Fantasmic! 2.0 Rumors, Speculation, Announcments

[Disney Analyst]

TP, I totally agree.
Our minds think alike as I was going to mention 'Mermaid' in my previous post.
It is another excellent example of one of Disney's 'overused' IPs.

Considering the treasure trove of multiple characters, 'worlds', films, and tv shows over the many years the Studio has been producing product, it boggles the mind sometimes to see them constantly focusing on ONLY five to six properties.
Not only that, but those same five or six properties use the SAME 'singular signature song' when most of the films highlighted had several.
'Mermaid' comes to mind here yet again, with 'Under The Sea' being the culprit.

There have been well over 60 animated films made alone sitting in Disney's vault, and many live action efforts as well.
Why not drag some of the oldies but goodies out and dust them off to liven the selection up a bit?
In a watery production like 'Fantasmic!', instead of rolling out 'Mermaid' yet again ( and 'Under The Sea'...zzz..) how about a segment related to '20,000 Leagues Under The Sea'..?
The Nautilus imagery is awesome and the film even had a catchy 'signature tune'.....'Whale Of A Tale'!




An example I can think of how this was done recently....reaching back into the vault......is during 'Mickey & the Magical Map'
Regardless of how one might feel about the Show, you cannot deny the excitement expressed by the audience the moment Pocahontas steps out on stage and starts singing.
I've seen the Show several times in person at this point, and every time when she appears there was a big reaction from the audience.
Why?
My guess would be because it is unexpected and a character that has been largely absent from the Park scene for some time.
The Guest reaction to her is great however..they make it audiably clear they are very happy to see her onstage.


I think it has a lot to do with her being a surprise....instead of 'Frozen' or 'Beauty & the Beast' yet again, here we get a taste of a film kind of 'forgotten' for the most part by Disney now.
It was obviously not 'forgotten' by the Guests who saw that staged Show however...they seem to love seeing her again.

Bringing something like 'Pocahontas' back into the spotlight was a nice touch.
I wish they would do more of this.
I'm sure we can all think of underused films or characters we would like to see utilized in Disney's Theme Park setting.
-

Wash your mouth out with soap!

Now Disney has been given the idea that because people love Pocahontas they can just add her to Fantasmic and remove the pirate ship, while saving money. Thanks a lot.

 

[HMF]

Wash your mouth out with soap!

Now Disney has been given the idea that because people love Pocahontas they can just add her to Fantasmic and remove the pirate ship, while saving money. Thanks a lot.

Uh, That is exactly what happened in the WDW version of Fantasmic!

 

[drizgirl]

Uh, That is exactly what happened in the WDW version of Fantasmic!

I'm guessing that's why the smiling teeth.

 

[PiratesMansion]

What is especially confusing about Mermaid is that they cling to "Under the Sea" as if it's the only song in that movie that anyone would know. There are other great songs in that movie too, They could at least switch "Part of your World" once in a while!

I remember stumbling on "One Man's Dream" on YouTube and being stunned at how it was absolutely full of Disney songs that you would never hear today. It would be nice to have some more variety. It's not like all of the older non-princess movies are obscure and hard to find.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Count me in as another who's sick and tired of seeing offerings featuring characters from the same movies over and over again. The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast are two big ones, especially The Little Mermaid. Why is that property everywhere? Disney always reuses the same princesses in the parades. I don't remember the last time I saw Jasmine, Pocahontas, or Mulan in a parade.

It's not just the princesses either. I wish they'd bring Merlin back to Fantasyland and Jane back to Adventureland (I understand why Tarzan would be an issue). No Hercules or Robin Hood? I have a picture of me as a kid with Esmeralda and Rafiki. They were there before, I don't see why they're not there now. Disney has dozens of characters to pick from the lot. There's no reason why the rotation should be as small as it is now.

