Expedition Everest Question

Lynx04

Lynx04

New Member
LoisMustDie said:
Thank you for pointing that out, but yes I realize this. My point was that these PARTICULAR ex-Imagineers (who worked on D ick Tracy until they were let go when the ride was abandoned) brought their ideas (which were already proposed for a Disney attraction) and used them for SM and MIB. I should have been clearer in my response, I know. But this is almost the exact situation as the Dragon's Tower/Dueling Dragons story, albeit less obvious.
Click to expand...

I remember reading a story about how surprised Eisner was when he saw DD, and how it seemed so closely related to DT. It is true that a lot of the creative staff of Disney, Universal and other parks have left to start their own companies specializing in building park attractions. Their is more job sercurity working for a company that makes attractions for all parks rather than working for a single company (Disney, Universal, Cedar Fair, ect) that only needs you for one attractions then lets you go.


(Slightly off topic, but related)
You are right though, Disney does get a lot of opportunities to make attractions first. It is Disney that passes on a lot of concepts and ideas. Just as an example of other things in that Disney has passed on that in other divisons of the company:

Pixar - Disney had an opportunity to buy Lucas' share in Pixar, Eisner said no.
Surviver - Disney skipped on Survivor became huge hit for CBS
CSI - Another pass on Disney's part, big hit for CBS.
Lord of the Rings - Head of the studios and Eisner both said no to the Wienstiens about making the trilogy, which was on the plate for Eisner's taking at a lower price too.
The Sixth Sense - The studio head sold Disney's stake in the film right before the release ending up only earning a distrubtion fee. Film became the highest grossing Disney live action film. :brick: :brick: :brick:

Disney has made a habit of not taking advantage of potential hits, or taking risks. It just shows that lack of creative, or out of touch of what consumers want that excists in the upper echilon.
 
LoisMustDie

LoisMustDie

New Member
Glasgow said:
What's wrong with Universal having a few good rides?
Click to expand...
Never said it was wrong. Just answering a question. It IS wrong that Universal gets their good rides from ideas that were already pitched to Disney, however.

Lynx04 said:
Disney has made a habit of not taking advantage of potential hits, or taking risks. It just shows that lack of creative, or out of touch of what consumers want that excists in the upper echilon.
Click to expand...
Here here!
 
C

CaptainMichael

Well-Known Member
MickeyMan101 said:
Anybody know If i might be able to get on EE in early to mid july?? Please say yes! Sorry it's kind of off topic:)

MickeyMan101
Click to expand...

Have you seen any of the pictures taken of Everest recently???? At the very most, they may start painting in July. Even that is a stretch!
 
Madison

Madison

New Member
LoisMustDie said:
Actually you are correct, in a way. They were FORMER Imagineers. They were let go in the early 90s. The attraction that you are referring to was the never-built "D ick Tracy's Crimestoppers" at MGM. The former Imagineers took the layout, theme, etc. from that attraction (which was also supposed to be interactive much like Buzz Lightyear) and made both Spider-Man and Men In Black with those ideas.

So yes, for those keeping score: even Universal's "original" attractions were never really original.
Click to expand...

Any technology that former Imagineers developed while with WDI is owned wholly by The Walt Disney Company, as is intellectual property. If any part of The Amazing Adventures of Spiderman ride system was developed at WDI, you would not see it at Islands of Adventure today.
 
LoisMustDie

LoisMustDie

New Member
Madison said:
Any technology that former Imagineers developed while with WDI is owned wholly by The Walt Disney Company, as is intellectual property. If any part of The Amazing Adventures of Spiderman ride system was developed at WDI, you would not see it at Islands of Adventure today.
Click to expand...
That's because it wasn't the same technology. The Crimestoppers ride utilized an EMV and AAs. The Spider-Man team had to come up with a different ride vehicle (which holds the same properties as the EMV without being copyright infringement) and used the 3-D screens (which were made from a totally new material). What I was saying that the layout, theme, storyline, etc. were rehashed from DT for both SM and MIB.

P.S. Wasn't AAs developed by WDI? If so, how can so many other parks use them?
 
Madison

Madison

New Member
I don't understand how you could consider them at all similar or say that ideas were borrowed from "Crimestoppers" for "Spiderman". To my thinking, that's a bit like saying "King Kong" borrowed from "Pirates of the Caribbean". It did, in some sense, in that it was a new generation of dark ride in the same way that "Pirates" was new compared to, say, "Ye Olde Mill" at Rye Playland.

I don't think you're suggesting that the "Spiderman" ride layout, sets, and designs were taken from "Crimestoppers," but I'm curious as to how that might play out.

Am I able to construct a building based on the unrealized design of another firm? If I went off and built a theme park that looks just like Long Beach's DisneySea, does The Walt Disney Co. have any recourse? I'd imagine they do, but I'm unclear on that. I guess it's some violation of their intellectual property rights.

I guess I agree that it's fair to say that one ride influenced another, but -- without knowing anything at all about the actual events surrounding either attractions' development -- I find it difficult to believe that they had anything in substantial in common.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom