News 'Encanto' and 'Indiana Jones'-themed experiences at Animal Kingdom

[Jayspency]

it's quite simple.

1. Family sees that Encanto ride + meet and greet is coming to Disney World.
2. Omg little Susie loves Encanto and would love to meet the Madrigals.
3. The ride is brand new, long waits, but has an ILL
4. The family goes and little Suzie LOVES the ride with new loveable animal sidekick of some sort.
5. Wow special T-shirt for the ride, animal sidekick plush, and a new Encanto ride pin.
6. It's okay to splurge, this was the whole reason we came basically.
7. Oh wow, Bruno + Mirabel are meeting with pictures. The pictures that the photographer took are great, might as well buy them or the photo package.

Thats how you turn liking Encanto and maybe buying a plush into $100+ of profit on 1 family.

ok but this happens with any new ride at disney, IP or original. going off track to the IP mandate because I also don't get why Disney thinks only IP based things pull in visitors and money when these things will happen regardless of IP.

 

[Architectural Guinea Pig]

ok but this happens with any new ride at disney, IP or original. going off track to the IP mandate because I also don't get why Disney thinks only IP based things pull in visitors and money when these things will happen regardless of IP.

What difference does it make if you have no context at all about an attraction and don't know that the IP is a movie? The IP, an original story, is usually made by Disney, so it's still Disney, is it not?

People want to visit these places, seeing places like Hogwarts come to real life is not just seeing the magic, it's entering the magic. We should be grateful that Imagineers and Universal designers continue to pour creativity and their personal touches even in these worlds. If you don't know about Avatar, you'll still like it, if you know Avatar, you'll love it and buy more and more.

Most people won't buy an Everest t-shirt because they liked the ride- but being able to buy a Star Wars sweatshirt that has cultural significance, lets you brag about going to Galaxy's Edge, and be recognized by everyone around you, you're going to want to buy it. And the numbers prove it.

 

[coffeefan]

IPs sell more, and children especially want to see their faves at the park.

 

[Jayspency]

What difference does it make if you have no context at all about an attraction and don't know that the IP is a movie? The IP, an original story, is usually made by Disney, so it's still Disney, is it not?

People want to visit these places, seeing places like Hogwarts come to real life is not just seeing the magic, it's entering the magic. We should be grateful that Imagineers and Universal designers continue to pour creativity and their personal touches even in these worlds. If you don't know about Avatar, you'll still like it, if you know Avatar, you'll love it and buy more and more.

Most people won't buy an Everest t-shirt because they liked the ride- but being able to buy a Star Wars sweatshirt that has cultural significance, lets you brag about going to Galaxy's Edge, and be recognized by everyone around you, you're going to want to buy it. And the numbers prove it.

Ik its all Disney IP I just say "original rides" to differentiate movie and park IP easier.

At the end of the day I don't really care if a ride is movie IP or theme park IP, I care about the quality of an attraction and the experience. I agree with what your points that movie IP based rides are generally more successful than park IP because of name recognition , I just find it concerning that Disney is almost only making movie IP based rides, sometimes at the expense of park theming like with nemo and CR in Epcot, from now on because they think its the only way they can make money when park IP rides like Everest or TOT for example have been successful in the past and are still very popular today.

 

[DisneyHead123]

it's quite simple.

1. Family sees that Encanto ride + meet and greet is coming to Disney World.
2. Omg little Susie loves Encanto and would love to meet the Madrigals.
3. The ride is brand new, long waits, but has an ILL
4. The family goes and little Suzie LOVES the ride with new loveable animal sidekick of some sort.
5. Wow special T-shirt for the ride, animal sidekick plush, and a new Encanto ride pin.
6. It's okay to splurge, this was the whole reason we came basically.
7. Oh wow, Bruno + Mirabel are meeting with pictures. The pictures that the photographer took are great, might as well buy them or the photo package.

Thats how you turn liking Encanto and maybe buying a plush into $100+ of profit on 1 family.

This is a very cheery and wholesome scenario. Alternate take: if you wave a bunch of toys in front of overstimulated children exiting a ride, at some point they will start screaming bloody murder about how they need a $40 remote control Mickey jeep and their parents will decide that’s a fair price to pay to exit the store with a shred of sanity before one of the shelves packed with Very Breakable Things gets taken out. I mean that’s what I heard. From, um, a friend.

Slightly off topic but it seems like every girl I know between the ages of around 7-11 this year is going to be a Descendant’s character for Halloween. Anecdotal, but if it really is the marketing madness it seems to be, wondering how long it will be until they show up in the park? They seem strangely underrepresented in the park stores.

 

[UNCgolf]

Ik its all Disney IP I just say "original rides" to differentiate movie and park IP easier.

At the end of the day I don't really care if a ride is movie IP or theme park IP, I care about the quality of an attraction and the experience. I agree with what your points that movie IP based rides are generally more successful than park IP because of name recognition , I just find it concerning that Disney is almost only making movie IP based rides, sometimes at the expense of park theming like with nemo and CR in Epcot, from now on because they think its the only way they can make money when park IP rides like Everest or TOT for example have been successful in the past and are still very popular today.

Well Tower of Terror isn't technically park IP, even though the ride itself would work just fine without the Twilight Zone IP attached.

Still, though, plenty of good examples. Pirates, Haunted Mansion, Spaceship Earth, etc.

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

even though the ride itself would work just fine without the Twilight Zone IP attached.

HARD disagree on that. For me that's a case in which the IP actually elevates the attraction.

 

[UNCgolf]

HARD disagree on that. For me that's a case in which the IP actually elevates the attraction.

At this point a significant number of riders don't even know what the Twilight Zone is, though. I don't think it would affect their enjoyment if it was something generic instead of Twilight Zone, even if I agree with you that the Twilight Zone makes it better.

 

[Jayspency]

HARD disagree on that. For me that's a case in which the IP actually elevates the attraction.

It definitely does, they would have to redo the entire storyline to work without TTZ. But Iger put old IP/park IP together when talking about IP in the parks so that's why I counted TOT even though it is technically TV IP

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

But... but... it's immensely popular! Culturally relevant!! Bob is making it a franchise!!!

It is immensely popular and culturally relevant. I see a lot of merchandise for it around where I live, but it does seem they keep a lot of the more top drawer stuff at the parks for reasons unknown. But it is indeed insanely popular. If you work with around children at all, you know. It and Moana rule their lives.

 

[Brer Panther]

I mean, did Stitch's Great Escape increase attendance (from Lilo and Stitch fans or otherwise) at the Magic Kingdom? Did Journey of Water increase attendance at EPCOT?

Thats how you turn liking Encanto and maybe buying a plush into $100+ of profit on 1 family.

That's assuming that the family who loves Encanto can even afford to go to the parks, what with all the price increases.

And just so we're clear, I'm not against the idea of an Encanto attraction, I'm just against it going in Animal Kingdom.

 

[Coaster Lover]

ok but this happens with any new ride at disney, IP or original. going off track to the IP mandate because I also don't get why Disney thinks only IP based things pull in visitors and money when these things will happen regardless of IP.

To an extent, true, but choosing the right IP and the right matching merchandise/food can have a significant impact... I'm sure Universal sold substantially more Butter Beer than Disney has sold of LeFou's Brew.

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

I mean, did Stitch's Great Escape increase attendance (from Lilo and Stitch fans or otherwise) at the Magic Kingdom? Did Journey of Water increase attendance at EPCOT?

That's assuming that the family who loves Encanto can even afford to go to the parks, what with all the price increases.

And just so we're clear, I'm not against the idea of an Encanto attraction, I'm just against it going in Animal Kingdom.

Honestly, yeah I think something like journey of water increased attendance, EPCOT has been doing much better attendance wise and I've seen the lines for Moana. They've allowed her to join that park and make it more approachable for kids with a simple walkthrough. The lines for meeting her were crazy last time I went and I imagine many of those families have photopass.

Yeah... of course I'm assuming they have the money because that's what this convo is about. An Encanto attraction will 100% be a make or break for some families on the vacation decision for which park to choose. Meanwhile lets just say Disney continued Dinoland USA and even added the excavator coaster like people wanted. Do you think the family with a young girl is going to choose AK now instead of MK where they can get Seven Dwarves, Big Thunder, etc? No. Full stop. Encanto can make them do a day at AK instead of another park but the excavator coaster is not. Maybe an older demographic? No, because IOA has a dinosaur boat ride AND a much more intense coaster for the teens/young adults all themed to a famous popular franchise. THAT is why Dinosaurs didn't work.

You can like it or not like it all you want, end of the day, a family is going to choose what they know over a random ride with little association to what they know. They are going to choose Jurassic Park over Dinosaur any day. Velocicoaster is gonna win over the Excavator no matter how good it would have been. So why play second fiddle? Disney has an IP that other parks in Florida CAN'T have, can't use, and its a proven seller. Why not add a proven seller to their least visited park? It worked last time they did it and is still seen as one of the most popular/best theme park lands and the movies were barely a footnote in pop culture.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

Rafiki’s Planet Watch has the animation experience, which should 100% be considered an attraction. Also, while you don’t seem to care about petting goats, kids love it.

Kids aren’t the only ones who love petting animals! Haha

 

[MR.Dis]

I think you are skewing your numbers but choosing not to include things on your list.

Rides (8):
Flight of Passage
Navi River Journey
Kilimanjaro Safari
Wildlife Express
Everest
Kali
Triceratops Spin
Dinosaur

Dedicated Shows (4):
Lion King
Nemo
Tough to be a Bug
Feathered Friends

Major Attractions(4):
Boneyard
Gorilla Falls Trail
Maharaja Jungle Trek
Rafiki's Plant Watch

When I counted I did NOT include your major attractions, just not in my calculation as an attraction. Yes, I have done all four, the trails are ok but the boneyard or Rafiki's really are not attractions. The dedicated shows I did count, but forgot the feathered friends. The thing is even if you count all of them it comes to 16, and as I originally stated all parks should have over 20.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I would count the train and Rafikis together as an attraction - I have issues with them but I still think they count.

I’d also add the oasis and tree of life trails together as an attraction- they are very nice to explore although they have a few less animals now I think?

But I think we all agree DAK needs more.

 

[The Leader of the Club]

I hope that, once TAs is done, the next step is adding some attractions to Africa, Asia, or Pandora. Hopefully finally bringing rides themed to Jungle Book or Lion King to this park.

 

[MistaDee]

By definition, a climate in the tropics is a tropical environment.

You seem to be struggling to understand the difference between the two definitions of tropical here, but that's ok it can be kind of tricky:

There are snow capped mountains and sand-duney deserts between the Tropic of Cancer and Tropic of Capricorn.

The high mountain environments of the Andes and deserts found between the two tropics are geographically/astronomically "tropical" according to definition 1

However, they don't meet the criteria for temperature or moisture to be "tropical" climates, even though they are geographically within the tropics. Here's a map of tropical climate zones, inclusive of tropical rainforest, savannah and monsoon zones:

As you can see there are plenty of environments within the tropics that aren't tropical climates, such as the northern Andes where camelids like guanaco, llamas and alpaca evolved to have such thick lovely coats.

A rain forest is not the only "tropical climate." In fact, rain forests can be found outside the tropics.

Did I claim that a rain forest is the only tropical climate? Did I say rain forests are only found between the two tropics?

"Tropical America" is not about rain forests.

Disney is the one who will be applying whichever definition of "tropical" they feel is appropriate - not you or me on these forums so I'll let them make prescriptive statements about what "Tropical Americas" is really about.

Encanto is located in the tropics and it is a mountainous forest and not a rain forest.

Encanto is set within a "cloud forest" that is absolutely a rain forest by pretty much any definition.

 

[MisterPenguin]

You seem to be struggling to understand the difference between the two definitions of tropical here, but that's ok it can be kind of tricky:

View attachment 823452



The high mountain environments of the Andes and deserts found between the two tropics are geographically/astronomically "tropical" according to definition 1

However, they don't meet the criteria for temperature or moisture to be "tropical" climates, even though they are geographically within the tropics. Here's a map of tropical climate zones, inclusive of tropical rainforest, savannah and monsoon zones:

"temperatures high enough to support-year round growth" is not the same thing as a region with actual year round growth.

"given sufficient moisture" is not the same thing as actually having that moisture.

The map you provide shows your narrow scope. The topics goes around the whole earth, not just in the Western Hemisphere.

Part of the Sahara desert is tropical.

Period.

A "cloud forest" could be a rain forest, but not necessarily.

"Rainforests are forests characterized by a closed and continuous tree canopy, moisture-dependent vegetation, the presence of epiphytes and lianas and the absence of wildfire." -Wikipedia

But whether you use "cloud forest" or "rain forest" the movie did not show us a continuous tree canopy shading everything below, nor the regular rolling in and out of the fog/mist of a cloud forest.

 

[Brer Panther]

Well, on the bright side, at least the long lines that the Encanto ride will supposedly have will mean shorter lines for Kilimanjaro Safaris. Hopefully.