future compared to some of the sloppy/cheap ways they first incorporated Pixar and Marvel into the parks.

Heck, it's taken them a decade to even get some decent Marvel stuff into Anaheim. The rest was just cheap meet n' greets in front of plywood sets. Tacky and cheap is how they treated Marvel for the first decade or so. Why?
Click to expand...
Except Pixar movies have always opened with the Disney logo. Soon as Fox movies do that, only then will it be the same.
 
BrianLo

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
mickEblu said:
The only problem with this is your cutting into the most pleasant place at the park - paradise gardens
Click to expand...

Right, I didn't mean to eliminate that area, just reconfigure and push it out. The ride would still benefit from a plaza.

Full Disclosure though, I have spent so little time in that area that I can't even frankly tell you what it there.
 
BrianLo

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
TP2000 said:
I completely understand your argument here. And yet, it would be easy to say in 2004 "Don't add Pixar crap to Disneyland!", but in 2019 Pixar is Disney and Disney is Pixar. The two are combined, especially for people under the age of 25.

And 10 years from now many folks will equate Fox crap/characters with "Disney", and 25 years from now it will all be the same.

It's just the way it's going, it's reality. I only hope they take a more sophisticated approach with stuff in the future compared to some of the sloppy/cheap ways they first incorporated Pixar and Marvel into the parks.

Heck, it's taken them a decade to even get some decent Marvel stuff into Anaheim. The rest was just cheap meet n' greets in front of plywood sets. Tacky and cheap is how they treated Marvel for the first decade or so. Why?
Click to expand...

I'd argue the opposite. Disney under Iger (with one exception) is very reticent to add anything they've not had their studios hands on first. Just look to Star Wars, it's centred around Disney's Star Wars, not Fox's Star Wars.

When and if Disney adds "Fox" properties, it will be their reimagining, sequels, reboots or what have you.

Pixar has always been "Disney's" from the get go. The original five films they produced before Disney's acquisition were still Disney owned IP. Had Pixar walked away, Disney would have happily kept milking Toy Story without their involvement.

Fox will be added eventually, but by that point is it even recognizable as Fox?
 
Phroobar

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
Mac Tonight said:
Disney needs a third-gate for its Star Wars, Marvel, Fox, and Nat Geo brands. They can call it Subsidiaryland.

And before you keyboard warrior me to death about it, I know there's no chance it will happen.

Just wishful thinking.
Click to expand...
Why do that when you have a park designed for hocing unrelated IPs and a 65 year old park full of old rides that could be replaced. It is what Eisner would have wanted.
 
Mac Tonight

Mac Tonight

Well-Known Member
Phrubruh said:
Why do that when you have a park designed for hocing unrelated IPs and a 65 year old park full of old rides that could be replaced.
Click to expand...
Because nothing they come up with will match the greatness of the 65 year park. And its just a shame to encroach on perfection like that just to appease your newest acquired brand.
 
Phroobar

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
Mac Tonight said:
Because nothing they come up with will match the greatness of the 65 year park. And its just a shame to encroach on perfection like that just to appease your newest acquired brand.
Click to expand...
Why aren't you CEO? It seems so obvious.
MeanLameCutworm-size_restricted.gif
 

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

Back
Top Bottom