Disney's Hollywood Studios: What's Next

[Thrill Seeker]

Down with the hat! As a Movie Rider, I can't stand the thing. As a fan of cohesive theming, I can't stand the thing. It ruins the 1940s feel of Hollywood Blvd. The day they announce the Hat is coming down, I want to go to Studios and kick it a few times just to say I contributed to it's deconstruction!

 

[WDWFREAK53]

I think they should move the hat out in front where they place the Christmas Tree. People would see it coming from land and sea! It would also keep a lot of the "picture taking" outside of the park.

 

[Ignohippo]

I rember that the Earful Tower was there long before the park had opened. You could see it while driving up into WDW. It made us very excited about the new park they were gonna build!

That's a hidden advantage of the Earful Tower: it is visible from World Drive, it welcomes visitors into WDW, on their way to the MK and EPCOT. Functioning like a sculpted 3D version of the famous 'it all started with a mouse'. To drive to the MK, you pass by Walt's studio, where a dream factory is build on producing mouse cartoons.
Fantastic, an icon for a park, that serves a double function as a beacon for the entire World.

'Hidden' advantage, because the view from World Drive is mostly blocked by trees. Nothing that three Canucks in an afternoon can fix!

Totally true, however it can't be seen from most of the park. The park "icon" for each park is generally something that can be seen through most of the park. One of the benefits is that it can help people find their bearings when walking around and find the park's center. Besides being totally unoriginal (it's someone else's building for heaven's sakes), the theater simply isn't tall enough to be seen from far away. I love the theater, am totally indifferent about the hat but hate how it blocks the theater.

Personally, I'd like to see a new street opened up going in between the restaurants on Sunset Boulevard and back behind Rock n' Rollercoaster. The hat would be moved to an new courtyard at the end of the street.

 

[sWANNISAX]

I think the hat has a place but not where it is now. I think it should become a new facade for the Disney studios section of the park. Place it so it's the front of the animation tour area. You enter the are through it or it sits above the building. It would be more appropriate there and allow the entrance to regain some majesty.

 

[Beholder]

Perhaps as a building facade or part of an attraction queue, they could set it level on the ground, creating a walk through. Inside the hat, we could witness the "mind" of the wizard (Yensid) at work. Various HD screens showing bits of Disney history such as movie clips, concept models, blue sky ideas, historical footage of Walt, his family, and maybe enhanced with lighting/sound fx. It would be kind of cool to have audio recordings of Walt saying some of his more famous quotes.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I'd say Avatar and Lord of the Rings are equally PG-13.
If we're really playing the "family friendly" card, there's all kinds of shootings and hangings and stabbings and whatnot in the Pirates movies, and they're not even good.

Not that I'm a huge Avatar fan, but I don't see the Lord of the Rings universe translating that well into a large-scale theme park attraction area. That world, as portrayed in the Jackson movies is mostly based on huge vistas and are on such a scale that they just couldn't work without actually putting the guests on an airplane and flying them to New Zealand.

For this reason you can build, say, the Ewok tree village in your theme park and have it look halfway decent, but something like Hobbiton just wouldn't work.

On a recent episode of Unofficial Guide's Disney Dish with Jim Hill and Len Testa, they discussed the Theme Park Rights to Lord of the Rings. Universal would be looking at it as a larger land in Islands of Adventure that would take over a portion of the Toon Lagoon section (keeping Popeye and Bluto's and Dudley Do Right's) whereas Disney was looking at a single scene in The Great Movie Ride. I feel this rumor has been around for both of these for a while so I don't know how fresh this is. He did cite the fact that Jackson is likely waiting to finish up work on The Hobbit movies before he moves on a Theme Park endeavor.

Cars Land works because it embodies nostalgia in the form of a bygone era of Americana, a spectacular unique landscape, and fantastic characters possible to replicate in a real environment.

I love Monsters Inc, watched it today actually, but I don't get the same impression from Monstropolis that I do from Radiator Springs. It is like a version of the lower east side of manhattan with Monster themed gags. That isn't the environment that needs the big land. Unless Monsters University introduces us to something else more compelling.

Here is my idea; extend Pixar Place to take over what should be the Bug's Life Playzone and retheme New York Street to Monstropolis.

