Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Maybe it's like when your knees hurt before it's about to rain?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
DHS Disney Confirms Muppets Take Over Rock 'n' Roller Coaster at Hollywood Studios
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Maybe it's like when your knees hurt before it's about to rain?
twilight mitsuk
Well-Known Member
following each other's lead
Agent H
Well-Known Member
I assure you that is not what’s happening.
The Leader of the Club
Well-Known Member
It’s really just a side-effect of great purge of non-IP attractions.
JohnD
Well-Known Member
Please explain how the August closure of Rip Ride Rocket has anything to do with Rockin Roller Coaster.
FerretAfros
Well-Known Member
While temporary overlays have leeway to be a little wackier (I will always defend the Castle Cake), there's clearly a connective design tissue between the giant fiberglass hat and the giant fiberglass guitar (and the giant fiberglass everything at the Value hotels). They're an easy and economical design shorthand to tell audiences what the structure is for, without having to actually design the structure itself to reflect anything meaningful. They're lazy and incongruous, typically tell the audience what's going on rather than showing, and make those areas look especially dated all these years later.
While they mostly occurred during a certain era of management (though the Toy Story Land props have unfortunately proliferated worldwide in recent years), that was likely as much a reflection of then-current tastes as a directive from above. The mid/late-90's and early 00's was a time that favored making a big bold impact over attention to details; it was the same mindset that brought about the infamously "hip and edgy" DCA rather than a more charming park that westcoasters were expecting. Aside from the guitar, RNRC's facade is among the most utilitarian Disney has ever done anywhere (perhaps surpassed only by Paris' iteration of the same attraction), mostly just a beige stucco box, but the oversized guitar has distracted people enough that it's become an icon in its own right.
If you're worried about the new facade having negative impacts on the surrounding structures, it's hard to not consider the negative impacts of the existing facade as well. While it's certainly plausible that something Muppet-themed could be over-the-top, assuming it stays in the courtyard it's difficult to imagine it will be a much worse fit than what's there now.
Eisner did not insist on building the Swan and Dolphin, he tried to block it. Tischman had the right to build two hotels on property as part of their agreement to build Epcot Center. When Eisner arrived at TWDC after the park had opened, he tried to void the agreement, hoping to reserve the right to operate on-property hotels for Disney itself. The resulting lawsuit and settlement let Tishman select the location (naturally, they picked a prime location walkable to the park) while Disney selected the architect and had some influence on the design (where Eisner picked a trendy famous designer, in hopes of making Disney a more respectable name among tastemakers).
While the visual impact of the hotels on the Epcot horizon is potentially regrettable, the actual design is about as it could be given the constraints. The Swan and Dolphin are the most architecturally significant structures on property, with the only meaningful competition coming from the Contemporary A-frame and Spaceship Earth, both of which are more novelties than precedents; downtown Celebration also deserves an honorable mention, though that's technically no longer Disney property.
The Swan and Dolphin are prime examples of postmodern architecture and among Michael Graves' most recognizable designs, far more influential in setting global trends than any of the beloved and iconic (but ultimately pastiche) buildings elsewhere on property. Although not copies of famous real or fictional structures like so many of Disney's designs, they manage to blend functionality and whimsy on a massive scale, with very intentional design choices made at every step along the way (though many of these have been removed over time with interior renovations that favor current trends over the architectural gestalt). They may not be to everybody's taste, but their influence on broader design trends was greater than nearly anything else on Disney property.
Marc Davis Fan
Well-Known Member
Thank you for such a thoughtful post. This is what I love WDWMagic for!
While I recognize that the Pressler-era (late-90s through early-00s) projects certainly leaned into that time period's tastes, the budgets were a central factor, e.g., they tried the "hip and edgy" concept at DCA 1.0 because they weren't given budgets for detailed theming and were required to still include a certain amount of ride capacity - so they determined, whether correctly or not, that they pretty much had to go in a different direction.
