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

[Animaniac93-98]

Political ideology has nothing to do with it. Lots of people are turned off by the vibe of Hollywood. That's a statement of fact.

The same is true for Vegas. And New York City. And "the south". People still visit them.

And many tourists still visit Hollywood, and/or Universal's Hollywood themed (or located) parks.

Not every topic appeals to everyone, but the idea that Hollywood doesn't have enough of an appeal to travellers (domestic or foreign) is ridiculous. If it didn't, Disney would remove all references to it in the park going forward, and not just GMR.

 

[Mike S]

Grauman's Chinese Theatre is THE icon of classic Hollywood, right up there with its neighbor, The Brown Derby, and the Hollywood sign behind it, looking down Vine St. from Hollywood Blvd. And it does have amazing Disney history (even though that was never really the point of this park). Mary Poppins and other Disney classics premiered there. Crossroads of the World is not far away, as are, of course Sunset Boulevard and the Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel (the model for ToT).

What younger people, or people who have never toured Hollywood, may not understand, is just exactly how much the original designers of Disney-MGM Studios got it right. They captured iconic, bygone Hollywood beautifully. And it was exactly right to have Grauman's Chinese Theatre as the centerpiece, or as Walt would have said, the "wienie" to beckon you forward.

And these things were classics already when the park was built -- much like the iconic ideal "Main Street, USA," was when Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom were built. They were not built to be current with the latest IP. That was left to Fantasyland and other areas of the parks, but even so current and IP attractions were installed where they fit the theme. Mostly, though, new attractions were built that fit the theme at hand. In the case of the Chinese Theatre, that would be a ride through the greatest movies of all time (again, already classics at the time it was built -- not a cheesy way to ride a current wave of popularity).

This is the way to go. Build attractions and landmarks that have timeless appeal. The Chinese Theatre is exactly that.

A great 6 part read about the buildings that inspired D-MGM.
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas.html
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas2.html
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas3.html
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas4.html
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas5.html
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas6.html

 

[prberk]

I think the part I bolded is the problem. When people hear "Hollywood" in 2016, they don't think about Frank Capra and Ingrid Bergman. They think about Kim Kardashian and Gwyneth Paltrow. To many folks in middle America (i.e. Disney's target audience), Hollywood is an elitist enclave of detestable heiresses, not the romanticized birthplace of American cinema. "Hollywood" doesn't elicit nostalgia and romance, it elicits resentment and class-based hostilities. It's the left-coast version of Wall Street.

Disney's target audience is whomever is willing to spend money on a trip to WDW. This includes a large segment of tourists who don't even live in USA, let alone "middle America".

Let's not throw political ideology into this discussion.

Political ideology has nothing to do with it. Lots of people are turned off by the vibe of Hollywood. That's a statement of fact. It doesn't even apply to me, since I'm nostalgic by nature and the vibe of "Old Hollywood" is very appealing to me.

All of which, it would seem to me, would make it especially important to keep Disney's "Hollywood" park, or movies-themed park, to reinforce the classic, iconic, whimsical, positive reflection of "the Hollywood that never was, and always will be."

Sometimes Disney parks are educational just in cultural classics, even when they are not meant to be. Taking us back in time (or to the icons of a different place) is what a "theme park" is about. And so, reinforcing classic themes is the place to start. Not current trends.

 

[prberk]

A great 6 part read about the buildings that inspired D-MGM.
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas.html
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas2.html
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas3.html
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas4.html
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas5.html
http://www.yesterland.com/replicas6.html

Thanks for that. It's cool how being so detailed can really seem realistic in invoking a time and place even if you have not seen all of the originals -- but when you do, it gives an even stronger appreciation for the work they put into it. And it reinforces why Disney's version of Grauman's Chinese Theatre is most appropriate for its location in the park, with great movie attraction inside.

 

[Mike S]

Thanks for that. It's cool how being so detailed can really seem realistic in invoking a time and place even if you have not seen all of the originals -- but when you do, it gives an even stronger appreciation for the work they put into it. And it reinforces why Disney's version of Grauman's Chinese Theatre is most appropriate for its location in the park, with great movie attraction inside.

The only silver lining we have is that Mickey Mouse isn't exactly completely unfitting of the location being a representation of both classic Disney and Hollywood even though it would be much better as a brand new build and GMR got the updates it needs. I remember when it was tossed around by @Disneyhead'71 that GotG was considered as a replacement for GMR

 

[CaptainAmerica]

All of which, it would seem to me, would make it especially important to keep Disney's "Hollywood" park, or movies-themed park, to reinforce the classic, iconic, whimsical, positive reflection of "the Hollywood that never was, and always will be."

