Rumor Disney Parks not allowed to create original content???

[Inspired Figment]

And yet they can be so good at creating IP when they want: Figment, Dreamfinder, Henry Mystic, Albert, Chandu, those freaking Duffy Bears, The Ghost Host, The Auctioneer, Old Bill, the blinking octopus from Horizons, the Yeti (from Disneyland) and so many others not to even mention Disney TV.

Not to mention Sindbad & Chandu the Tiger

 

[RobotWolf]

Not to mention Sindbad & Chandu the Tiger

You'll note Chandu's appearance in my list. I left the (newly) beardless wonder off because they adapted an existing external IP. Although I don't know if that's fair because Elsa could easily be on that list but her IP was, similarly, adapted from an existing, external IP.

 

[THE Monorail Lime]

Doubtful... Though they have decided to maximize existing IPs... It is not necessarily that which is killing the spirit of EPCOT...

I AM FINE WITH IT BECAUSE EPCOTS GETING A ROLLERCOASTER!

 

[the.dreamfinder]

I'd consider that arguably very close to being outright "not allowed". At the very least heavily discouraged and with an inherent severe handicap making it unlikely to be approved.

Western River Expedition was pitched for DCA 2.0 and HKDL by Lasseter and shot down.

Via Imagineering Disney

 

[Pixieish]

Bob Iger since day one has had a personal bias in favor of the studios. He views the theme parks (and video games, and books, etc.) as basically a tool for and extension of the studios in the same vein as merchandise, not understanding and taking advantage of the fact that themed entertainment is a storytelling medium by its very nature. He literally reorganized the company around his flawed perception. In Bob Iger's synergy chart, all arrows point outward from the studios, which is unhealthy for every other division.

Take Disney Infinity for example. It was plenty profitable, but the studio heads deemed it was hurting their integrity, and so they wanted to end it, and Bob Iger listened. The studio heads ended Jedi Mickey and gang, Star Wars Weekend elements, a Tiny Tower spinoff called Tiny Death Star, etc. too for the same reasons. Even though the video-game-related decisions basically killed the division, my point is not to criticize these decisions, rather it's to point out his clear bias.

Would Bob Iger ever allow the parks, or any non-studio entity, to get rid of something profitable if they deemed it was hurting their integrity?

I realize this was not your primary point...


Disney Infinity died because the 2.0 version of the game produced too many toys at too high a price point, and didn't sell as well as expected. 3.0 corrected those issues, but the Toys to Life market was already quickly retracting. All remaining Toys to Life concepts are now out of the market. Disney Infinity died because of management mistakes, not because of the studios.

There was tons of fighting between divisions that was also a huge contributor to the downfall of Disney Infinity. It's such a shame - the potential there was pretty huge.

 

[WDWTank]

There is no question that the parks have followed a pattern of basing attractions on existing properties for some time now. No doubt. But that it happened because the company thought it "looked bad" for the parks to do better than the studios? No, I seriously doubt that.

More likely, it simply has to do with the fact that the company thinks using pre-existing properties that are known hits is a less risky way to develop park attractions than doing it from scratch with original content. Disney knows that if you slap the name "Frozen" on something, there is a certain built-in audience. Build something original, even if it's something as awesome as, say, Haunted Mansion, and you risk it being a flop.

The larger a company gets, the less willing it is to take risks. Which is a perverse reality because in almost every case, it is creativity and innovation that allows a small business to succeed and become a big business. And I think that's the core of what's happened at Disney. It's not that Iger wants to stifle creativity per se; it's that he only wants the company to undertake projects that are more or less guaranteed to be successful. Love him or hate him, Eisner was at least willing to take risks.

I really like Eisner

 

[Otamin]

It’s frustrating knowing the likelihood of things changing are so incredibly slim.

It has gotten to the point where I’m honestly surprised the new Disneyland railroad route doesn’t have an IP attached to it.

 

[MisterPenguin]

It’s frustrating knowing the likelihood of things changing are so incredibly slim.

It has gotten to the point where I’m honestly surprised the new Disneyland railroad route doesn’t have an IP attached to it.

Only because the Lone Ranger reboot failed...

 

[matt9112]

That "trainwreck" that made $1.3 billion? Really should have stopped that. Plenty of people love it.

1.3 billion worth a torpedo to the entire franchise? episode 9 needs to figure out how the hell to make 7 and 8 make any sense. and the solo flop on top of it? yeah they have some work to do. lesson learned? star wars isnt marvel.

empire strikes back nuff said.

 

[Mickey5150]

1.3 billion worth a torpedo to the entire franchise? episode 9 needs to figure out how the hell to make 7 and 8 make any sense. and the solo flop on top of it? yeah they have some work to do. lesson learned? star wars isnt marvel.

empire strikes back nuff said.

Well thankfully Disney also owns Marvel so Star Wars doesn't have to be.

 

[Yellow Strap]

1.3 billion worth a torpedo to the entire franchise? episode 9 needs to figure out how the hell to make 7 and 8 make any sense. and the solo flop on top of it? yeah they have some work to do. lesson learned? star wars isnt marvel.

empire strikes back nuff said.

You realize if we applied that logic in 1980 then Return of the Jedi might not happen as fast. Empire had half the box office of New Hope and critically it was deemed too dark and not as fun as ANH at the time.

#Perspective

 

[matt9112]

Well thankfully Disney also owns Marvel so Star Wars doesn't have to be.

the point is rhey are trying to make the movies the same way to a degree. Star wars is not as comical or light (comics have always had a bit of sass)

(trigger alert) rogue one was the best new movie.

 

[Bocabear]

So anyway....about the parks creating original content......

 

[MisterPenguin]

So anyway....about the parks creating original content......

Let's see:

• Rivers of Light
• Soarin' Around the World
• Mission Space: New Green

All missed opportunities!!

Does Pandora count since, while it was being built, so many people were dismissing the movie claiming that it was no longer relevant as an IP?

If DinoLand gets refreshed without Indy, which is today's rumor concerning the land, would that count?

 

[disneyworlddad]

There have been public statements to this effect, but I doubt it's an absolute mandate, more just "best practice". Companies are risk averse, that's the issue.

I talk about it in an article from a few years ago: https://micechat.com/101023-tim-grassey-addicted-easy-money/

I read that article when you wrote it. Very well done.

 

[marni1971]

Let's see:

• Rivers of Light
• Soarin' Around the World
• Mission Space: New Green

All missed opportunities!!

Does Pandora count since, while it was being built, so many people were dismissing the movie claiming that it was no longer relevant as an IP?

If DinoLand gets refreshed without Indy, which is today's rumor concerning the land, would that count?

Pandora is IP. No argument there.

Soarin... couldn’t resist Tink still could they? Though both versions of course are mainly IP free. Same for MS. Although both of these were created under Eisners watch when IP was better balanced. MS escaped IP only because Mission to Mars bombed.

Rivers of Light... it’s reception could have damned the new Epcot night show. There’s a concensus it is not hitting high approval due to lack of IP and too abstract a story. Not because of the flaws apparent to anyone who actually watches it.

IP should be balanced wisely. Like the old days. There’s no escaping it made TWDC, Disneyland and WDW. But the swing to the current situation is pathetic.

 

[Bairstow]

Rivers of Light... it’s reception could have damned the new Epcot night show. There’s a concensus it is not hitting high approval due to lack of IP and too abstract a story. Not because of the flaws apparent to anyone who actually watches it.

It's unfortunate if Disney is choosing to learn the wrong lessons from Rivers of Light's technical failures.

Was the provisional Jungle Book show better received?

 

[marni1971]

It's unfortunate if Disney is choosing to learn the wrong lessons from Rivers of Light's technical failures.

Was the provisional Jungle Book show better received?

Indeed. And no. Although the flaws of that show were known and in a way expected.

 

[Kman101]

Pandora is IP. No argument there.

Soarin... couldn’t resist Tink still could they? Though both versions of course are mainly IP free. Same for MS. Although both of these were created under Eisners watch when IP was better balanced. MS escaped IP only because Mission to Mars bombed.

Rivers of Light... it’s reception could have damned the new Epcot night show. There’s a concensus it is not hitting high approval due to lack of IP and too abstract a story. Not because of the flaws apparent to anyone who actually watches it.

IP should be balanced wisely. Like the old days. There’s no escaping it made TWDC, Disneyland and WDW. But the swing to the current situation is pathetic.

Exactly what I feared in regards to Rivers of Light.

 

[matt9112]

Exactly what I feared in regards to Rivers of Light.

i like the concept but it falls flat for me. pretty floats though.