-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Creations Shop opening this summer
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
I suspect even if the 'shop' is included, it will be a little like "Park" is included in the Disneyland logo (to use that analogy again):
If "shop" is used more along the lines of how "store" is used in the name of "Disney Store", I would agree it sounds kind of silly.
Last edited:
mightynine
Well-Known Member
Sorry some of us can remember when Disney could do theming that didn’t need the crutch of the characters.
Cadbury
Well-Known Member
or when Disney could come up with a ride/attraction without the crutch of an IP.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
They're so very specific about including "Shop" every single time they mention it, though, which is why it sounds so ridiculous. All of the Instagram posts etc. would be significantly improved if they simply stopped adding "Shop" after Creations.
sedati
Well-Known Member
And Jurassic Park would do just fine without the dinosaurs I suppose.
Forget EPCOT, look at Disneysea. Both had tremendous budgets and ambition, so why the almost immediate influx of characters?
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
He means the ‘film’ characters & stories. Not characters in general. It’s not the same argument. Disney’s created & has been successful in creating more than just iconic movies & tv shows. They use to have the same creativity within their attraction concepts & characters also.. there’s really no excuse as to why they still shouldn’t.
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
No kidding you wouldn’t do Jurassic Park without the dinosaurs. It’s a part of it’s original integrity, story, & concept. Not to mention it’s a ‘film’ franchise.. Universal Studios in particular deals with pretty much ‘only’ ‘Film’ based rides. That’s not the same case for parks like EPCOT.
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
Well, you have Sindbad’s Storybook Voyage out there and that’s a great example of an original attraction with lovable characters.
Another great example is Mystic Manor at Hong Kong Disneyland..
It’s not neccesarily ‘characters’ that are the problem.. it’s the ‘over’ reliance & usage of Film IP stories & characters as a crutch rather than a genuine tasteful balance of both ‘original’ and ‘film IP’ & a proper fit like in the past.
sedati
Well-Known Member
I actually meant Jurassic Park as if it were a real place. You go to a place called Jurassic Park, you expect dinosaurs. You go to a place called Walt Disney World...
Again, look at DisneySea. They had Mermaid Lagoon and Arabian Coast, and thought that was enough IP to tide the public over.
sedati
Well-Known Member
Sinbad was completely overhauled. They didn't install IP, but maybe they should have as I don't think it's still pulling in what it deserves even with cute tiger and catchy song.
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
Right.. ‘Walt Disney World’… meaning, “a World featuring ‘anything’ created by Disney” .. notice it’s not called “Disney’s Fantasy World”, “Disney Studios Park, or “Disney Movie World”. It’s supposed to be a tribute to Americana as seen in the eyes of Walt Disney.. and there’s a section specifically dedicated to characters & stories of that nature.. ‘Fantasyland’. That & the meet n greet characters.
Again, it’s not neccesarily that Film IP exists within the parks that’s the problem. It’s the continual loss of the balance of original/unique content in the park that ‘should’ be there in favor of more & more Film IP themed rides.. to the point it’s becoming overkill & could possibly be a death knell to true creativity within the parks like there was in the past. That unique creativity is what truly sets Disney apart from the rest of the competition. So it’s a wonder they wouldn’t want to capitalize on that, promote it better, and be the ‘leaders’ of the industry again rather than be Universal copycats..
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
All we want is the balance back that there used to be back in the day. Even if EPCOT has some Film IP based attractions. I’d hope they stay true to being focused on showcasing real world concepts & cultures using the film or characters to compliment those things (rather than detract from it in favor of something strictly focused on fantasy within their own worlds & stories where it doesn’t fit within wherever it’s placed at all), along with having a good balance of park original content & characters that make EPCOT all the more unique from the rest of the parks.
Last edited:
sedati
Well-Known Member
Yes, balance is good. The park was born out of a great imbalance that it has flailed about trying to settle and may never find solid ground.
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
Only because of upper management looking at Disney through a strictly ‘film studio’ mindset & not as a creative powerhouse capable of creating anything through whatever medium they could imagine. That’s what WED was originally created for… as a way for Disney to create anything in 3 dimensions for the parks or worlds fairs, not simply as an arm only making movie tie-in rides & attractions, shoehorned into places without taking into account the integrity, spirit, & goals of the park or area it’s being placed into.
Inspired Figment
Well-Known Member
Though I personally believe it will find solid ground once more (once better management comes in)… it’s been done before in the past, so it’s not impossible.
mightynine
Well-Known Member
No, I would expect a Jurassic Park area to have dinosaurs.
I can’t speak for Tokyo Disneysea, I’ve never been.
But I think this speaks to the heart of the approach - a Disney theme park initially was not themed to “Disney”, but to a certain level of quality to the attractions or property.
Now, thanks to the wonders of vertical integration, there has to be the characters and/or IP everywhere. And if that had been the case since the start, would we have the Haunted Mansion, Big Thunder, or Pirates? Would you have Spaceship Earth or had Body Wars, Horizons, Soarin’? Would we had enjoyed the Great Movie Ride, Expedition Everest or Kilimanjaro Safari (Yeti notwithstanding)?
And for those who think the characters should be everywhere, what does someone who loves Luca get out of a trip? Or Soul? Or Raya?
That’s the point I try to make: I’m not against the idea of the parks being more “Disney” in the Bob’s IP-laden world. But I do have an issue with using it as a shortcut to make the connection in theme park storytelling in any of its forms.
To bring it back down to the Creations Shop level, there’s tons of Epcot IP they could use to theme it, but instead let’s be lazy, make something kinda generic and put Mickey in it to make it Disney.
I’m not saying MouseGear was great - it’s layout made zero sense and it was cluttered and dated.
I guess I just get frustrated because Disney set the bar I’m holding them too.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Was anyone confused Mickey Mouse wasn’t in Frozen?
The flailing has nothing to do with the lack of characters. Even with EPCOT Center’s high cost, the parks kept Walt Disney Productions profitable while the Studio bled. If anything, the flailing has only increased as executive leadership has demanded more characters.
castlecake2.0
Well-Known Member
I don’t think the majority of guests would agree. When they come to Disney they’re expecting to see the characters they’ve seen on tv and in movies.
