• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

News Disney Not Renewing Great Movie Ride Sponsorship Deal with TCM ; Attraction to Close

Mike S

Well-Known Member
LOL. Each side is definitely a bit hypocritical at times. Man there are some who think one or the other can truly do no wrong.

I think the screens are OK on Kong. I still feel immersed enough. It's not as if I'm stationary and sitting in front of one big screen. I actually think the screen rides are well done in Universal but it's a tad on the overkill side. They really didn't need Fallon. I give them a slight pass on Kong because of the Kong animatronic and the vehicle and overall enjoyment of the ride. I think it's been a bit too heavily criticized. And every time I ride guests seem really into it and have a good time on it. I think they did a good job with it.
They didn't need Fallon or Fast & Furious. Well, ok, they did need F&F but not the one that's coming. USF is where the problem is, not IoA.

The amazingness of Flight of Passage alone proves that screens aren't the devil. It completely outshines the "physical" boat ride right next to it for crying out loud!!!
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
They didn't need Fallon or Fast & Furious. Well, ok, they did need F&F but not the one that's coming.

The amazingness of Flight of Passage alone proves that screens aren't the devil.

Exactly. I was going to throw in F&F but I think it's fine they're adding that franchise (a tad late IMO but better than never I suppose. And why does this one seem to be taking FOREVER?) although I don't think they needed to have it be entirely screen based.

Yep. FOP has proven screens aren't the worst thing ever. I understand why some panic and worry it sets a precedent that all rides will be screen-based, but River Journey, while lacking a bit, is fairly immersive and makes great use of screens and projections.
 

SorcererMC

Well-Known Member
Ok. You're certainly entitled to feel how you feel. No where did I say I liked what they're doing. They used to give us what we didn't know we wanted. I'm not saying I agree with their strategy but it IS what their doing (giving into the general public). Not sure why people want to argue this. It just feels useless to me to complain about it. We can't change their strategy. If we could I'd say keep ranting up a storm on all they're doing wrong. But until people start truly punishing them by not opening their wallets and pocket books, they're going to keep doing what they're doing.

And it's not a "no" because Marvel, Pixar and Star Wars/Lucas ARE Disney now. Sorry if some don't want to accept that. Not liking them is fine but they're as much Disney as Peter Pan, Mary Poppins and resorts like Animal Kingdom Lodge are Disney to me. But to each their own. I know it's the cool thing to rail against IPs being inserted into the parks and I'll complain when they shoehorn something in where it doesn't belong, I have and will continue to do so but it's tiresome hearing how awful IPs are.

And they aren't going to ruin Mickey Mouse :rolleyes: Unfortunately they picked a design that clearly many here dislike because it didn't fit their mold of what we personally wanted the attraction to be. Maybe give it a chance and some of you may actually enjoy it, even the design of Mickey. In this case they COULD be giving us something we didn't know we wanted. And I feel like they could easily switch the graphics of how Mickey, etc. look. I know we all had it in our heads that we'd get a through the years "classic" Mickey, but Mickey in the shorts is more in line with original drawings and his behavior actually gives him a personality. I guess everyone wants bland boring park Mickey to wave at you and say have a magical day and do his little giggle laugh and call it a day? Maybe the 7-8 minute ride will actually be, I don't know, fun?

Somehow you have misinterpreted my comments to be emotional, ranting or railing against IPs, or otherwise argumentative. I'm not. (And I realize now that in my initial post on the subject I unknowingly stepped into one of the weird feuds of the forums).
I thought I was having a conversation about how Disney treats and uses their IPs in the theme parks, and describing how the current market is weighted towards Disney. (ie It's not only how Disney is segmenting the demand of the consumer market).

I think if you reread my actual opinion about this ride you'll find I'm being open-minded about what they are doing, and I'll reserve judgment until we know more. Yet I also entirely understand why some people would react negatively to this news. The more I think about it, the more I realize that Disney really missed an opportunity to create positive hype around it. #MarketingFail

And they aren't going to ruin Mickey Mouse :rolleyes:
Kid was using sarcasm. It was funny! (I'll edit my post w/ a :cool:)
 
Last edited:

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Ok. You're certainly entitled to feel how you feel. No where did I say I liked what they're doing. They used to give us what we didn't know we wanted. I'm not saying I agree with their strategy but it IS what their doing (giving into the general public). Not sure why people want to argue this. It just feels useless to me to complain about it. We can't change their strategy. If we could I'd say keep ranting up a storm on all they're doing wrong. But until people start truly punishing them by not opening their wallets and pocket books, they're going to keep doing what they're doing.

