Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
Yeah, but I don't see how it doesn't accomplish portraying a "Fantasy Hollywood" and a movie studio setting. I think it does both of these quite well.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney-Pixar Studios Theme Park?
- Thread starter HandyAndy
- Start date
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
I don't really have a problem with the loss of working studios. My problem with MGM is how polarized it is. It has a brilliant (in my mind) front half of the park where all of the park's signature attractions are and the fun "Hollywood that never was and always will be" theming is." Meanwhile, the backlot area has been allowed to stagnate such that just about everything back there is 15-20 years old (with the exception of the underwhelming Lights, Motors, Action). Basically, all of the must-sees are confined to Sunset Boulevard while the rest of the park has become "we'll see it if we have time to kill before our Rock 'n' Roller Coaster Fastpass comes up" land. That's unfortunate. Shows like Indy going unchanged for 20 years is disgraceful; it's a stunt show. It would not be prohibitively expensive to have some script changes or new stunts every 5 years or so...a similar argument can be made for the backlot tour. No real studio back there? Fine. Buy some movie props off eBay and make a real backlot tour. The average guest won't care if it was really made on property or not, but the average guest does care that the Studios Backlot Tour is now simply the Catastrophe Canyon Express. I still love MGM and see all the attractions every trip, but it is very apparent to me that the park has been allowed to stagnate, unlike say...Epcot. Call Epcot's theme a bit confused, but you would be hard-pressed to say that Disney has not invested a lot of money in freshening up the park.
tirian
Well-Known Member
I agree that the merchandise has nothing to do with any potential rebranding efforts; I was just making an observation. :wave:
However, about two years ago, all the MGM references were removed from the park's merchandise because the contract was in limbo. Some merch, such as the clapboards, actually lost all artwork; and the T-shirts simply said, "Disney Studios."
That was all two years ago. Now everything, from the T-shirts to the clapboards, has "MGM" on it again. This was a very intentional change.
The Studios may be getting rebranded, but it's ironic that the changes have been greenlighted after the WDC spent money to secure the MGM name. :brick:
tirian
Well-Known Member
I AGREE! :sohappy:
You would if you`d been to the original park in it`s first 5 or so years :wave: Now THAT worked as a Hollywood that never was but always will be.
harryk
Well-Known Member
We may be dating ourselves - but those first 5 years at MGM Studios was a grand time. The 'Art of Animation' was one of the best features of the park - you not only saw a lot of animation being done - but you learned something at the same time. The 'back-lot tour' was extensive and you did not feel as though you were being 'rushed' to Catastrophie Canyon. While the updating of Studios is well past due - I saw no need to remove the 'false front' buildings/houses to construct 'Lights, motors, action' with the amount of property which WDW owns in the area. My last visit to MGM (this past December) was somewhat of a disappointment - especially with LMA - it was very cloudy and the vidio presentation of the 'Action' was very sunny - so a replay of what we saw was toooooooooo phoney - i.e. 'not up to Disney standards' of the past. - as the saying goes --- 'All improvements and changes are NOT always good'. -- bring back some of the old standards and upgrade at the same time.
But I'll be back at 'STUDIOS' next December - the front of the park 'cast members' are wonderful. :xmas: :xmas: :xmas: :sohappy: :sohappy: :xmas: :xmas:
But I'll be back at 'STUDIOS' next December - the front of the park 'cast members' are wonderful. :xmas: :xmas: :xmas: :sohappy: :sohappy: :xmas: :xmas:
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
I really don't understand the LMA hate. Do you really think today's audience is going to by wowed by the houses that were on residential street? When the park opened the Golden Girls still had some luster, and that was maintained while it stayed in syndication. LMA replaced these facades with a different facade and brought a show in. Personally, I think the backlot tour would still be struggling even if it still include that trip down residential street. I think they have a few options here with respect to the backlot tour. Remove it completely and use the foothold for at least one more E tickets and some more family friendly shows or attractions to spread the park out more, or turn it into a trip through various Hollywood Special effects, basically similar stand alone structures like Catastrophe Canyon and other "Behind the Scenes" type insights. The third option is a combination of the two. Dust off the Half Mountain idea where you have the half mountain facade roller coaster and have the backlot tour show you how they only build what the eyes can see.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
Bingo! I completely agree.
Going down Residential Street...even me, at 28...didn't know what half of the houses were (Empty Nest and Golden Girls pop out in my memory)...and even if they did...I don't think I'd be able to pick them out of a lineup today.
How interesting would that be for a young child, teenager, or even someone in their early 20's?
EDIT: The only thing that lost some 'luster' when Residential Street left is the Osborne Lights.
yellowrocket
Active Member
Ah... the new Disney word of choice is "PLACEMAKING"!
Buford
New Member
I will say this: if you go to the animation tour today, look at the familes and kids that stop by the cel artist at the Animation tour..... the look on the kids faces are PRICELESS! 
And there are many interested guests.... having aspects of a working studio.... especially where artists communicate talents to visitors as there still is with the cel artists/academy animators.... does enhance the experience greatly and adds value!!
And there are many interested guests.... having aspects of a working studio.... especially where artists communicate talents to visitors as there still is with the cel artists/academy animators.... does enhance the experience greatly and adds value!!
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
I don't have a problem with LMA being built on top of the Alice in Wonderland house, but LMA sucks. There were far better attractions that they could have cloned for about the same amount of money (I am pretty confident that LMA was expensive...and not worth the investment). MGM needs new rides, not a show plopped on top of a ride.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
I will say this: if you go to the animation tour today, look at the familes and kids that stop by the cel artist at the Animation tour..... the look on the kids faces are PRICELESS!
Actually, I can back you up on this one. I haven't been to the Animation Tour in a long time...but back in January we went through it and I think the best part of that tour is where you can sit down and actually draw a Disney character! The kids all seemed to like it and most of theirs came out better than their parents! :lol:
I thought it was an incredible experience and the Studios needs more things like this.
Tim G
Well-Known Member
RIGHT!!!
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
To be honest, I haven't seen many of the traditional Disney animation movies since the 90s when Lion King and Aladdin were king. That probably hurts my attention in the Animation Tour, but I absolutely loved the old one as well as the accompanying story that was led by Robin Williams and Walter Cronkite. It's not secret that with the advent of CGI technology the traditional animated movie suffered, and so did interest in the process.
Perhaps it was my own maturity that sort of corresponded with the development of CGI that also hurt the Animation Tour, but I know that if the old Animation Tour was still there, I would visit it at least once a trip. With that said, that area of MGM seems to have turned into the kiddy section of the park anyways (I speculate that when Voyage of the Little Mermaid is repalced it will be by another kid friendly attraction) so perhaps making the animation tour more interactive wasn't the worst idea - it just doesn't work for this 24 year old.
Perhaps it was my own maturity that sort of corresponded with the development of CGI that also hurt the Animation Tour, but I know that if the old Animation Tour was still there, I would visit it at least once a trip. With that said, that area of MGM seems to have turned into the kiddy section of the park anyways (I speculate that when Voyage of the Little Mermaid is repalced it will be by another kid friendly attraction) so perhaps making the animation tour more interactive wasn't the worst idea - it just doesn't work for this 24 year old.
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
Actually, I did see it in it's first five years. The attractions of changed, and it isn't a studio anymore, BUT THE THEME AND ATMOSPHERE OF THE PARK HAS NOT.
Honestly, it was never much of a studio anyway other than the animation department. You all are just looking for things to complain about.
I agree about LMA. It is a lot more impressive than most stunt shows for what those drivers can do. Granted, I don't care for stunt shows and haven't wanted to see it more than once. But it does get a much bigger draw and crowd reaction than a couple of houses from TV shows in 1989 would. Seriously, think about that. Tell me that the houses would really be worth keeping, other than nostalga purposes...
However, I would like to point out that the Backlot Tour doesn't take up as much room as it seems. Most of the path is basically now wedged in between buildings that are still in use by the park.
Believe me it has - even by 2001. I was lucky to have been in 1990 and 1993; then it felt like a studio, real or not. The backlot tour dosn`t take up much room since it`s a shadow of it`s former self.
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
Well, how has it changed so drastically?
and I know the Backlot Tour is a shadow of its former self, but my point was that taking it out wouldn't really free up as much room as you'd think.
and I know the Backlot Tour is a shadow of its former self, but my point was that taking it out wouldn't really free up as much room as you'd think.
unkadug
Follower of "Saget"The Cult
True, not in it's current state ! :wave:
The size of the original 2-part tour was immense. It took a good 90 minutes to 2 hours. Do a thread search; I`m sure I posted it somewhere. If not let me know and I`ll stick the map in my album.
Back in the early days there was the definate distinction between `park` and `studio` - as originally designed - walking through the studio arch meant just that.