News Disney CFO Christine McCarthy says Disney will continue to focus on existing intellectual property for new park investments

[Sirwalterraleigh]

A lot of Americans are utterly convinced companies and the executives who run them are omniscient and unfailingly wise, and when they seem to do something very stupid its actually an act of brilliance stemming from the perfect, dispassionate analysis of infinite data. In a world where professors, doctors, and all other experts are considered utterly untrustworthy, nothing can shake public faith in executives.

That’s because we are trained to equate large money with intelligence.

It’s a “confidence game”…often the reality is utter buffoons who make ridiculous mistakes under cover of that “belief”

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

And yet another rehashing of the edutainment was better event though the world as experienced by the majority of the public was a much different place than it is today.

Always countered with the “Disneys awesome…don’t think about it!”

 

[MrPromey]

....
So, long-term, with a plan like this, you just wind up with a multitude of dated attractions and not enough desire/cash to replace them with something new because there are so many of them. A good example is Uni's Revenge of the Mummy. Despite their efforts to reboot that franchise, the ride's theme is horrifically outdated, despite the quality of the ride itself. Versus something like Everest, which remains a titan in amusement ride storytelling that pulls in consistent lines, acts as a highlight to plenty of vacations, and retains a modern feeling despite being over 15 years old without any connection to IP.
....

You make a great point, here. My eleven year old son loves Revenge of the Mummy.

He has absolutely zero understanding of any of what they're talking about on the screens in the beginning of the queue or who that guy is screaming about his coffee at the end of the ride. He doesn't get what the deal is with the beetles on the screen in the room where the train goes backwards, either.

After several visits and rides, I tried to show him the movie and it didn't keep his interest.*

He still likes the ride but it might as well be an original... Really, they could strip out all that movie-making backstory and tie it to a classic Universal Monsters theme and that would probably be enough.

*re-watching after so many years, it's funny how dated it looks in terms of production and how unimpressive the cg is compared to what we're used to today.

 

[MrPromey]

Sure, but now that version of the Guardians is now over, so does Cosmic Rewind become more dated with time? Does it feel out of place if you're a big Guardians fan?

I always feel that's the risk with an IP-focus - you're betting on something popular now being popular later.

Which is why what they did with Galaxy's Edge is so puzzling and yet, completely not, given an understanding of their corporate mindset.

They had something time-tested that people loved which they spent billions to get their hands on and people were excited to see it in the parks.

They decided that's not what they wanted to give us because, presumably, they wanted to be able to ti-in and cross-promote their new Star Wars stuff instead.

How well did that work out?

 

[networkpro]

Which is why what they did with Galaxy's Edge is so puzzling and yet, completely not given an understanding of their corporate mindset.

They had something time-tested that people loved and were excited to see in the parks.

They decided that's not what they wanted to give us because, presumably, they wanted to be able to ti-in and cross-promote their new Star Wars stuff.

How well did that work out?

But look at all that concrete splashed around with none of those confusing familiar characters. Anyone seen Vi Moradi around this year ?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I think the big issue a lot of us have with Disney's insistence on IP-based attractions is timelessness. McCarthy claims the desire to use IP "that really resonate(s) with our customers." But if there's one constant in pop culture, it's that it's ever-changing. It's human nature that as a collective, we all get tired of thing and move on to other thing. While it's true that some IP can transcend this, the vast majority of it cannot. What resonates now is not what resonates ten years from now, and by-and-large, you want theme park rides to last more than ten years.

So, long-term, with a plan like this, you just wind up with a multitude of dated attractions and not enough desire/cash to replace them with something new because there are so many of them. A good example is Uni's Revenge of the Mummy. Despite their efforts to reboot that franchise, the ride's theme is horrifically outdated, despite the quality of the ride itself. Versus something like Everest, which remains a titan in amusement ride storytelling that pulls in consistent lines, acts as a highlight to plenty of vacations, and retains a modern feeling despite being over 15 years old without any connection to IP.

So, sure, if you flood the parks with, say, Guardians of the Galaxy right now, that's a good decision in the short-term because people are going to want to book trips specifically for the Guardians of the Galaxy ride. Vol 3 just released, and James Gunn signaled that we won't be seeing those characters as a team again. How long before those rides are tacky relics of a time long past? I'd bet serious money that when that happens, Everest is still pulling in enthusiastic crowds.