Sometimes Disney parks are educational just in cultural classics, even when they are not meant to be. Taking us back in time (or to the icons of a different place) is what a "theme park" is about. And so, reinforcing classic themes is the place to start. Not current trends.

Classic themes and current trends are not mutually exclusive. Star Wars is one of the top ten greatest films of all time. It also dominated the box office in 2015/2016.

 

[ProjectXBlog]

Maybe. The one I go to has the following headliner rides not based on an IP: EE, Safari, Dinosaur and Kali River Rapids. There are also tons of minor attractions not based on IPs: the walking trails in Africa and Asia, the tree of life itself, Hambre Village area, conservation station, all of Dino land. The only attractions in the park based on IPs are the Nemo, Lion King and Bug shows. I would say it's pretty fair to say the park is not based on IPs.

dinosaur is based on an IP though

 

[RobidaFlats]

dinosaur is based on an IP though

Dinosaur originally opened as Countdown to Extinction. The name change as a weak attempt at a movie tie-in came later.

 

[ProjectXBlog]

I think the part I bolded is the problem. When people hear "Hollywood" in 2016, they don't think about Frank Capra and Ingrid Bergman. They think about Kim Kardashian and Gwyneth Paltrow. To many folks in middle America (i.e. Disney's target audience), Hollywood is an elitist enclave of detestable heiresses, not the romanticized birthplace of American cinema. "Hollywood" doesn't elicit nostalgia and romance, it elicits resentment and class-based hostilities. It's the left-coast version of Wall Street.

uhm....no it isn't? i don't know a single person who thinks of hollywood as a wall street analog. why do you think so many people watch the oscars every year? and do you not think some people in, say, the great depression detested the stars of that era?

 

[ProjectXBlog]

Dinosaur originally opened as Countdown to Extinction. The name change as a weak attempt at a movie tie-in came later.

yeah i know, but you can't say the dinosaur ride isn't based on an IP at this point. the name of the ride is literally the name of the movie

 

[KingOfEpicocity]

dinosaur is based on an IP though

But there's nothing in Dino to suggest it's based on the movie. Simply the name.

 

[RobidaFlats]

yeah i know, but you can't say the dinosaur ride isn't based on an IP at this point. the name of the ride is literally the name of the movie

I would submit that you can and should say that the ride isn't based on an IP. It may have taken it's name from the movie, but the ride itself originated (synonym for based) from non-existing IP and has not been significantly altered from that origin.

 

[Buried20KLeague]

But there's nothing in Dino to suggest it's based on the movie. Simply the name.

Ummm.....

 

[ElvisMickey]

I've already pondered it, but, no one likes my viewpoint on it. Collectively, we are living off old memories that usually are not real accurate especially if our first visit was as a kid. Our memories are jaded at that point. Also, we fail to understand that the more we see things the more we notice bad things that might have existed but we were so mesmerized by the bright lights and colors and music that we didn't initially notice them. We also, as humans, tend to remember things that made us feel good, the smell of popcorn, the music of an attraction, in other words the warm fuzzy's that we all want to experience over and over. The problem is that life isn't like that, so we go back and the old feeling doesn't always come back to us, so our first reaction is... we didn't change so must be Disney did. We didn't get overwhelmed by life, so Disney has changed or in some way been less exciting then it was. We are always living in the past and many of us are unable to project into the future because now isn't as warm and fuzzy to us as yesterday was, naturally, we think that things are not as good. Yet, millions of new people go there, for the first time, every year and they experience that good feeling that we once did many years ago. They don't think that things aren't what they once were, so they experience what we once did, emotion wise, but, don't anymore. For them the magic still exists. Are they supposed to believe that the magic isn't there because, we know what that was and they don't? It's all a matter of perspective and timing.

I don't know what they are going to do with the old GMR, the ride that I have ridden on every visit since the park opened. I don't know if I will like what replaces it. I don't know if it will take time for it to grow on me or maybe it never will, but, the world (real or Disney) doesn't revolve around me, so I will take what I can from it and enjoy what is there and not mourn what is no longer. Thing change or things die. When it gets to the point where I no longer enjoy going there, then I simply will stop going there. We all have that option.

