Disney Forum Fans VS Generic Disney Fans

[Goofyernmost]

I think it should be noted that being on the “extreme” end of things, at least to me, does not necessarily mean being averse to change. In most cases, the change itself isn’t what bothers me; I understand things need to stay fresh to a certain extent. What makes me upset is that with the Disney company’s modern practices, change inevitably means more IP infusion, a cheapening in quality, and more often than not a lesser product than what we began with. And by lesser product, I keep overall theming in mind. I can’t trust them to make good changes anymore because when they touch the parks, they replace UoE with Guardians and gut attraction space for meet-and-greet locations.

I still do not understand the thing about IP connection. There was hardly a thing in the original Disneyland that wasn't an IP. If you define it by something original from the Disney Company, you will witness the parks crumbling before they come up with much that is original.

The original Disneyland contained IP's like Sleeping beauty, Peter Pan, Mr. Toad. Carnival rides like Dumbo, Carousel, Davy Crocket and others, Most all of Disney ideas were derived from someone else's stories, thoughts and creations and all Disney did was twist it to the Disney way. Just what Disney does with todays are more in line with current social favorites. Without them we would all tire of Disney Park quickly. Disney has made a fortune doing just that and I suspect they always will until people either no longer have interest in the parks or it gets to the point where people get offended by absolutely everything and they no longer create new out of the fear of offending anyone.

 

[LittleMerman]

Wakanda at AK vs. Original Park Theme

Guardians/Rat/Frozen enthusiasts vs. Classic Epcot fanboys

Change the classics to match movies vs. Untouchable classics

MMRR enthusiasts vs. GMR is better/Hate new Mickey style

Vloggers vs. Forum Folks

People excited about Harmonius vs. People upset about the barges.


Don't get me started how crazy forum fans are lol. I get it - if you register for a forum then you obviously have a passion for the subject but there are so many people that dissect every stone and brick in the parks and get upset when you share your opinion bc it doesn't match their's and they get all upset when there are changes in the parks and what not. It's a tough line between wanting to share your enthusiasm with other fans and the crazies ruining things for you.

 

[UNCgolf]

I still do not understand the thing about IP connection. There was hardly a thing in the original Disneyland that wasn't an IP. If you define it by something original from the Disney Company, you will witness the parks crumbling before they come up with much that is original.

The original Disneyland contained IP's like Sleeping beauty, Peter Pan, Mr. Toad. Carnival rides like Dumbo, Carousel, Davy Crocket and others, Most all of Disney ideas were derived from someone else's stories, thoughts and creations and all Disney did was twist it to the Disney way. Just what Disney does with todays are more in line with current social favorites. Without them we would all tire of Disney Park quickly. Disney has made a fortune doing just that and I suspect they always will until people either no longer have interest in the parks or it gets to the point where people get offended by absolutely everything and they no longer create new out of the fear of offending anyone.

A lot of Disneyland's biggest rides aren't really connected to a Disney IP -- Pirates of the Caribbean, the Haunted Mansion, Big Thunder Railroad, Matterhorn Bobsleds, the Jungle Cruise, Space Mountain. Most of the old E-tickets were not IP rides. Even more of Walt Disney World's best rides weren't, considering nothing in Future World was connected to an IP and those were among the best rides Disney ever built.

With that said, no one is saying they shouldn't build any rides connected to a Disney IP. The point is that they used to be free to build whatever interesting concept they wanted, which led to so many great attractions. They're no longer free to do so.

 

[Chicken Guy]

I still do not understand the thing about IP connection. There was hardly a thing in the original Disneyland that wasn't an IP. If you define it by something original from the Disney Company, you will witness the parks crumbling before they come up with much that is original.

The original Disneyland contained IP's like Sleeping beauty, Peter Pan, Mr. Toad. Carnival rides like Dumbo, Carousel, Davy Crocket and others, Most all of Disney ideas were derived from someone else's stories, thoughts and creations and all Disney did was twist it to the Disney way. Just what Disney does with todays are more in line with current social favorites. Without them we would all tire of Disney Park quickly. Disney has made a fortune doing just that and I suspect they always will until people either no longer have interest in the parks or it gets to the point where people get offended by absolutely everything and they no longer create new out of the fear of offending anyone.