And it's not a "no" because Marvel, Pixar and Star Wars/Lucas ARE Disney now. Sorry if some don't want to accept that. Not liking them is fine but they're as much Disney as Peter Pan, Mary Poppins and resorts like Animal Kingdom Lodge are Disney to me. But to each their own. I know it's the cool thing to rail against IPs being inserted into the parks and I'll complain when they shoehorn something in where it doesn't belong, I have and will continue to do so but it's tiresome hearing how awful IPs are.

And they aren't going to ruin Mickey Mouse :rolleyes: Unfortunately they picked a design that clearly many here dislike because it didn't fit their mold of what we personally wanted the attraction to be. Maybe give it a chance and some of you may actually enjoy it, even the design of Mickey. In this case they COULD be giving us something we didn't know we wanted. And I feel like they could easily switch the graphics of how Mickey, etc. look. I know we all had it in our heads that we'd get a through the years "classic" Mickey, but Mickey in the shorts is more in line with original drawings and his behavior actually gives him a personality. I guess everyone wants bland boring park Mickey to wave at you and say have a magical day and do his little giggle laugh and call it a day? Maybe the 7-8 minute ride will actually be, I don't know, fun?
Isn't it possible that they are giving you what you didn't know you wanted right now? I mean you seem to imply that you don't want it, therefore, it is very possible that you just don't know that you want it... yet! If you go into it with the thought that you will hate it... you probably will hate it. We are pretty good at convincing ourselves that we know better then anyone else. Almost the whole world didn't know that they wanted what Walt gave them, but, as it turned out they did. Give it a shot... who knows it may be really good. It could happen. I plan to do that because life is way to short to not let myself at least be neutral to new ideas. Sometimes they are life changing.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
Isn't it possible that they are giving you what you didn't know you wanted right now? I mean you seem to imply that you don't want it, therefore, it is very possible that you just don't know that you want it... yet! If you go into it with the thought that you will hate it... you probably will hate it. We are pretty good at convincing ourselves that we know better then anyone else. Almost the whole world didn't know that they wanted what Walt gave them, but, as it turned out they did. Give it a shot... who knows it may be really good. It could happen. I plan to do that because life is way to short to not let myself at least be neutral to new ideas. Sometimes they are life changing.

That's actually what I was trying to say .... lol. I actually do have an open mind and am looking forward to everything they announced. EDIT: by saying I don't like what they're doing I was implying I don't love the locations of a few things not that I'm not looking forward to what we're getting :)
 
Last edited:

Kman101

Well-Known Member
Somehow you have misinterpreted my comments to be emotional, ranting or railing against IPs, or otherwise argumentative. I'm not. (And I realize now that in my initial post on the subject I unknowingly stepped into one of the weird feuds of the forums).
I thought I was having a conversation about how Disney treats and uses their IPs in the theme parks, and describing how the current market is weighted towards Disney. (ie It's not only how Disney is segmenting the demand of the consumer market).

I think if you reread my actual opinion about this ride you'll find I'm being open-minded about what they are doing, and I'll reserve judgment until we know more. Yet I also entirely understand why some people would react negatively to this news. The more I think about it, the more I realize that Disney really missed an opportunity to create positive hype around it. #MarketingFail


Kid was using sarcasm. It was funny! (I'll edit my post w/ a :cool:)

Sorry I probably jumped on you a little too much! Thanks for explaining it a bit more.

I agree and understand some of the negativity.
 

egg

Well-Known Member
My dislike for this change boils down to one thing:

I can totally see why today's management doesn't love a ride that pays tribute to classic movies not owned by Disney. But in a park about "Hollywood" and movies, it was a nice gesture to recognize a history that goes far beyond Disney.