My first trip to WDW was in 1980 when I was 3 years old and I went pretty much every Summer until a 3 year lull while I was in high school. I got to experience the resort in its prime...the MK, 80s EPCOT Center and Disney MGM Studios on an annual basis. I started working part time for the Disney Store when I was 19 in 1995 and began to travel to WDW again, at least once a year. Now I'm 39 and live 30 miles away and go to at least one of the parks once a week. The resort has changed and not for the better. Period. Anyone who is knowledgeable about this company, its history and culture, knows full well that they HAVE changed under the current regime, especially when it comes to how WDW is run. Yes, the magic is still there. But that's from what was laid out BEFORE the current regime took over. What has the current regime created that's so magical? Upcharges, cost cutting, Magic Bands, a lack of investment in the parks, construction that takes years to even get started when they finally do decide to invest some money, saturating the resort with I.P.s., etc. etc. etc. They're just reaping the benefits from creative, talented people who for years worked under those who weren't afraid to spend a little money and invest in the parks on a regular basis. I don't think anyone would deny that the resort is still magical. The problem we have is how the resort is run today.

 

[RobidaFlats]

Ummm.....

A decorative addition to the outside of the ride hardly constitutes basing the ride itself on the movie.

When Disney bought Star Wars and put their name on it, did that make A New Hope based on Disney?

 

[ProjectXBlog]

I would submit that you can and should say that the ride isn't based on an IP. It may have taken it's name from the movie, but the ride itself originated (synonym for based) from non-existing IP and has not been significantly altered from that origin.

lol thank you for defining the word "originated"

i get where you're coming from, but the ride as we know it now came from an IP. i also suspect CTE was developed to be a dinosaur tie-in but the name change waited until the film's release. either way, call it what you want, we all share this earth together my brother

 

[Buried20KLeague]

A decorative addition to the outside of the ride hardly constitutes basing the ride itself on the movie.

When Disney bought Star Wars and put their name on it, did that make A New Hope based on Disney?

THE NAME OF THE RIDE AND THE DINO YOU BRING BACK ARE FROM THE MOVIE. What part of that is difficult to understand? It's a ride that wasn't based on an IP, but they modified it later to make it so.

How far they shove it down your throat or the public's familiarity with said movie is immaterial. It's a ride with an IP tie in.

 

[Matt_Black]

When Disney bought Star Wars and put their name on it, did that make A New Hope based on Disney?

It's a little known fact that George Lucas drew much of the inspiration for Star Wars from the Silly Symphony "Who Killed [Synonym for Rooster] Robin?"

 

[Goofyernmost]

We don't have to look any further than AK for a somewhat recent example of a park having a unique concept not at all based on IPs. It's certainly possible to still do. I think it comes down to creative laziness and a fear of failure. It's easier and safer to built SW land or Guardians of the Galaxy Land or Harry Potter phase 2 then a unique and original ride. You have a built in fan base so even if the ride is just so/so people will still like it because of the IP. A good example of a unique ride that is just so/so is Mission Space. Disney spent a lot of money on that ride and they haven't gotten the returns they hoped for. A Guardians replacement for Energy is much safer than a unique replacement. I guess you can blame this on park fan's negative attitudes, but this is happening in other creative areas like films and TV shows all the time. A sequel or spin off movie is much safer than a unique concept. I think it's more that Wall Street has bullied the heads of creative companies into taking the safer road as opposed to challenging themselves.

No, I don't blame everything on fans attitudes other then the part where they have no real incentive to create and take the risk. At this point, as far as I can tell, no matter what they did the "fan base" would be critical of it. I blame the change in directions more on change in the majority of guests, people in general, and the change in tastes, desires and expectations of a theme park experience. But, we, if we are that powerful, have done nothing to encourage them to take high risk chances on new things that aren't already equipped with a fan base. Just look at the excitement generated by Star Wars, for example. That is a no risk opportunity for Disney to shine. Will they... I'm not really feeling good about it right now. And, oh, by the way, that is one of those evil I.P.'s. just as Harry Potter in Universal is an outside I.P.

 

[KingOfEpicocity]

THE NAME OF THE RIDE AND THE DINO YOU BRING BACK ARE FROM THE MOVIE. What part of that is difficult to understand? It's a ride that wasn't based on an IP, but they modified it later to make it so.

How far they shove it down your throat or the public's familiarity with said movie is immaterial. It's a ride with an IP tie in.

So because the original IP ride was basically unchanged, that means the IP was tied in?