I was talking about the entrance archway being set back from Sunset Boulevard and in muted color tones. This preserves the approach to ToT. If the entrance archway were made, say, tie-dye or with a bright sign, that could damage ToT's approach experience.
Maybe I'm thinking of his influence on the design? I certainly recall his choosing Michael Graves, but I also recall reading about Imagineers seeking to dissuade him from some of his decisions about the Swan and Dolphin due to EPCOT sightline considerations. I'll have to read into this further.
It could have had more muted colors and less domineering sculptures/fountains - unless those choices were part of the constraints somehow.
Disneyland's influence on architecture and design is difficult to overstate (though under-recognized even within those fields), so to the extent that WDW's parks and resorts expand upon that (e.g., better transitions at MK than DL), they're part of something hugely influential. My own dislike of the Swan and Dolphin largely comes from the fact that they don't employ the full "architecture of reassurance" principles, making them a jarring contrast with most of the design on property (unlike Robert A. M. Stern's neighboring work).
Last edited:
Eisner got Graves to tone things down. The designs we ended up with are actually the muted Michael Graves design for the resort.
Graves even had odd ideas down to what silverware people would be eating at within the building and really tried to play more.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
What Eisner owns is the sightlines in Epcot. He dismissed those concerns.
How are they not part in line? They are (were) highly designed and ordered spaces, vibrant and colorful.
Also, just to be provocative, Graves was a better classicist than Stern.
ToT and RNRC being next to each other has always made sense to me because they are situated in the same stretch of Hollywood (HTH and Aerosmith recording studio from which you have to drive through traffic downtown on the 101 and 110) so they would be quite close in the real world of Los Angeles. I assume many of the imagineers designing the park layout were Angelenos also.
Bocabear
Well-Known Member
To me the proximity of RNRR and TOT thematically don't feel right...but there they are and there they will stay... Best they can do is create a better separation from Sunset Boulevard, and or, make the RNRR building look like a recognizable old LA landmark...not just a guitar in front of a big concrete box... With the addition of the Muppets, maybe they could create a Muppets Studios miniland with the Muppet Studios gates creating a visual break from Sunset Boulevard into the Henson/ Old Chaplin Studios lot...
Marc Davis Fan
Well-Known Member
I agree that they check those boxes, but I think where they go astray is being too domineering and fortress-like, as opposed to more delicate (e.g., characteristics Hench discussed like thin columns that "know" they won't be attacked).
I love your signature, by the way!
That's indeed what I was thinking of re: "insisting on the Swan and Dolphin." I remember reading of Imagineers warning him about the sightline issues, his insisting upon it (the design/height) anyway, and then his asking if they could mitigate it afterwards.
Last edited:
Cmdr_Crimson
Well-Known Member
Sadly it won't be relevant as singer John Mayer and producer McG has bought the studio last year..
John Mayer and producer McG set to buy historic Jim Henson studio lot in Hollywood
John Mayer and movie director McG have agreed to buy the Jim Henson Company Lot, a legendary studio in Hollywood founded by Charlie Chaplin.
www.latimes.com
The Leader of the Club
Well-Known Member
Maybe they’d donate the Frog to WDW…Sadly it won't be relevant as singer John Mayer and producer McG has bought the studio last year..
John Mayer and producer McG set to buy historic Jim Henson studio lot in Hollywood
John Mayer and movie director McG have agreed to buy the Jim Henson Company Lot, a legendary studio in Hollywood founded by Charlie Chaplin.
Last edited:
HMF
Well-Known Member
Nah, That makes too much sense for them to do it.
Marc Davis Fan
Well-Known Member
As an additional question, does anyone an a general estimate of what’s been budgeted for RnRC?
I certainly hope it’s closer to RnRC -> Avengers scale than it is to Space -> Hyperspace scale, even though I’m not optimistic. The “pretend this is an automobile and pretend these cartoon-painted flats are Los Angeles” is probably the least compelling concept for a major roller coaster (so not counting Mulholland Madness and such) in Disney history.