Disney(World) vs. Disney(land)?

[GLaDOS]

Far more people probably liked AE than complained about it. Didn't matter in that case and it wouldn't matter here. Heck, far more people probably liked Snow White than complained about it. Same result.

The bus system is a completely different animal. Disney is stuck with the buses.

Again, I think AE was a completely different animal. I think Disney realized it was a foolish placement from the beginning, and used the amount of complaints it got as an excuse to close it.

SW is a weird situation, the ride was around for DECADES before it was changed to what it was in 94. I think the change was more to try and lift sagging attendance rather than because of "scary" complaints.

Besides, Stitch gets complained about all the time in park, no one goes into it, yet it's still going strong.

I don't think Disney gives into complaints like this as much as people believe they have.

 

[lebeau]

Again, I think AE was a completely different animal. I think Disney realized it was a foolish placement from the beginning, and used the amount of complaints it got as an excuse to close it.

SW is a weird situation, the ride was around for DECADES before it was changed to what it was in 94. I think the change was more to try and lift sagging attendance rather than because of "scary" complaints.

Besides, Stitch gets complained about all the time in park, no one goes into it, yet it's still going strong.

I don't think Disney gives into complaints like this as much as people believe they have.

You're right in that all of those situations are different. And there is no way to know how VV would have turned out. There is no direct analogue.

As for Stitch, I figure they will get to it eventually. They have taken some steps to address the complaints. Sooner or later, it will be replaced.

Would complaints lead to them shutting down VV if it ever got built? Probably not. But I believe it would lead to them dumbing it down to a point where it would no longer be very satisfying to its core fans. Could be wrong. I'm no good at predicting the future.

But I feel even more sure in predicting that Disney knows that such a ride would likely result in headaches they don't want to deal with. So they won't ever go very far down that path at MK.

 

[spacemt354]

Again, I think AE was a completely different animal. I think Disney realized it was a foolish placement from the beginning, and used the amount of complaints it got as an excuse to close it.

SW is a weird situation, the ride was around for DECADES before it was changed to what it was in 94. I think the change was more to try and lift sagging attendance rather than because of "scary" complaints.

Besides, Stitch gets complained about all the time in park, no one goes into it, yet it's still going strong.

I don't think Disney gives into complaints like this as much as people believe they have.

I think a lot of what is said above evolves from how you interpret it. People complained about the scare factor in those rides, and now they are all closed. Maybe I'm simple-minded, but I look at that and say Disney definitely listens to the complaints. And some of the changes they make dont close the rides, but tame down scare effects (ctx to te current dinosaur is a prime example).

But again, the Villians village is a blue sky idea as someone said before. Neither opinion will really be 100% proven right or wrong. But from my view, the evidence points to Disney discarding the concept due to the lack of popularity in Disney Villians, and also the backlash of the scare factor in fantasyland in the magic kingdom.

 

[misterID]

An attraction/mini-land where the main characters are villians won't work though. There would be a lot of backlash. And as proof, neither toad nor alien encounter are rides in the magic kingdom anymore. People complained about the scare factor. Does it mean I didn't enjoy those rides? Of course not, but the fact that this idea was discarded indicates that Disney had an idea this concept would polarize some guests due to the scare factor.

HM is not that scary, IMO. There are a few moments (stretching room, maybe the doors) but other than that it's a fun family ride. But that is the key-- its only one ride, not an entire mini-land dedicated to antagonists. Not to get philosophical here, but for the kids who aren't scared by vv, should we really "like" the villains? I don't see the appeal. The only Villians I actually like aren't even Disney (darth vader and the joker) Other than those two, I dont see what is so great about Villians. They are sinply evil people, who have an agenda against the protagonist. Assembling a Villians "avengers" team in the magic kingdom for a second flume ride isn't as appealing to me. And that opinion is not going to change because I don't see what's so great about them in the first place. If anything Disney should promote Disney heroes, not Villians, because heroes are the characters kids and kids at heart should aspire to be.

Toad was not removed because it was too scary, it was removed for its real estate to build Pooh.

And guys, we're talking about a flume ride with a large drop. So, I think BTMR and SM are good rides to compare it to. Little kids wouldn't be riding it.

Since this is all subjective, without knowing all the details, seeing how popular Splash is with its, ummm, unique theming, I would bet VV could rival Splash in popularity.

Now, I don't know specifics or statistics, but I would wager that the vast majority of Disney visitors know about Disney villains, and I'd wager even more that it would probably appeal to them.

And please, I doubt a ride where the villains (as I've heard) are defeated by the good guys, is going to make any kid aspire to be a Disney villain. This is just good fun. You really don't want your kid growing up to be a pirate (who rapes, robs and pillages), either. But POTC is still a fun ride. And I haven't heard any problems of the ride corrupting children.