 

[Phroobar]

The problem is Disney is only marketing the hell out of certain things. They are not marketing Robin Hood or 101 Dalmatians but Ariel is a Disney "Princess" so she must be placed everywhere with a ear worm song. They can't market everything they own. Everything you see at a Disney park is a giant commercial. It's just a lot more subtle than Magic Mountain's approach of a giant 50 foot banner for Twix.

 

[HMF]

[QUOTE="phruby, post: 7596694, member: 29682"Everything you see at a Disney park is a giant commercial. .[/QUOTE]
Under Eisner and Iger that is indeed the case. Under Walt and those who succeeded him it was not.

 

[Phroobar]

Under Eisner and Iger that is indeed the case. Under Walt and those who succeeded him it was not.

I don't know about that. It can be argued that the entire park is a commercial for Disney films even when Walt ran things. Sleeping Beauty's castle was intended to be advertising for the upcoming movie. Frontierland is nothing but Davy Crockett, Zorro and Tom Sawyer which were all tv shows or movies done by Disney. Fantasyland is nothing but live versions of the movies. Tomorrowland was a big advertisement for chemical companies. Even after all this advertising Disney during the 70s was not in good financial shape. Disney movies were considered children's entertainment. The company looked like it was going to be picked apart by corporate raiders until Eisner was put in charge and made the brand hip again. Under Eisner/Iger, the company got a lot better at exploiting their properties even better than Walt ever did.

 

[HMF]

I don't know about that. It can be argued that the entire park is a commercial for Disney films even when Walt ran things. Sleeping Beauty's castle was intended to be advertising for the upcoming movie. Frontierland is nothing but Davy Crockett, Zorro and Tom Sawyer which were all tv shows or movies done by Disney. Fantasyland is nothing but live versions of the movies. Tomorrowland was a big advertisement for chemical companies. Even after all this advertising Disney during the 70s was not in good financial shape. Disney movies were considered children's entertainment. The company looked like it was going to be picked apart by corporate raiders until Eisner was put in charge and made the brand hip again. Under Eisner/Iger, the company got a lot better at exploiting their properties even better than Walt ever did.

Prior to Splash Mountain, most movie-themed Attractions never left Fantasyland and originally they did not even have the titular characters in them. Eisner definitely steered things in a more synergistic direction but to his credit he did green-light some original concepts. With Iger it is all-IP all the time.

 

[Phroobar]

Prior to Splash Mountain, most movie-themed Attractions never left Fantasyland and originally they did not even have the titular characters in them. Eisner definitely steered things in a more synergistic direction but to his credit he did green-light some original concepts. With Iger it is all-IP all the time.

Each of the lands at Disneyland were designed to be exploited via the Wonderful World of Disney tv show. Fantasyland had Walt's cartoon movies. Frontierland had the Mine train thru Nature's Wonderland which directly related to the Disney's nature shows, Davy Crocket and Indians. Tomorrowland was all about corporate america. If Walt lived long enough Adventureland would have gotten more IP stuff besides the Jungle Cruise which is based on an old Humphrey Bogart movie. The Matterhorn was based on Third Man on the Mountain. Advertising was everywhere at Disneyland. Basing a ride on an IP was nothing new and was common practice long before Eisner stepped in. Pirates and the Mansion were rare times they went off IP track and allowed to experiment.

 

[FerretAfros]

Agreed. But it would be even bolder, more daring, and a greater creative challenge to include something in the new edition of Fantasmic! that was NOT Little Mermaid or Beauty & The Beast.

That lil' mermaid has a major float segment in both Disneyland parades this summer; Paint The Night and Mickey's Soundsational. Do you think they'll have Little Mermaid in this parade?!? Is the Pope a Catholic?!?

But that was just the 3 o'clock daytime version. Return to Main Street after dark and see her again in an entirely different float all lit up. It's Little Mermaid! You MUST love her! Anaheim has zoning requirements about this!

She also has a major D Ticket Omnimover attraction over in DCA. Plus a cameo swim-on appearance in It's A Small World. Again, there have to be zoning requirements in Anaheim that mandate a Little Mermaid reference within so many square feet. Either that, or Disney's creative folks are phoning it in for every major entertainment offering.