There is an element of Monstropolis already in Pixar Place. You can view the explanation here, but here's the full quote from Page 1 of the thread:

Tonight I decided to pop Monsters, Inc. into the DVD player for some night time entertainment. Not even five minutes into watching I noticed something oddly familiar sitting in the background. Pay close attention to the next two pictures...

1. "Bridge" at DHS at the current "end" of Pixar Place

2. Workout scene at beginning of Monsters, Inc.


Quite similar in style, right down to the circle in the metal work. At first I thought this was a coincidence but watching more there were MANY instances of something like this:

throughout Mike and Sully's walk to work. In my mind, this all but confirms that Soundstage 1 has a Monsters, Inc. themed ride coming its way in some form (doorway scene rollercoaster or not). Perhaps this next part of Pixar Place will look like this, some of the trees are even planted already...

 

[RSoxNo1]

Carsland? No. Again.

RSR? Possibly. Not yet.

Something else? Probably. Sooner.

Count me amongst those that would prefer Carsland and RSR being a California exclusive offering. Should we be encouraged that Disney seems to be feeling the same way?

 

[RSoxNo1]

Originality is expensive, and the chances of I or my family, (or most of the East Coast for that matter) ever going across the continent to California Adventure (and not just Disneyland) are virtually non-existent, so if Carsland is a known hit and MGM needs an expansion, why not build a second Carsland?

I'm pretty sure people weren't complaining about "originality" when they built the Magic Kingdom's Pirates of the Caribbean.
Much the opposite, actually.

Carsland cost $600 million. There hasn't been a more expensive addition to any Disney World park. $600 million would go a long way for original attractions, or it could go towards Carsland.

As for Pirates of the Caribbean, that was 39 years ago and it was built largely instead of Western River Expedition. While we romanticize things that never happened, it's something that's widely considered as the crown jewel of unbuilt attractions.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I actually like the hat as a structure, just not there at all. I know it's a 'fake' icon created for marketing since the other 3 parks had a legit one, but just move it. It doesn't need a big 'reveal' like Cinderella's Castle or the Tree of Life, and isn't spectacular like Spaceship Earth, so just stick it somewhere. I think out front, where the Christmas tree (I mean, holiday tree) goes.

I few the hat as something tacky, like the oversized props at Pop Century, All Stars, and to a lesser extent Art of Animation. In fact, the hat would be a great icon for the Art of Animation resort.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I vote for a new centerpiece, something taking the best of both ideas and combining them. That's what I would like to see.

I believe that the icon should be Tower of Terror. We discussed this recently on our show that aside from maybe Kilimanjaro Safaris, it is the one attraction that is most integral to the park where it resides. The entire beginning of that park is a build up to Tower of Terror. The walk down Hollywood Boulevard onto Sunset Boulevard helps contribute to the abandoned hotel at the end of the street. What's more impressive is that this was an addition to the park after the fact. The only issue I see with this is that the attraction itself is limiting, but in terms of the park's focus I can't think of a better option.

 

[djlaosc]

On a recent episode of Unofficial Guide's Disney Dish with Jim Hill and Len Testa, they discussed the Theme Park Rights to Lord of the Rings. Universal would be looking at it as a larger land in Islands of Adventure that would take over a portion of the Toon Lagoon section (keeping Popeye and Bluto's and Dudley Do Right's) whereas Disney was looking at a single scene in The Great Movie Ride. I feel this rumor has been around for both of these for a while so I don't know how fresh this is. He did cite the fact that Jackson is likely waiting to finish up work on The Hobbit movies before he moves on a Theme Park endeavor.

If this is the case, then I hope that Universal get the rights!

No one could complain about the loss of the Toon Theater. Would that mean the removal of "Comic Stip Cafe"?

 

[Bairstow]

Carsland cost $600 million. There hasn't been a more expensive addition to any Disney World park. $600 million would go a long way for original attractions, or it could go towards Carsland.

As for Pirates of the Caribbean, that was 39 years ago and it was built largely instead of Western River Expedition. While we romanticize things that never happened, it's something that's widely considered as the crown jewel of unbuilt attractions.

Heh. To play alternate history though, if you remember the politically-correct changes they made to Pirates in the '90s, can you imagine what they would have ended up having to do to Western River if it was built as planned?