It may not appeal to you, but guess what? The FLE doesn't appeal to me. Doesn't mean it won't be successful.

If the Villains are this much of a liability, they would have removed all the villain characters from the parks, and no one, especially children, would want to have their picture taken with them.

 

[lebeau]

Now, I don't know specifics, but I would wager that the vast majority of Disney visitors know about Disney villains, and I'd wager even more that it would probably appeal to them.

I will take that bet!

I have yet to see any proof of the villain's popularity. Has Disney ever successfully marketed them?

It may not appeal to you, but guess what? The FLE doesn't appeal to me. Doesn't mean it won't be successful.

I get that FLE won't appeal to everyone. But you do understand the need for it or something like it, right?

I used to have a lot of debates with people about how the large princess fanbased was underserved at WDW. I'll dredge up those arguments if I have to, but hopefully that isn't necessary.

Also, just want to point out that I don't have any objection to VV. I am just stating the reasons why I don't think Disney will ever build it at MK and why I think it would be a bad idea to do so.

If the Villains are this much of a liability, they would have removed all the villain characters from the aprks, and no one would want to have their picture taken with them.

There's a big difference between having a few villain characters and devoting an entire land to them.

Also, I believe they have scaled down on walk-around villains. Have they not?

 

[spacemt354]

Toad was not removed because it was too scary, it was removed for its real estate to build Pooh.

And guys, we're talking about a flume ride with a large drop. So, I think BTMR and SM are good rides to compare it to. Little kids wouldn't be riding it.

Since this is all subjective, without knowing all the details, seeing how popular Splash is with its, ummm, unique theming, I would bet VV could rival Splash in popularity.

Now, I don't know specifics or statistics, but I would wager that the vast majority of Disney visitors know about Disney villains, and I'd wager even more that it would probably appeal to them.

And please, I doubt a ride where the villains (as I've heard) are defeated by the good guys, is going to make any kid aspire to be a Disney villain. This is just good fun. You really don't want your kid growing up to be a pirate (who rapes, robs and pillages), either. But POTC is still a fun ride. And I haven't heard any problems of the ride corrupting children.

It may not appeal to you, but guess what? The FLE doesn't appeal to me. Doesn't mean it won't be successful.

If the Villains are this much of a liability, they would have removed all the villain characters from the parks, and no one, especially children, would want to have their picture taken with them.

Well we already have a flume ride with a large drop. I wouldn't want a second one. I get wet on splash, why would I want to get wet again on the Villians ride, and vice versa. I think they would cancel themselves out. Im sure it would be fun, but if I rode Villians I wouldn't go and ride splash because I would be accomplishing the same thing...getting wet.

Pirates is different. Kids dress up as jack sparrow (the good guy) they don't dress up as Davy jones. And sometimes it sounds like this Villians concept is actually coming. It's not. I don't really like the concept, but even I did, I'm not going to get all worked up about a blue sky idea. I'm not saying that you are, but nobody's opinion on this really determines anything, because this is a hypothetical concept.

But nevertheless, I just cannot envision the magic kingdom housing an area just for Villians. I just can't. Maybe Hollywood studios...maybe. But if you had a top 5 Disney Villians list for me, I wouldn't really have to give it much thought. I'd probably just say the first five that came to my head. But if you asked me my top 5 Disney heroes, I would have to give it some thought, and narrow it down because that's a tough one. I just like the back stories and concepts of Disney heroes more than the stories behind the Villians

 

[alissafalco]

That is so paper thin. Every bit of the HM is scary to a kid.

Every kid I knew was just as afraid of Pirates as HM. And yes, Toad was scary and POPULAR. Saying a scary attraction won't work just isn't true.

And I'm sure it would appeal to a WIDE variety of people. And I seriously doubt they would make it a scary ride. People have grown up with these villains and they're just as endearing as "the heros" to Disney fans.

not me when I was five....and I wasn't a tough kid by any means. I loved both those rides.

 

[misterID]

I will take that bet!

I have yet to see any proof of the villain's popularity. Has Disney ever successfully marketed them?




I get that FLE won't appeal to everyone. But you do understand the need for it or something like it, right?

I used to have a lot of debates with people about how the large princess fanbased was underserved at WDW. I'll dredge up those arguments if I have to, but hopefully that isn't necessary.

Also, just want to point out that I don't have any objection to VV. I am just stating the reasons why I don't think Disney will ever build it at MK and why I think it would be a bad idea to do so.



There's a big difference between having a few villain characters and devoting an entire land to them.

Also, I believe they have scaled down on walk-around villains. Have they not?

Let me resond to the last three posts here:

Of course MK should expand the appeal to different demographics, including young girls with the "princesses demographic." Absolutely agree. And adding a VV would appeal to boys (imo), teens, adults, which MK desperately needs. Less a kiddy park. Wouldn't you agree it should appeal to everyone? We can disagree on the amount of knowledge Disney visitors have of Disney villains, but I always see villain charcters out in the parks.