Not paying tribute to other movies isn't terrible. It's just in no way commendable, and makes DHS feel far more like a giant promotion of BRANDS!!
 

bclane

Well-Known Member
One day I'll get a passholder email. 6 years as an AP and zero emails.
Wow that sucks! You might want to call them and make sure they have your correct email address. And also it couldn't hurt to make sure they aren't getting stashed in your junk mail folder. We got to go to the Pandora preview and it was an email invite. I'm sooooooooo happy we got that email and there has been at least a few others that were particularly important to us. Good luck getting that fixed!
 

PrincessJulia1207

Well-Known Member
I can totally see why today's management doesn't love a ride that pays tribute to classic movies not owned by Disney. But in a park about "Hollywood" and movies, it was a nice gesture to recognize a history that goes far beyond that was being made alongside Disney.
unless you're talking pre-1929, a lot of the "Hollywood history" you're referring to happened during Walt Disney's peak successes with Mickey, and then with developing the company and the brand ;)
 

MansionButler84

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
I don't think MansionButler is arguing with anyone or even stating they like what's going on, but it's fine if they do. Nothing wrong with appreciating new things coming to the parks. I personally think some placements of them suck but I'm still looking forward to everything we're getting. He's talking to you about the reality of how the parks are run now. That IS how it is whether we like it or not. They do a lot of guest surveying and I have no doubts some of it is skewed to give them the results they want but it's a reality of the current theme park guest, right or wrong Disney is going to give the general public what they want to see. Do I agree? No, but it doesn't matter what we want, unfortunately.

And yes they were a creative juggernaut who came up with fantastic ideas for rides. I'm sure that's still possible but I also don't fault them for wanting to put popular new IPs in their parks. I just don't agree with their placements. And yes, Marvel and Star Wars are like any property that Disney bought and turned into a film. It's no different but some want to argue it is and rail against IPs. I want original homegrown IPs and rides but that isn't where we are at right now.
I like 20-minute rides. The average 2017 theme park visitor does not. Universal and Disney are on the same page on this. I feel like everything at Universal is about 4 minutes long.

I actually think it's refreshing that Mickey will be a bit longer. Hope everyone will be entertained enough to stay off their phones. I see people texting on Pirates! Sad!
 

PrincessJulia1207

Well-Known Member
This is a pretty accurate description of whats happening at DHS (click the spoiler button):
cczva5g67caz.jpg
 

ChrisFL

Premium Member
My dislike for this change boils down to one thing:

I can totally see why today's management doesn't love a ride that pays tribute to classic movies not owned by Disney. But in a park about "Hollywood" and movies, it was a nice gesture to recognize a history that goes far beyond Disney.

Not paying tribute to other movies isn't terrible. It's just in no way commendable, and makes DHS feel far more like a giant promotion of BRANDS!!

Well it seems it will no longer be about Hollywood and movies if the persistent rumors about another name change prove to be accurate.
 

PrincessJulia1207

Well-Known Member
how do you think they'll pay tribute to GMR in MMRR and Ellen's EA in the GOTG ride in EPCOT?
(similar to how they placed several tower of terror items on display in the queue of Mission Breakout: a bellhop hat, a portrait, and an HTH bookmark)
 

egg

Well-Known Member
Well it seems it will no longer be about Hollywood and movies if the persistent rumors about another name change prove to be accurate.

Oh... but the park really isn't changing in the radical way many people like to portray it. The park has always been a mix of "Hollywood" / making of movies, and of going into the movies. That balance has shifted over the years, but it's still a mix of both.

Iger let it slip a couple years back that there would be a name change, so I'm sure it'll happen. I just don't see how it's necessary. But this is the wrong thread.
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Oh... but the park really isn't changing in the radical way many people like to portray it. The park has always been a mix of "Hollywood" / making of movies, and of going into the movies. That balance has shifted over the years, but it's still a mix of both.

Iger let it slip a couple years back that there would be a name change, so I'm sure it'll happen. I just don't see how it's necessary. But this is the wrong thread.

It's not really going to be about making movies any more -- I expect the Indy stunt show to go at some point and that will really be the last vestige -- but will be about experiencing movies and entertainment essentially. But that's still "Hollywood" which is used as a shorthand for the entertainment industry at large.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom