.
Last edited:
So I'm always a bit at odds with the entire "Walt's vision" thing because imo I really wonder if the modern day consumer actually knows or cares about "Walts supposed vision". I've never read anything on him nor do I have any interest to, and from these boards evidently I get that Walt wanted some place where supposedly all people could vacation at.
Whether we like it or not, kid like things tied to movies, not to say that there can't be a theme . Frozen sells and I know folks like to "Dismiss" kids opinions but moms and dads across the globe are plunking down crap loads of money for their little girls to look like a princess from a movie.
So I think going forward any CEO who comes in after Iger is going to not make the cut with old time purist. whether that's good or bad is for the future to decide.
Now I have absolutely no problem with IP. bring it on. I hate "old and stale" and that's what was happening in the parks. could they have put something else instead of GOTG? probably? but I'm happy that at least Guardians is coming and they got rid of the horrible Ellen travesty. (lol I'll get creamed for that.)
Will I miss Illuminations? definitely, it was one of my favorites but if the Ip laced replacement is good, I'll enjoy that also.
hypothetical question: Do you think the kids/youngins today know who walt disney was? or that there was a man behind the parks?
A couple points I forgot to mention. MDE was Iger's idea, and that money could have been used much much better. Also, his partnership with James Cameron to bring Avatar to DAK was one of his best ideas. That park needed more to do, and Pandora is the most beautiful addition to any Disney park during Iger's tenure. If Chapek were in charge, he probably would have spent much less money on DAK, and instead of Pandora, we probably would have gotten something similar to Toy Story Land. (Bugs Land perhaps?)
In my opinion, that's why it works. The movie and characters were mediocre, but the world was breathtaking. I don't want theme park attractions to be a rehash of the plotlines from beloved movies.Agree with a lot of what you said but disagree with Avatar being one of his best ideas. IMO this is one of his worst, if not his worst. Yes, I know people will say FOP is great (it is) and the Land is beautiful (it is) but there is no connection to the Avatar movies or characters.
Actually, that one was mr. butt-grab's idea. Sure Chapek didn't help that idea become reality, though.Turning Paradise Pier into Pixar Pier was a foolish mistake with no regard to cohesive theme or storytelling.
In my opinion, that's why it works. The movie and characters were mediocre, but the world was breathtaking. I don't want theme park attractions to be a rehash of the plotlines from beloved movies.
Big Thunder Mountain isn't a franchise anyone cares about. Neither are Space Mountain or Song of the South. But those attractions are beloved because of the placemaking.
See also: Tron.
When you say BTM, space mountain, and splash mountain are things people care about, do you mean the rides or the inspiration for them?I think we’re in agreement. My argument is still valid. The world and the land are beautiful. The movie and characters are mediocre. My point was Iger just grabbed something without understanding its place in the zeitgeist and sure it turned out well but imagine how much more beloved it would be if it was something that people care about?
Big Thunder (western), Space Mountain (space mountain), and Splash Mountain (classic Disney) are actually things people care about. So that’s why those work.
But I agree with you the land is beautiful and I don’t need attractions built around movie plots etc ... in the end I just don’t want decisions made rashly or impulsively that don’t reflect what people really want.
I hear he did a lot of stock buy-backs. I wonder if there's anyone who can set me straight on whether that's a good or bad thing.
When you say BTM, space mountain, and splash mountain are things people care about, do you mean the rides or the inspiration for them?
Well, I'll have to disagree with you about the inspiration part. Most people care about the rides; I doubt many people would be able to even tell what you the inspiration for the rides are.Both.
I have to ask, are you saying BIG THUNDER MOUNTAIN and SPACE MOUNTAIN were from a movie or movies or movie franchise or franchises before they were theme park rides because if so I have never heard that before??? I don't believe that is true and if it is please correct me.In my opinion, that's why it works. The movie and characters were mediocre, but the world was breathtaking. I don't want theme park attractions to be a rehash of the plotlines from beloved movies.
Big Thunder Mountain isn't a franchise anyone cares about. Neither are Space Mountain or Song of the South. But those attractions are beloved because of the placemaking.
See also: Tron.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.