And What I understand, it would be a stretch to say the Villains would have their own land, but just a piece of an existing land.

I haven't seen any proof Song Of The South is a popular franchise, or that you need a popular franchise to make a popular attraction. And I don't see a problem with a second water-based attraction because, as Lee pointed out, it would have been different.

And Pirates are different than Disney villains. They were REAL murderers and thieves who raped robbed and plundered. You have a serial killing bride in the Haunted Mansion!

Also, I loved HM and POTC when I was a kid too. It doesn't change the fact they were both scary rides.

 

[nytimez]

The villains concept sounds awesome. Done right, I can't see how it couldn't be a huge hit with guests.

Weird to argue about the strength of the villains as a franchise, tho. Whatever it is would have to ultimately live or die on the strength of the attractions built... not the franchise itself. A lame land based on a strong franchise would ultimately fail (after the initial excitement wears off)... and a great land based on even a weak franchise could certainly succeed.

Anyway, I'm eager to hear more from '74 about the eventual changes at DHS (and anywhere else). Any more red meat for us wolves??? Please?

 

[Villains0501]

I will take that bet!

I have yet to see any proof of the villain's popularity. Has Disney ever successfully marketed them?

Well, just this past Monday, the Disney Store added close to 60 new Disney Villains products on their website, including the new Disney Villains Designer Doll Collection (which sold out within hours).

The success of MNSSHP is, I believe, largely due to the presence of the Villains.

The Sorcerers of the Magic Kingdom is now one of the hottest attractions at MK and it heavily incorporates the Villains (even more so than "Fantasmic!").

But if you really need proof, go to social media sites like Tumblr or Pinterest and just see how many Disney Villains-focused blogs exist. You won't know where to start.

I think the Villains are more popular than you give them credit for, or they're at least headed that way. I think the Villains brand is entering into a new phase of marketable success, and TDO is finally realizing it. I mean, Maleficent (arguably one of the most popular Disney Villains) is getting her own big-budget movie next year, starring Hollywood A-lister Angelina Jolie.

 

[lebeau]

Of course MK should expand the appeal to different demographics, including young girls with the "princesses demographic." Absolutely agree. And adding a VV would appeal to boys (imo), teens, adults, which MK desperately needs. Less a kiddy park. Wouldn't you agree it should appeal to everyone?

Sure. But I would also argue that it already does. MK and WDW as a whole are geared primarily towards boys. There is still plenty for teens and adults at MK although I will acknowledge that there has been a shift towards it becoming a kiddie park. I would hate to see it cross a point of being just a kiddie park.

I actually doubt the villains hold all that much appeal to teens or adults beyond those who are obsessed with Disney anyway. But I'm sure any e-ticket attraction regardless of theme would have at least some appeal to teens and adults.

I haven't seen any proof Song Of The South is a popular franchise, or that you need a popular franchise to make a popular attraction. And I don't see a problem with a second water-based attraction because, as Lee pointed out, it would have been different.

You can base a ride on an unpopular property like Song of the South. But Disney isn't really in the habit of doing so these days. I actually think the Villains franchise on its own merits would drive away more guests than it would attract. I suspect an e-ticket would be more popular with a neutral theme than it would be with a villlains theme. Obviously, pure speculation.

I don't have a problem with two water rides if they are different enough. I love water rides.

Also, I loved HM and POTC when I was a kid too. It doesn't change the fact they were both scary rides.

My $.02. I was an easy kid to scare. Pirates didn't scare me even a little bit. HM scared me until we got passed the stretching room. From there on, I was good.

Weird to argue about the strength of the villains as a franchise, tho. Whatever it is would have to ultimately live or die on the strength of the attractions built... not the franchise itself. A lame land based on a strong franchise would ultimately fail (after the initial excitement wears off)... and a great land based on even a weak franchise could certainly succeed.

Anyway, I'm eager to hear more from '74 about the eventual changes at DHS (and anywhere else). Any more red meat for us wolves??? Please?

Agreed that a franchise doesn't make or break an attraction. It would have to survive on it's own merits. But I do believe that the villains would chase off more guests than it would attract. So almost any other theme (that wasn't somehow repellent to a lot of guests) would likely be preferable to the villains.

I do agree though that we should move on from this massive thread drift.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Doesn't stop them from having all the princesses hang out together.
Same thing, in my opinion.

So having all the villains together turns you on?

 

[lebeau]

Well, just this past Monday, the Disney Store added close to 60 new Disney Villains products on their website, including the new Disney Villains Designer Doll Collection (which sold out within hours).

The success of MNSSHP is, I believe, largely due to the presence of the Villains.

The Sorcerers of the Magic Kingdom is now one of the hottest attractions at MK and it heavily incorporates the Villains (even more so than "Fantasmic!").