Plus we'd probably have about thirty threads about how they never maintain the attraction correctly and that the rooftop cowboy on horseback wasn't working.

 

[Beholder]

@RSoxNo1 Wouldn't the decision to incorporate LOTR or Hobbit into a theme park attraction/land be made by the estate of Tolkien? I thought that his estate held all the rights and decision making powers concerning his physical/intellectual properties? I may be wrong, just wondering though. Also, didn't Tolkien have serious issues with Walt about his treatment of traditional folk tales? Turning them into watered down versions of the original stories? I wonder if the Tolkien estate would be willing to ease up on it's stance in light of HP's success?

 

[BeanSz]

I have been a long advocate of adding some more stuff for boys especially in the elementary and middle school age group. Disney has long been lacking boy-themed character meals. I love the idea of Carsland -- so very excited for trip to California to see. Would be great add -- but I think Disney would miss big opportunity at Studios if they did not build on the Marvel/Avenger success -- could be some really cool stuff here and would go well with a big part of the market segment.

 

[RSoxNo1]

@RSoxNo1 Wouldn't the decision to incorporate LOTR or Hobbit into a theme park attraction/land be made by the estate of Tolkien? I thought that his estate held all the rights and decision making powers concerning his physical/intellectual properties? I may be wrong, just wondering though. Also, didn't Tolkien have serious issues with Walt about his treatment of traditional folk tales? Turning them into watered down versions of the original stories? I wonder if the Tolkien estate would be willing to ease up on it's stance in light of HP's success?

I'm curious if Jackson would be used as a consultant? At this point I think it's nothing more than chatter.

 

[djlaosc]

I have been a long advocate of adding some more stuff for boys especially in the elementary and middle school age group. Disney has long been lacking boy-themed character meals. I love the idea of Carsland -- so very excited for trip to California to see. Would be great add -- but I think Disney would miss big opportunity at Studios if they did not build on the Marvel/Avenger success -- could be some really cool stuff here and would go well with a big part of the market segment.

Disney cannot build on the Marvel/Avenger success - Universal have the rights east of the Mississippi

 

[djlaosc]

I'm curious if Jackson would be used as a consultant? At this point I think it's nothing more than chatter.

You would think that he would have to be - do he and the Tolkien Estate get on well?

 

[tomman710]

@RSoxNo1 Wouldn't the decision to incorporate LOTR or Hobbit into a theme park attraction/land be made by the estate of Tolkien? I thought that his estate held all the rights and decision making powers concerning his physical/intellectual properties? I may be wrong, just wondering though. Also, didn't Tolkien have serious issues with Walt about his treatment of traditional folk tales? Turning them into watered down versions of the original stories? I wonder if the Tolkien estate would be willing to ease up on it's stance in light of HP's success?

I think they realized they whiffed on HP and I doubt they'll let another major franchise go by (of course this could be my optimisim outweighing the evidence that there are a million no brainer ideas they chuck every day) ... in fact its blatantly clear that they will now jump on any major major franchise (i.e. Avatar). If and when LotR is made available they will be first in line and realistically even with the problems at WDW, Tolkien's camp should be knocking on Disney's door first.

 

[Beholder]

I'm curious if Jackson would be used as a consultant? At this point I think it's nothing more than chatter.

If not Peter Jackson, then maybe those who wrote/negotiated the original film deal, perhaps using Jackson as leverage, stipulating that he would be used as an attraction consultant. I think the chatter is testament to the long term staying power of Tolkien's creations. I know some of it is wishful "you've got HP, but we have LOTR!" type of stuff, but I think overall that it would make (done correctly) for an incredible land. And it would have to be a "land" to do it justice.

And I think Disney is the one that should be courting the Tolkien estate. I don't think Tolkien's people cares if it ever turns into a theme park attraction. But I think Disney would reap huge rewards if this ever came to pass.

 

[Jedeye80]

I would love to seethe rings franchise at WDW, not sure who holds the rights be it the Tolkien estate or Peter Jackson but I'm sure I read somewhere that the Tolkien estate were not happy with how the films turned out, I could be wrong but not sure. To me it's the only franchise outside of star wars that could compete with potter and if done right would be amazing. It's a shame it's not still Disney MGM studios seeing as though MGM was involved in the making of the rings trilogy.