Beauty & The Beast comes in as a close second for tired and predictable. Although there is no BatB attraction, the yellow dress and the hairy guy get major floats in both Disneyland parades, a dedicated stage show every day in Fantasy Faire, and now a themed restaurant in Fantasyland.

There are at least a dozen other Princesses that have been popular in the last 25 years since Fantasmic! debuted, and the girls born in the early 1980's who grew up with Little Mermaid and Beauty & The Beast are now middle aged and they have 7 year old girls about to outgrow the Princess phase. Fantasmic! desperately needs to update the roster of Characters it uses, instead of just being locked in time at an executive planning session held back in 1991.

They should start by kicking that tired old mermaid and the flouncy one in the yellow dress back to the break room, and get some fresher and newer gals out there.

Although your list already proves that The Little Mermaid is oversaturated (no pun intended), I would be remiss if I didn't point out that she also was included in Disneyland Forever, has one of the longest segments of World of Color, is the proprietor of a major character dining location (formerly one of the best restaurants in the resort), has one of the largest vignettes in Storybookland, and a carousel. It's a wonder that they ever let Tinkerbell have her dedicated meet & greet location (though she makes regular appearances in Fantasy Fair, along with other princesses)

And that's not even counting the other Disney locations, where she can be found in countless other attractions, parades, shows, and even has an entire land of her own. Yes, elements of that film lend themselves to theme parks very well, but I think we've had enough at this point

The Matterhorn was based on Third Man on the Mountain.

Have you seen Third Man on the Mountain? Other than being set on the Matterhorn, there's really no connection to the ride at Disneyland. There are no bobsleds, no ice caverns, and no abominable snowman. Having visited Zermatt myself last year, I can see why Walt wanted to bring some of that atmosphere to the park, but it really has no connection to the film. Having seen Third Man on the Mountain doesn't improve your understanding or appreciation of the Matterhorn Bobsleds in any way

Similarly, other than the broadest interpretation of the locations, Adventureland and Frontierland have no real connection to the True Life Adventures. The Frontierland-inspired TV shows did have minor influence in the park, but they were originally based on real historical figures and tall tales (not Disney creations, like Elsa in Norway) so it's hard to say that they don't fit, and the presence was so minor that it's hard to claim that were a major selling point to the land or its attractions

 

[Phroobar]

Have you seen Third Man on the Mountain? Other than being set on the Matterhorn, there's really no connection to the ride at Disneyland. There are no bobsleds, no ice caverns, and no abominable snowman. Having visited Zermatt myself last year, I can see why Walt wanted to bring some of that atmosphere to the park, but it really has no connection to the film. Having seen Third Man on the Mountain doesn't improve your understanding or appreciation of the Matterhorn Bobsleds in any way

Similarly, other than the broadest interpretation of the locations, Adventureland and Frontierland have no real connection to the True Life Adventures. The Frontierland-inspired TV shows did have minor influence in the park, but they were originally based on real historical figures and tall tales (not Disney creations, like Elsa in Norway) so it's hard to say that they don't fit, and the presence was so minor that it's hard to claim that were a major selling point to the land or its attractions

Yes, I have seen Third Man on the Mountain a number of times. Like all of the 50's Disney live action movies, it's not very good but does have a Disney sweetness to it. The movie is all about mountain climbing. Disney could never make a ride based on mountain climbing but a state of the art roller coaster inside a mountain is something unique and adapted well to the movie since they bobsled in Sweden. To keep the tie to movie, Disney would have mountain climbers scale Matterhorn.

Adventureland and Frountierland may not have had a real connection to the True Life Adventures but Disney sure did market them that way through the show.

 

[brb1006]

Noooooooo!

( insert Darth Vader screaming moment here )




Gosh DARN it, TDA!
I challenged you to 'think outside of the marketing box'...!!
Can they even produce a new nighttime spectacle today that does not include the 'bought IPs' or 'Frozen'...?