But if you really need proof, go to social media sites like Tumblr or Pinterest and just see how many Disney Villains-focused blogs exist. You won't know where to start.

I think the Villains are more popular than you give them credit for, or they're at least headed that way. I think the Villains brand is entering into a new phase of marketable success, and TDO is finally realizing it. I mean, Maleficent (arguably one of the most popular Disney Villains) is getting her own big-budget movie next year, starring Hollywood A-lister Angelina Jolie.

All that stuff points out to me is that there is a small, rapid fan base which I already knew.

I actually see the Villains franchise as one that had it's hey day and is receding in popularity if anything. These things are impossible to prove one way or another. That's just my perception of things which is more or less the opposite of yours.

I do know that the villains merch is always on clearance at our Disney Store. But that's purely anecdotal.

It is possible that the Maleficent movie could give the franchise a shot in the arm. But I don't really see that happening. At best, it will give Maleficent a moment of increased popularity like the Tim Burton Alice did a couple years back.

 

[RSoxNo1]

This is an honest question and not meant to be condescending. Why did the Pirates and Princess Parties fail? I had heard that the Firework's show was apparently very good. Could this have been modified to a Villains and Princess Parties or would that be too similar to the Not So Scary Party?

 

[PeoplemoverTTA]

I actually see the Villains franchise as one that had it's hey day and is receding in popularity if anything. These things are impossible to prove one way or another. That's just my perception of things which is more or less the opposite of yours.

I respect your opinion, but I disagree that the villains' popularity is waning. SoTMK is bringing well-known and more obscure villains to a younger generation, making them "cool." I also think the game is serving to make them less scary, as very young children are "defeating" these villains on a regular basis. Imho, bringing a villain-themed land to MK now would be excellent timing. Too bad it's not a reality.

 

[Tiggerrules]

Interesting that Disney Insider just sent this out about villians. Hope this link uploads correctly.
http://disney.go.com/disneyinsider/insider/email/20120821

 

[dsigno51]

Hey guys, I'm new to this forum but I found this thread really interesting so I just had to post.

In my opinion, I think TDO needs to focus more on bringing Epcot up to date and attract some more interest there than adding a whole Villian section to MK. Now that they added the new FLE, I think they definitely need to focus some attention on Future World. I was there this summer, and it seemed to lack any central theme at all. It was definitely better in previous years. There are some really cool things they could do with FW to attract visitors, even draw visitors away from Uni if they put enough effort into it. Epcot was relevant in the 80s and 90s, and it definitely needs some TLC. As for AK, not really a fan of the whole Avatar thing.

 

[lebeau]

I respect your opinion, but I disagree that the villains' popularity is waning. SoTMK is bringing well-known and more obscure villains to a younger generation, making them "cool." I also think the game is serving to make them less scary, as very young children are "defeating" these villains on a regular basis. Imho, bringing a villain-themed land to MK now would be excellent timing. Too bad it's not a reality.

I think it's way too early to judge what kind of impact SoTMK might have on the popularity of Disney villains. Of the total population of the US, relatively few have any idea such a thing as SoTMK even exists. Maybe if the game is around in 5 or 10 years, it will have the kind of impact you're talking about. But I seriously doubt it will ever happen. In the grand scheme of things, SoTMK will never be more than a blip on the cultural radar.

 

[WDW1974]

OK, I am officially out of 'my' own thread. When it gets back on track (or partially) or there's more news to drop here, I'll be back.

Y'all have fun and please don't be like the typical rube WDW guest that puts their shoes up on the furniture in the lobbies of Disney's deluxe resorts. I ain't cleaning up after you ... and I doubt The Mom is either.

 

[Villains0501]

All that stuff points out to me is that there is a small, rapid fan base which I already knew.

I actually see the Villains franchise as one that had it's hey day and is receding in popularity if anything. These things are impossible to prove one way or another. That's just my perception of things which is more or less the opposite of yours.

I do know that the villains merch is always on clearance at our Disney Store. But that's purely anecdotal.

It is possible that the Maleficent movie could give the franchise a shot in the arm. But I don't really see that happening. At best, it will give Maleficent a moment of increased popularity like the Tim Burton Alice did a couple years back.

How can you say they've had their hey day when Disney is still producing volumes of Villains merchandise? A year, even a few months ago, I would've agreed with you. Villains merchandise was just nowhere to be found. Now, however, things are on the up-swing. I've been to three Disney stores in three different states in the past two months, and I've found new Villains merchandise in every single one of them. From a new mug/dishware set in NY to plush and toy sets in DE to shirts, bags, and now dolls in VA, Villains are everywhere. I'll go ahead and copy in a link to the Disney Store website just so you can see this progress for yourself:

http://www.disneystore.com/disney-villains/mn/1000017/

Whether you like it or not, Villains are finally on the rise and I couldn't be happier!