Everest worked for about a year and a half…

A “titan”??

I mean…it was cool…but I barely remember it.

It’s kinda six flags since. Not terrible…doesn’t make the top 10 in town…because it was built around a story and the story doesn’t work

 

[UNCgolf]

And yet another rehashing of the edutainment was better event though the world as experienced by the majority of the public was a much different place than it is today.

It's not like people have stopped going to science museums, children's museums, aquariums, zoos, and even stuff like tech expos -- if anything, some of that is more popular today than ever -- so the Internet/smart phone argument doesn't really have any good evidence to support it. The better argument is that Disney was never going to commit to the regular, necessary updates for stuff like Communicore/Innoventions (and some of the attractions too).

That said, it's kind of irrelevant to the overall issue. Old school EPCOT offered more to do than current EPCOT, and what was offered was also generally of a higher quality than the replacements. The park has gotten significantly worse regardless of any edutainment argument.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Which is why what they did with Galaxy's Edge is so puzzling and yet, completely not given an understanding of their corporate mindset.

They had something time-tested that people loved and were excited to see in the parks.

They decided that's not what they wanted to give us because, presumably, they wanted to be able to ti-in and cross-promote their new Star Wars stuff.

How well did that work out?

Well I think I might have mentioned this…

But that was pure ego and an attempt at a future cash grab that has fallen flat

 

[UNCgolf]

You make a great point, here. My eleven year old son loves Revenge of the Mummy.

He has absolutely zero understanding of any of what they're talking about on the screens in the beginning of the queue or who that guy is screaming about his coffee at the end of the ride. He doesn't get what the deal is with the beetles on the screen in the room where the train goes backwards, either.

After several visits and rides, I tried to show him the movie and it didn't keep his interest.*

He still likes the ride but it might as well be an original... Really, they could strip out all that movie-making backstory and tie it to a classic Universal Monsters theme and that would probably be enough.

*re-watching after so many years, it's funny how dated it looks in terms of production and how unimpressive the cg is compared to what we're used to today.

This is also why so much of the original Universal Studios attraction lineup is gone (even though I think those attractions were generally better than what's replaced them).

IP often has a shelf life, and if the attraction itself isn't very good to great outside of the IP nexus (or if you're lucky enough to have IP that maintains popularity for a very long time), you're basically committing yourself to needing to do major overhauls every 15-20 years to replace the outdated IP that no longer interests/attracts new guests.

There are obviously good business reasons to use IP, especially in the short term. Over the long haul, maybe not as much? If you spend $300 million on a ride and then need to spend $300 million more (or likely an even higher number) in 15-20 years to replace it because the IP has more or less expired (and the ride isn't especially good independent of the IP) maybe it doesn't work out that well.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Happy 10th anniversary to Mystic Manor...the last of its kind.

 

[WaltsTreasureChest]

Always countered with the “Disneys awesome…don’t think about it!”

These type of people are all over Reddit

 

[MrPromey]

This is also why so much of the original Universal Studios attraction lineup is gone (even though I think those attractions were generally better than what's replaced them).

IP often has a shelf life, and if the attraction itself isn't very good to great outside of the IP nexus (or if you're lucky enough to have IP that maintains popularity for a very long time), you're basically committing yourself to needing to do major overhauls every 15-20 years to replace the outdated IP that no longer interests/attracts new guests.

And credit to Universal, though I generally agree with you regarding the originals vs. the replacements* (though isn't Transfomers where Murder She Wrote was? If so, I'll consider that an exception even if I don't like the movies... or was that all contained in the new Minions space? Either way. ), they have at least made a serious effort to update and replace on a pretty regular schedule to stay relevant.

Disney doesn't normally get around to doing that until at least a decade beyond when they should have.

*I still mourn the loss of Back to the Future

 

[Animaniac93-98]

This is also why so much of the original Universal Studios attraction lineup is gone (even though I think those attractions were generally better than what's replaced them).

IP often has a shelf life, and if the attraction itself isn't very good to great outside of the IP nexus (or if you're lucky enough to have IP that maintains popularity for a very long time), you're basically committing yourself to needing to do major overhauls every 15-20 years to replace the outdated IP that no longer interests/attracts new guests.