Come on Entertainment, I know you can do better then that.
Tell the Marketing folks to kiss off for once when it comes to 'allowed' Show content.
Don't turn the new edition of 'Fantasmic!' into yet another 'marketing video clip show of contemporary products' being passed off as a 'nighttime spectacular'.
Ya know, there is a reason why the original show ran for 20+ years and felt 'timeless'.....







-

At least Tokyo Disneysea does a good job with it's use of Disney IPs.

 

[brb1006]

Agreed. But it would be even bolder, more daring, and a greater creative challenge to include something in the new edition of Fantasmic! that was NOT Little Mermaid or Beauty & The Beast.

That lil' mermaid has a major float segment in both Disneyland parades this summer; Paint The Night and Mickey's Soundsational. Do you think they'll have Little Mermaid in this parade?!? Is the Pope a Catholic?!?

But that was just the 3 o'clock daytime version. Return to Main Street after dark and see her again in an entirely different float all lit up. It's Little Mermaid! You MUST love her! Anaheim has zoning requirements about this!

She also has a major D Ticket Omnimover attraction over in DCA. Plus a cameo swim-on appearance in It's A Small World. Again, there have to be zoning requirements in Anaheim that mandate a Little Mermaid reference within so many square feet. Either that, or Disney's creative folks are phoning it in for every major entertainment offering.

Beauty & The Beast comes in as a close second for tired and predictable. Although there is no BatB attraction, the yellow dress and the hairy guy get major floats in both Disneyland parades, a dedicated stage show every day in Fantasy Faire, and now a themed restaurant in Fantasyland.

There are at least a dozen other Princesses that have been popular in the last 25 years since Fantasmic! debuted, and the girls born in the early 1980's who grew up with Little Mermaid and Beauty & The Beast are now middle aged and they have 7 year old girls about to outgrow the Princess phase. Fantasmic! desperately needs to update the roster of Characters it uses, instead of just being locked in time at an executive planning session held back in 1991.

They should start by kicking that tired old mermaid and the flouncy one in the yellow dress back to the break room, and get some fresher and newer gals out there.

At least WDW has it limits with The Little Mermaid.

 

[brb1006]

TP, I totally agree.
Our minds think alike as I was going to mention 'Mermaid' in my previous post.
It is another excellent example of one of Disney's 'overused' IPs.

Considering the treasure trove of multiple characters, 'worlds', films, and tv shows over the many years the Studio has been producing product, it boggles the mind sometimes to see them constantly focusing on ONLY five to six properties.
Not only that, but those same five or six properties use the SAME 'singular signature song' when most of the films highlighted had several.
'Mermaid' comes to mind here yet again, with 'Under The Sea' being the culprit.

There have been well over 60 animated films made alone sitting in Disney's vault, and many live action efforts as well.
Why not drag some of the oldies but goodies out and dust them off to liven the selection up a bit?
In a watery production like 'Fantasmic!', instead of rolling out 'Mermaid' yet again ( and 'Under The Sea'...zzz..) how about a segment related to '20,000 Leagues Under The Sea'..?
The Nautilus imagery is awesome and the film even had a catchy 'signature tune'.....'Whale Of A Tale'!




An example I can think of how this was done recently....reaching back into the vault......is during 'Mickey & the Magical Map'
Regardless of how one might feel about the Show, you cannot deny the excitement expressed by the audience the moment Pocahontas steps out on stage and starts singing.
I've seen the Show several times in person at this point, and every time when she appears there was a big reaction from the audience.
Why?
My guess would be because it is unexpected and a character that has been largely absent from the Park scene for some time.
The Guest reaction to her is great however..they make it audiably clear they are very happy to see her onstage.


I think it has a lot to do with her being a surprise....instead of 'Frozen' or 'Beauty & the Beast' yet again, here we get a taste of a film kind of 'forgotten' for the most part by Disney now.
It was obviously not 'forgotten' by the Guests who saw that staged Show however...they seem to love seeing her again.