That’s a narrow perspective. EPCOT Center existed, and in Disneyland alone Walt created the Matterhorn, Enchanted Tiki Room, Its a Small World, Pirates, Haunted Mansion, Most of tomorrowland which was not IP based, Carousel of Progress, Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln, Jungle Cruise, etc. And that doesn’t count the dozens of other attractions to emerge from Imagineering through the remainder of the 20th century. In fact, with the exception of Splash, Indiana Jones, and some late Eisner-era additions, I’d consider E-ticket IP attractions outside of Fantasyland a largely Iger-era concept.

 

[AugieMorosco]

I think it should be noted that being on the “extreme” end of things, at least to me, does not necessarily mean being averse to change. In most cases, the change itself isn’t what bothers me; I understand things need to stay fresh to a certain extent. What makes me upset is that with the Disney company’s modern practices, change inevitably means more IP infusion, a cheapening in quality, and more often than not a lesser product than what we began with. And by lesser product, I keep overall theming in mind. I can’t trust them to make good changes anymore because when they touch the parks, they replace UoE with Guardians and gut attraction space for meet-and-greet locations.

Fair point. And conversely, I think being on the "extreme" the other way does not mean that we don't hold some things sacred. I'd say we almost all agree on some basic points:
- against paying more, getting less
- would rather see new rides built than reimagined rides
- believe that the majority of the parks should be left alone, especially MK.
- want Imagineering to drive changes, not budgets & corporate influence
- believe live performers are essential to the parks keeping their "magic"

After that, we may disagree on IP in the parks, what attractions are classic enough to be "untouchable", etc. But I think those differences fall within a more narrow spectrum than it may seem initially.

I also don't get the vlogger hate. Are there particular vloggers this community dislikes? I don't really feel "part of the community" here, so I am kind of out of the loop on that.

 

[Goofyernmost]

A lot of Disneyland's biggest rides aren't really connected to a Disney IP -- Pirates of the Caribbean, the Haunted Mansion, Big Thunder Railroad, Matterhorn Bobsleds, the Jungle Cruise, Space Mountain. Most of the old E-tickets were not IP rides. Even more of Walt Disney World's best rides weren't, considering nothing in Future World was connected to an IP and those were among the best rides Disney ever built.

With that said, no one is saying they shouldn't build any rides connected to a Disney IP. The point is that they used to be free to build whatever interesting concept they wanted, which led to so many great attractions. They're no longer free to do so.

They are still free to do that, they just don't want too. It cuts into their bonus's.

Still, they didn't intellectually create Pirates from the Caribbean, pirates in the Caribbean existed. They didn't just imagine space travel it was already a thing. Haunted Mansions had been around for ages in road side carnivals everywhere, They didn't think up the Matterhorn, they just built a coaster around it. Jungle was right out of the pages of the African Queen. I'm sure that the connection for Big thunder mtn. was based on a reality as well. All Disney did was to take that place, happening or story and put his/their own twist on it. To me the only place were complete originality existed was EPCOT and even that concept was based on Walt's dream of being an urban designer and that wasn't even close to Walt's dream. Walt's dream was that "one little spark of inspiration" that the imagineers needed. Luckily that was before the accountants and lawyers started to run the company. All entertainment ventures are based on reality and just made to fit a particular viewpoint about it. It makes for relatable experiences that entertain and amuse.

 

[UNCgolf]

They are still free to do that, they just don't want too. It cuts into their bonus's.

Still, they didn't intellectually create Pirates from the Caribbean, pirates in the Caribbean existed. They didn't just imagine space travel it was already a thing. Haunted Mansions had been around for ages in road side carnivals everywhere, They didn't think up the Matterhorn, they just built a coaster around it. Jungle was right out of the pages of the African Queen. I'm sure that the connection for Big thunder mtn. was based on a reality as well. All Disney did was to take that place, happening or story and put his/their own twist on it. To me the only place were complete originality existed was EPCOT and even that concept was based on Walt's dream of being an urban designer and that wasn't even close to Walt's dream. Walt's dream was that "one little spark of inspiration" that the imagineers needed. Luckily that was before the accountants and lawyers started to run the company. All entertainment ventures are based on reality and just made to fit a particular viewpoint about it. It makes for relatable experiences that entertain and amuse.

They're not still free to do that -- using Disney IP for every attraction was mandated from above.

The rest of what you said seems like actually agreeing with us, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say. They used to be free to take inspiration from anything and create an original ride around it. Now they're required to only use what exists in Disney movies and TV shows; none of those rides would be built today.

 

[aliceismad]

I'm pretty much firmly in the middle, or at least I see value in both sides of the arguments. Except maybe Wakanda. If they're going to build Wakanda, put it in DHS, not Epcot or AK. There's ground between "extreme" and "generic" fans (as defined here). There are absolutely important reasons to maintain original aspects and history of the parks, but I'm also excited to see new creations and understand that the parks may adapt through time.

 

[Goofyernmost]

They're not still free to do that -- using Disney IP for every attraction was mandated from above.

The rest of what you said seems like actually agreeing with us, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say. They used to be free to take inspiration from anything and create an original ride around it. Now they're required to only use what exists in Disney movies and TV shows; none of those rides would be built today.

You don't really think that the imagineers, especially during Walt's time and even Eisner's time, were free to do anything they wanted do you? They had heads of the company's that gave them slack to use imagination but it wasn't anything they wanted. They still have that option but the final decisions are made by people that have no understanding of quality and taking chances. It always comes from the top. In recent years the powers have been particularly attentive to the accounting department with no consideration to the creative department. That is the difference. It would be a mistake to think that Walt and Mike didn't make the decisions on every detail, they just had a bigger ability to allow for creativity.

 

[UNCgolf]

You don't really think that the imagineers, especially during Walt's time and even Eisner's time, were free to do anything they wanted do you? They had heads of the company's that gave them slack to use imagination but it wasn't anything they wanted. They still have that option but the final decisions are made by people that have no understanding of quality and taking chances. It always comes from the top. In recent years the powers have been particularly attentive to the accounting department with no consideration to the creative department. That is the difference. It would be a mistake to think that Walt and Mike didn't make the decisions on every detail, they just had a bigger ability to allow for creativity.

They were free to come up with whatever ideas they wanted. That doesn't mean they would have been approved, but now they know there's no point because nothing that's not connected to IP is going to be approved.

It's a tremendous difference and definitely constrains creativity.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps the single stupidest thing to be every written on the internet.

Yours or mine!

They were free to come up with whatever ideas they wanted. That doesn't mean they would have been approved, but now they know there's no point because nothing that's not connected to IP is going to be approved.

It's a tremendous difference and definitely constrains creativity.

I'm not sure I see the difference between what you are saying and what I am saying. Since we don't see every concept presented I'm not sure we can say that they don't still have ideas but the approval process is no longer easy.

 

[MaryJaneP]

Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps the single stupidest thing to be every written on the internet.

Not sure why an observation that pirates roamed the Carribean waters for centuries, prior to Disney making a ride, and then subsequently, Disney making movies about the genesis of their ride, and then even more subsequently, Disney adding a character from the movie into the ride, qualifies as "the single stupidest thing" every written on the internet. BTW, isn't the criticism supposed to be "the single MOST STUPID" or "the single more stupid" since "stupidest" is not even proper use of the word? Also BTW, shouldn't it be "ever" rather than "every"?

 

[UNCgolf]

Yours or mine!

I'm not sure I see the difference between what you are saying and what I am saying. Since we don't see every concept presented I'm not sure we can say that they don't still have ideas but the approval process is no longer easy.

If you already know any original idea isn't going to be approved (due to corporate mandate), there's no reason to waste any time coming up with one. That's the difference.

 

[Goofyernmost]

They were free to come up with whatever ideas they wanted. That doesn't mean they would have been approved, but now they know there's no point because nothing that's not connected to IP is going to be approved.

It's a tremendous difference and definitely constrains creativity.

That may be true, but I also think that you are guessing that is what happens. In my opinion it is still filled with creative talent all attempting to outdo each other and road blocks don't deter them from attempting to go around the barricades. It's just that the current road blocks are less inclined to take chances then what was once the norm.

 

[UNCgolf]

That may be true, but I also think that you are guessing that is what happens. In my opinion it is still filled with creative talent all attempting to outdo each other and road blocks don't deter them from attempting to go around the barricades. It's just that the current road blocks are less inclined to take chances then what was once the norm.

It's not a guess. Bob Iger has publicly said so. I suppose it could change now that Chapek is CEO, but that seems incredibly unlikely.

 

[LittleMerman]

A good example of "general Disney fans" and "forum Disney Fans" is Frozen in Norway. I've seen so many arguments on here that it doesn't belong for whatever reasons and people get so angry but general Disney fans didn't care about Maelstrom and like Frozen Ever After regardless of where it is in the park.

 

[AugieMorosco]

A good example of "general Disney fans" and "forum Disney Fans" is Frozen in Norway. I've seen so many arguments on here that it doesn't belong for whatever reasons and people get so angry but general Disney fans didn't care about Maelstrom and like Frozen Ever After regardless of where it is in the park.

Didn't get to visit the parks as a kid and only started a few years ago as an adult, so never got to ride Maelstrom. I've seen ride-through videos and it looked meh, but I can understand the connection to it for long-time park fans. I do like the idea of rides more themed to the nation, particularly in Epcot, but I really like Frozen Ever After. FEA was actually the very first ride I rode at Disney World, so I have my own nostalgia for it.

 

[MaryJaneP]

Fair enough, although the adjective "stupidest" is fine here, I will go with your suggested edit that it is the "MOST STUPID thing ever posted on the internet."

The comment that Disney didn't create the intellectual property of Pirates of the Caribbean is, yes, the MOST STUPID thing ever posted on the internet.

To say that creating the entire concept of the theme park attraction, its characters, story, music, ride design, character facial/costume design, etc. was not "created" because at one point real pirates existed is the MOST STUPID thing anybody has ever posted on the internet.

Agree to disagree. Obviously, WDI created IP when they created the PoC ride. It appears to be a ride telling some of the events that occurred when actual pirates roamed the waters of the Caribbean in prior years. The ride, story, audio, and other elements are the IP of TDC. However, WDW did not shoehorn into an existing building some other IP that they had used elsewhere. It was PoC from start until today. Somewhat analogous would be if Disney owned the rights to the book and/or movie "African Queen" (not sure that they don't) and they decided to shoehorn in Humphrey Bogart and Katherine Hepburn into JC. The post previously derided seemed to give voice to a sizable segment of WDW fans that do not want all (or any, to some) rides to merely be ways for TDC to co-market their other IP. But maybe there are other opinions on this issue. There are by far much more stupid posts on the internet. It seemed an overreach to identify that one as the most stupid in the vast wasteland known as the internet. Maybe, however, this recitation herein is.

 

[CosmicRays]

Wakanda at AK vs. Original Park Theme

Guardians/Rat/Frozen enthusiasts vs. Classic Epcot fanboys

Change the classics to match movies vs. Untouchable classics

MMRR enthusiasts vs. GMR is better/Hate new Mickey style

Vloggers vs. Forum Folks

People excited about Harmonius vs. People upset about the barges.

I actually would love Wakanda at AK, but maybe in a new section? I also wouldn't mind it going in Dinoland to be honest.

This one is tough- I love the idea of incorporating things like Remy into France and Guardians but I do sorely miss Maelstrom. Also Cava De Tequila used to have a Maelstrom Margarita that was incredible.

Updated classics I am fine with honestly. Keep the spirit but update the looks, colors, etc.

I will always go to bat for The Great Movie Ride, but I am a huge movie buff. MMRR is a great ride though.

There are a couple of Vloggers I actually enjoy although it can be difficult to find good ones through a sea of terrible.

I can't comment on the barges since I haven't been since October, but the pictures make me wary for sure. I will hold judgement until I get to see Harmonious for myself.

I guess I kind of fall in the middle. I don't hold certain things to heart while others (Maelstrom, TGMR) I do.

 

[Walt Disney1955]

You always have to have an ear to the ground to try new things. Walt did this. However, one thing Disney was normally good at was keeping the overall theme and atmosphere the same while trying new things. You still should keep plenty of things that worked in the past. Like when people want to modernize Frontierland or Fantasyland.......................I don't think they really "get" those lands.