Universal knew this back in the 80s, which is why the park was designed for the most part with generic street facades and soundstages...easy to replace. Now their business model has switched to building detailed environments for specific settings and characters.

Disney has seemingly done the opposite, going towards IP rides in big boxes.

 

[BlakeW39]

Everest worked for about a year and a half…

A “titan”??

I mean…it was cool…but I barely remember it.

It’s kinda six flags since. Not terrible…doesn’t make the top 10 in town…because it was built around a story and the story doesn’t work

Everest as built was a fantastic attraction. But seeing as 75% of the effects on it no longer work, I agree it definitely isn't one of the best attractions in town, not anymore at least. It does however still draw major crowds which is proof that IP =/= popularity.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

These type of people are all over Reddit

You don’t need to travel to find them…

…but the numbers are in noticeable decline…because what’s actually in reality now is becoming clear

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Everest as built was a fantastic attraction. But seeing as 75% of the effects on it no longer work, I agree it definitely isn't one of the best attractions in town, not anymore at least. It does however still draw major crowds which is proof that IP =/= popularity.

A mode was really cool. It takes B/C level rollercoaster system and made it really a WDI kinda twist.

Think I saw it 3…maybe 4 times?

But it’s been usurped by a couple at uni…sea world installs good traditional coasters…guardians and I assume tron is Better?

 

[zombiebbq]

It's inevitable given the amount of IP Disney now owns, especially after the introduction of Disney+. Now I've never been a CEO, but it makes little business sense to me to *not* use your own IP within your parks. It's also a business driving move in their eyes - you like a particular IP? Oh well there's a ride for it at the parks, maybe I'll visit (see -Star Wars). That's what they are hoping happens. Plus merchandise and all that other fun stuff. It's natural. I don't love it myself, but I can't blame them for doing it.

 

[UNCgolf]

A mode was really cool. It takes B/C level rollercoaster system and made it really a WDI kinda twist.

Think I saw it 3…maybe 4 times?

But it’s been usurped by a couple at uni…sea world installs good traditional coasters…guardians and I assume tron is Better?

I don't think Guardians is better than Everest, although that's mainly because the story part of Guardians is essentially unintelligible nonsense and it doesn't even properly use the Guardians IP. The coaster itself is good, but almost everything around it is badly designed. I think the overall Everest experience is better.

TRON isn't even in the conversation.

From a compete design standpoint (i.e. the theming, ride experience, queue, etc. all together as one), I think Everest is probably still the best coaster at Disney. Big Thunder is in the conversation but Everest offers more from a physical thrill standpoint for people who rate that highly. I assume Hagrid's is better (if only because it's fully working), and Revenge of the Mummy is pretty close, but that's about it IMO. Something like Velocicoaster is in a separate conversation to me because it's just a coaster rather than a themed experience (I know there's some theming but it's a very minor part of the experience).

 

[BlakeW39]

A mode was really cool. It takes B/C level rollercoaster system and made it really a WDI kinda twist.

Think I saw it 3…maybe 4 times?

But it’s been usurped by a couple at uni…sea world installs good traditional coasters…guardians and I assume tron is Better?

To be honest, I still think Everest is a more thrilling ride than GOTG. I think GOTG is fun but pretty overrated. Tron is a no go. I went in with quite low expectations and was still disappointed. Not sure if you've ridden it, but it's very underwhelming. And very short.

Anyways. I'm not gonna even compare Everest to something like Hagrid's. Hagrid's works and is great. Everest was great, and then it stopped working. And now it's fine.

 

[MrPromey]

It's inevitable given the amount of IP Disney now owns, especially after the introduction of Disney+. Now I've never been a CEO, but it makes little business sense to me to *not* use your own IP within your parks. It's also a business driving move in their eyes - you like a particular IP? Oh well there's a ride for it at the parks, maybe I'll visit (see -Star Wars). That's what they are hoping happens. Plus merchandise and all that other fun stuff. It's natural. I don't love it myself, but I can't blame them for doing it.

I don't think anyone is saying including it is bad. AK opened with two attractions tied to yet-to-be-released movies, for instance... but if the entire theme park had to have been designed just around theatrical or D+ IPs... it just really wouldn't have happened.

Instead, we'd have a totally different park, probably with a High School the Musical ride somewhere still in it.

... at least the stage for that live show at Hollywood Studios was mobile and could be driven right to the landfill at the end of its service life.