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

[SteveAZee]

During the 80s, synergy was a newish concept for Disney. Eisner was pushing it hard companywide. It was a buzzword with departments in the divisions devoted to synergy. Now, it's just what the company does, everywhere.

The idea of synergy at Disney has been around for a while...

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/disney/w...rganizational-synergy-diagram-1967-69533.html

 

[Biff215]

Ha! Maybe on opening day but these days, it's a long line if it's 20 minutes

They seem to inflate the posted wait times quite a bit. Kylo had a posted 20 minute wait that was 5. Chewie typically is about double that, well posted at least.

 

[DznyRktekt]

Just called Claire Huxtable and she confirmed that Countdown to Extinction was far superior to Dinosaur.

 

[Matt_Black]

Just called Claire Huxtable and she confirmed that Countdown to Extinction was far superior to Dinosaur.

Well, she also took Bill's side regarding the recent... unpleasantness, so....

 

[Captain Barbossa]

I hate TCM. And the fat guy.

 

[Cesar R M]

So apparently, when they rip out the GMR and base the new ride on Mickey Mouse, it won't actually be based on Mickey Mouse, it will still be based on the history of the golden era of film production. They just won't mention any of that, and just show nothing but Mickey Mouse shorts.

except thats stupid.
since they are ripping absolutely everything, it wont have ANYTHING to do with GMR.
and since not even the outside is related.. your point is moot.

anyway if TOT changes to GOTR, it still will be TOT, just not "twilight zone".
plus they said overlay, not a full gutting and redo.

 

[Cesar R M]

also, jeebus, you guys addedf like 20 pages in a single sole day. and most them about an ancient ride base on dinosaurs.

 

[articos]

also, jeebus, you guys addedf like 20 pages in a single sole day. and most them about an ancient ride base on dinosaurs.

Indiana Jones = still feels current. Dino = feels ancient. Exact same ride. Some we get right, others...

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Obscure? Random? Morocco was America's first official international ally, in 1786! To suggest that Morocco was "random" shows a distinct lack of patriotism!

Speaking of obscure, that treaty is awesome sauce. 'In the name of Allah, should a US soldier be taken prisoner by the Barbary State, he shall not be kept as a slave but can be bought free for 100 Mexican dollars'.

 

[JustInTime]

What's the current theory on the fate of Star Tours?

I've heard several rumors. Rethemed to Big Hero 6 being one of the most frequent.

 

[Slowjack]

I can guarantee you the park's new name will not be Disney's Hollywood Adventure. They will likely axe any Hollywood reference from the park's name. Its main two lands, Toy Story and Star Wars, are movies produced by non-Hollywood film companies. It just wouldn't work or make sense. I am thinking Disney's Cinematic Adventure.

The first problem with your suggestion is that Disney apparently thinks possessives are stodgy now. The cool, 21st-century thing to do is to disregard the basic rules of grammar and write things like Disney California Adventure. So let's start by changing your idea to Disney Cinematic Adventure.

The second problem is related to the first. Adjective forms are out. Just use more nouns. So now we're at Disney Cinema Adventure.

The final problem, though, is that the word Cinema is too broad for a park that is no longer about Hollywood or movie-making in general, but merely about that corner of it that contributes to Disney's bottom line. And what's the one word, the only word, that really describes what this new park will be about? You guessed it: Disney itself.

So I give you the new, complete, focus-group-tested, board-approved moniker for the park: Disney Disney Adventure. You heard it here first!

 

[nor'easter]

The first problem with your suggestion is that Disney apparently thinks possessives are stodgy now. The cool, 21st-century thing to do is to disregard the basic rules of grammar and write things like Disney California Adventure. So let's start by changing your idea to Disney Cinematic Adventure.

The second problem is related to the first. Adjective forms are out. Just use more nouns. So now we're at Disney Cinema Adventure.

The final problem, though, is that the word Cinema is too broad for a park that is no longer about Hollywood or movie-making in general, but merely about that corner of it that contributes to Disney's bottom line. And what's the one word, the only word, that really describes what this new park will be about? You guessed it: Disney itself.

So I give you the new, complete, focus-group-tested, board-approved moniker for the park: Disney Disney Adventure. You heard it here first!

I wonder how many committee meetings, memos, brand consultants, and focus group studies it took to conclude....kill the apostrophe. Bonuses all around.

 

[RSoxNo1]

During the 80s, synergy was a newish concept for Disney. Eisner was pushing it hard companywide. It was a buzzword with departments in the divisions devoted to synergy. Now, it's just what the company does, everywhere.

It's what any large company does often times against all logic.

 

[marni1971]

I'm guessing that huge berm isn't to scale?

It is pretty much, yes.

 

[ProjectXBlog]

I can guarantee you the park's new name will not be Disney's Hollywood Adventure. They will likely axe any Hollywood reference from the park's name. Its main two lands, Toy Story and Star Wars, are movies produced by non-Hollywood film companies. It just wouldn't work or make sense. I am thinking Disney's Cinematic Adventure.

do you really think they would rather have a clunky name like "disney's cinematic adventure" over the less literal name of "hollywood adventure?"

 

[MOXOMUMD]

Since it's all fiction anyway, I think they could contrive a worm hole so that the SWL characters meet up with the GotG peoples.

So Starlord could meet Sith Lord

 

[culturenthrills]

So with what is apparently designed now for SWL is this all we are getting. Because there doesn't look like much room between SWL and TSL. If so this is not fixing the studios at all. It will still be a half assed park esp compared to what USF and IOA will look like by then.

 

[englanddg]

So we have the possibility of losing the Twilight Zone Tower of Terror and The Great Movie Ride, in addition to all that has already closed (Osborne Lights, Lights Motors Action, Backlot Tour, etc.)? This is totally unprecedented; There will remain little more than remnants of the park. .

In addition to the mistake of removing popular and iconic attractions, Disney is much too quick to bulldoze its own history.

But, you can reserve your construction walls 90 days in advance with LastPass+.

 

[marni1971]

So with what is apparently designed now for SWL is this all we are getting..

As it stands yes.

I'd be shocked if a third attraction wasn't pushed through after opening though.

 

[articos]

I wonder how many committee meetings, memos, brand consultants, and focus group studies it took to conclude....kill the apostrophe. Bonuses all around.

More than you want to know. But it came down to one person's decision, then convincing Iger and Marketing.