Rumor Fantasyland Expansion

[Phroobar]

I think @Disney Irish and @TROR are father and son.

 

[Disney Irish]

I think @Disney Irish and @TROR are father and son.

No....

 

[socalifornian]

I think @Disney Irish and @TROR are father and son.

 

[Rich T]

If you're looking for a Star Wars ride where you can sit in front of a screen and do nothing....

Nothing but enjoy a great ride. Funny, most of the rides I've ever loved involve just sitting and enjoying. This isn't a slam of Falcon; it's trying something different. I'm a huge fan of TSMM. Looking forward to trying the Falcon for myself, though the "team" aspect is, I hope, a one-and-done for Imagineering.

 

[Rich T]

There's only one Falcon...

There is no Falcon. The Falcon is movie sets, models and CGI. The Falcon isn't real. It never existed. I enjoyed your criticism of the ride, but, c'mon. This in NOT supposed to be a historic recreation. It's an outer space fairy tale. And, besides there are now TWO Falcons. It's bi-coastal.

 

[Mac Tonight]

"Hi, thread. You're weird. OK bye."

 

[Stripes]

Am I missing something? That video is footage from the Star Wars films, not the ride itself- and the Falcon depicted in the films operates very differently than the glorified video game WDI built.

Account owner again.

It shows that in the movies the characters were at each other’s throats and yes, they had to look away from the action all of the time.

If you think the average guest would’ve been able to handle the controls of the unmodified Millennium Falcon, I think you’d be in for quite a surprise. The screams of “it’s too complicated” would be piercing to the ears.

Nothing but enjoy a great ride. Funny, most of the rides I've ever loved involve just sitting and enjoying. This isn't a slam of Falcon; it's trying something different. I'm a huge fan of TSMM. Looking forward to trying the Falcon for myself, though the "team" aspect is, I hope, a one-and-done for Imagineering.

The interactivity of the experience is what makes it so compelling. You have to work as a team and get to know your crew mates, just like in the films. If there was no interaction between the flight crew, the experience would feel hollow. I’m very much looking forward to the attraction when I visit later this month after hearing the glowing praise from my family.

Star Tours is great, but this isn’t Star Tours.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Theme parks, like other forms of art, exist to tell stories.

Not exactly.

 

[shambolicdefending]

Theme parks, like other forms of art, exist to tell stories.

Theme parks exist to make money for their owners.

 

[Rich T]

If there was no interaction between the flight crew, the experience would feel hollow...

That's the impression I'm getting. That kind of interaction with strangers on a ride is NOT something I crave, but I'll give it a go this once. I'll be frankly amazed if this is something I ride more than once or twice, as this generally ain't my cup of tea. Then again, I like being amazed and surprised.

 

[TROR]

Theme parks exist to make money for their owners.

I'm not one to pull out Walt quotes, but this belief was extending to the parks and it's a belief that must be applied to any companies that produces art.
"We don't movies to make money, we make money to make more movies."

 

[shambolicdefending]

I'm not one to pull out Walt quotes, but this belief was extending to the parks and it's a belief that must be applied to any companies that produces art.
"We don't movies to make money, we make money to make more movies."

The ideological remembrance of Walt Disney is great (although the truth is he was just as much a cut-throat capitalist as anybody).

But the fact is, neither his parks, nor anybody else's would exist if they weren't returning value to shareholders.

 

[Magenta Panther]

The ideological remembrance of Walt Disney is great (although the truth is he was just as much a cut-throat capitalist as anybody).

But the fact is, neither his parks, nor anybody else's would exist if they weren't returning value to shareholders.

Walt was not a "cut-throat capitalist". He once said that while he knew that money was important, he didn't see it as a means to enrich himself, but to do things with - like create innovations in animation and invent the theme park. He had little patience with stockholders and avoided meeting with them whenever possible. His company was in the red for much of its existence because he refused to do things the cheap and easy way. He never put profit before product. Robert Iger he wasn't.

 

[TROR]

The ideological remembrance of Walt Disney is great (although the truth is he was just as much a cut-throat capitalist as anybody).

But the fact is, neither his parks, nor anybody else's would exist if they weren't returning value to shareholders.

If that were the case, there'd be no reason to build anything but the bare minimum.

 

[shambolicdefending]

If that were the case, there'd be no reason to build anything but the bare minimum.

That's not true. Virtually every type of consumer product has variance in quality and price that matches variance in consumer preference.

The common denominator is that the ones that earn more than they cost stick around. The others don't.

 

[shambolicdefending]

Walt was not a "cut-throat capitalist". He once said that while he knew that money was important, he didn't see it as a means to enrich himself, but to do things with - like create innovations in animation and invent the theme park. He had little patience with stockholders and avoided meeting with them whenever possible. His company was in the red for much of its existence because he refused to do things the cheap and easy way. He never put profit before product. Robert Iger he wasn't.

Most of what you say is true. None of it dispels the facts that he was as hardcore free market as they come, and that Disneyland would not exist today if it wasn't commercially successful.

 

[TROR]

Most of what you say is true. None of it dispels the facts that he was as hardcore free market as they come, and that Disneyland would not exist today if it wasn't commercially successful.

And what made it commercially successful? Its high quality storytelling appealing to conservative American ideals.

 

[shambolicdefending]

And what made it commercially successful? Its high quality storytelling appealing to conservative American ideals.

Agreed.

 

[TROR]

Agreed.

So money, like happy emotions, are a side effective of good storytelling.

 

[shambolicdefending]

So money, like happy emotions, are a side effective of good storytelling.

A more accurate way to phrase it would be, "Consumers like good story-telling, and are willing to pay a commercially viable price for it."

The other key part of the equation is that the consumer gets to decide what a "good" story is. Not the story teller.