Bringing something like 'Pocahontas' back into the spotlight was a nice touch.
I wish they would do more of this.
I'm sure we can all think of underused films or characters we would like to see utilized in Disney's Theme Park setting.
-

Another reason why I love how Tokyo Disney Resort is run is because they focus more on other Disney films and things that are hardly attention at WDW and Disneyland instead of the same six properties. Look at "Happiness Is Here" which focuses on popular and past Disney (And Pixar) films. This also includes lesser known Disney characters from the past.


This parade from the early 2000's even featured various characters from the Silly Symphony shorts.

 

[brb1006]

What is especially confusing about Mermaid is that they cling to "Under the Sea" as if it's the only song in that movie that anyone would know. There are other great songs in that movie too, They could at least switch "Part of your World" once in a while!

I remember stumbling on "One Man's Dream" on YouTube and being stunned at how it was absolutely full of Disney songs that you would never hear today. It would be nice to have some more variety. It's not like all of the older non-princess movies are obscure and hard to find.

Do you remember some of the lesser known Disney songs heard at One Man's Dream?

 

[brb1006]

Count me in as another who's sick and tired of seeing offerings featuring characters from the same movies over and over again. The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast are two big ones, especially The Little Mermaid. Why is that property everywhere? Disney always reuses the same princesses in the parades. I don't remember the last time I saw Jasmine, Pocahontas, or Mulan in a parade.

It's not just the princesses either. I wish they'd bring Merlin back to Fantasyland and Jane back to Adventureland (I understand why Tarzan would be an issue). No Hercules or Robin Hood? I have a picture of me as a kid with Esmeralda and Rafiki. They were there before, I don't see why they're not there now. Disney has dozens of characters to pick from the lot. There's no reason why the rotation should be as small as it is now.

I always loved watching youtube video people pulling the Sword in the stone at Disneyland mainly to see how Merlin reacts to this.

 

[brb1006]

The problem is Disney is only marketing the hell out of certain things. They are not marketing Robin Hood or 101 Dalmatians but Ariel is a Disney "Princess" so she must be placed everywhere with a ear worm song. They can't market everything they own. Everything you see at a Disney park is a giant commercial. It's just a lot more subtle than Magic Mountain's approach of a giant 50 foot banner for Twix.

It's a different story for the non-US Disney parks however where they even give attention to lesser known Disney films and cartoons of the past such as Paris (Started around 2011) and especially Tokyo.

 

[SuddenStorm]

Yes, I have seen Third Man on the Mountain a number of times. Like all of the 50's Disney live action movies, it's not very good but does have a Disney sweetness to it. The movie is all about mountain climbing. Disney could never make a ride based on mountain climbing but a state of the art roller coaster inside a mountain is something unique and adapted well to the movie since they bobsled in Sweden. To keep the tie to movie, Disney would have mountain climbers scale Matterhorn.

Adventureland and Frountierland may not have had a real connection to the True Life Adventures but Disney sure did market them that way through the show.

Third Man on the Mountain and The Matterhorn Bobsleds are just two different things that Disney put out that were inspired by the real Matterhorn mountain. I think the story goes that Walt got the inspiration to build the Matterhorn while shooting Third Man- but as stated above the Matterhorn Bobsleds really isn't based on the movie.

Same with the African Queen- Walt may have drawn inspiration from it but it really isn't based on it the same way Splash Mountain is based on Song of the South, or the Teacups is themed to Alice in Wonderland.

I don't believe those two attractions count as early IP use in the parks.

 

[SuddenStorm]

I think it's good to remember that in the case of Fantasmic!, it came out when The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast were new movies. I think it's easier to forgive that then it is in the case of PTN and DL Forever, where the Little Mermaid is utilized way to much.

I also appreciate that in Fantasmic, they didn't have Under the Sea for 3 minutes. Just a brief part of Part of Your World in the medley, and Poor Unfortunate Souls in the villain segment (which I don't think I've heard in any other Disneyland show).