hogwarts to replace 20k?

[ogryn]

I really hope it doesn't happen. I hate HP with a passion.

Over here at least, HPMania seems to have died down. I don't think Potter is timeless (just appropriate for this moment in time), and any replacement for the lagoon should be based on a timeless property (that includes new ideas that would go the distance).

The last thing Disney wants is a $xx million attraction that two years down the line, people are going to say "Harry Potter" that was sooo 2002.

 

[Erika]

I'm thinking the hype has died down only because there hasn't been a new movie or book for awhile. COme June I expect it to spike again.

I love HP but I don't know that I want him in Fantasyland.

 

[MartyMouse]

Harry Potter would fit the style and design of Disney/MGM much better than Fantasyland, Fantasyland has always been reserved for Disney Classics and that’s the way it should stay.

Now on to the rumor –

Harry Potter is owned in the United States by Scholastic Books, they control all the distribution of printed material and all merchandise related directly to the books (I don’t know if you saw the Hallmark items they sold based on the books – not the movies but they were bad). Now Warner Bothers (a Time Warner AOL company – who hates Disney because they can’t match the financial success of Eisner’s Mouse House) owns all the movies rights and images derived from the films as well as all of the merchandise.

So looking at who owns Harry Potter in the States should you think that a ride is likely?? It is possible but the ride would be based on the books not the movies because I don’t see Warner who owns it’s own chain of theme parks letting Disney use images from their films and pervious merchandise based solely on the books had hot been well received on a mass market scale.

Also because of Disney policies if Hogwarts were to be built in Fantasyland it would be on such a small scale so that it would not dwarf the castle.

 

[Tom]

If they're going to add themes to the MK, they should at least be Disney related ones. There is plenty of Disney related material that could easily fill that void where 20k was.

If they're going to contaminate the parks with HP stuff, it should definately be in MGM. It's a movie that has NOTHING to do with Disney, and thus, would fit right in with all the other non-Disney stuff over in MGM.

 

[General Grizz]

Originally posted by chucknstuff
I think this will be a good thing for the park. The generation of kids growing up now will have their own little piece of Fantasyland

What do you mean? The kids I know are in love with "Peter Pan," "It's a Small World," "Dumbo, the Flying Elephant," and "The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh." (Snow White is too scary for them :lol: ).

To say that the kids don't have their own little piece of Fantasyland is to say they're not treated right for not having a place they can relate with. Does this mean that children aren't watching Peter Pan or Dumbo anymore?

Of course not. And generations since 1971 weren't around in 1937, 1941, 1953, and 1964. These are Disney classics that rank highest on the kid's list (as well as with PhilharMagic, but my younger cousin has no interest in putting on 3-D glasses after he was put on Honey, I Shrunk the Audience! :lol: )

And I'd go so far as to say that children have more affection for these films than Harry Potter.

Now, if you're saying MODERN movies don't make it, then Finding Nemo or Little Mermaid is your bet. If it were my choice, I've been exploring ideas about Mary Poppins and Bedknobs and Broomsticks.

And what ever happened to original attractions? Disney films have been out since 1937, and the original attractions (Haunted Mansion, It's a Small World, Tiki Room, Pirates, Bears, Imagination) had been made years later and they're Disney's most popular attractions. Why isn't Imagineering usings its imagination in this sense anymore?

*sigh*

The problem with Harry Potter is that it's an established fantasy with Fantasyland qualities. It's too close, and it's not Disney. That's the problem. Disney can't be so weak as to go out to other places to look for ideas. And, while I see this negating the whole MGM process, to me, Harry Potter has a unique flavor that does not compute with Mickey Mouse's resort.

It would seem PERFECT in Universal. PERFECT. Don't you think?

And I would agree - keep him out of the Magic Kingdom before anything else.

 

[Shaman]

I don't see how it can happen...(a ride based on the movies)....if they make a deal in where the ride can be based on the movie that would be a great accomplishment....But should it be in MK....not really....but I wouldn't be outraged if it were to go there....that being said I would still prefer a Villains ride to HP....

Disney before HP....:hammer:

 

[MartyMouse]

Originally posted by General Grizz

Now, if you're saying MODERN movies don't make it, then Finding Nemo or Little Mermaid is your bet. If it were my choice, I've been exploring ideas about Mary Poppins and Bedknobs and Broomsticks.

Yes!! Where is my Mary Poppins Ride?????

Originally posted by General Grizz

And what ever happened to original attractions? Disney films have been out since 1937, and the original attractions (Haunted Mansion, It's a Small World, Tiki Room, Pirates, Bears, Imagination) had been made years later and they're Disney's most popular attractions. Why isn't Imagineering usings its imagination in this sense anymore?

Love it or hate it Alien Encounter was 100% WDI for WDW!!!
Now it's gone - I miss Skippy.

 

[General Grizz]

Originally posted by MartyMouse
Love it or hate it Alien Encounter was 100% WDI for WDW!!!

And for that (AND New Tomorrowland AND Timekeeper as far as '95 goes) was VERY commendable. The spirit was there, and heck, they made a thriller nostalgic for me!

 

[MKCustodial]

Originally posted by AndyMagic
Agreed! Why is it that Indiana Jones fits in Disneyland yet Harry Potter doesn't fit in Disney World? That is rubbish. In fact, HP is much more in line with the typical "disney spirit" than Indiana is. As long as they don't make it TOO intrusive, it should fit in nicely. The only reason people have a problem with this is because HP is a current franchise. I bet if it was 20 years old, like Indiana franchise is, people would say it is timeless and that it is Disney worthy. Meh. You can't please them all.

I agree with Wilt. I'd love to see a Harry Potter attraction, but NOT at the MK. Definately at the Studios and maybe at the British pavillion at Epcot. But in my mind, the Magic Kingdom is exclusive to all things Disney.

 

[KevinPage]

Originally posted by AndyMagic
Why is it that Indiana Jones fits in Disneyland yet Harry Potter doesn't fit in Disney World? That is rubbish. In fact, HP is much more in line with the typical "disney spirit" than Indiana is. As long as they don't make it TOO intrusive, it should fit in nicely. The only reason people have a problem with this is because HP is a current franchise. I bet if it was 20 years old, like Indiana franchise is, people would say it is timeless and that it is Disney worthy. Meh. You can't please them all.

Excellent point. I never had a problem with Star Wars or Indy at MGM, probably because I loved both of them along with Disney, so it was a melding of my favorite things. I'm not a Potter fanatic, so it always felt out of place.

If it was a classic and "old school" people and I would be more accepting of it. I think the first reaction when you see something CURRENT is that someone is trying to capitalize on a trend, where if it is an older movie, it's nostalgia and timeless and a great addition.

I still think it fits far better in MGM. As much as I'd like to see MK get more new rides, I still visit MK the most regardless, since it's MK. MGM can use everything it can get, even with all it's current additions

 

[garyhoov]

Those who say it doesn't "fit" are probably correct, but if "fitting" means an attraction with characters that were popular with kids 50 years ago and not-fitting means attractions with characters that are popular with kids today . . . isn't there something to be said for attractions that don't fit?

Now that Disney has let Pixar go, they may have to think about bringing characters in from other sources. I hate to say it, but Disney's recent track record makes it look like they may not be capable of creating new characters that kids will want to see.

 

[WDWFREAK53]

Originally posted by garyhoov
Those who say it doesn't "fit" are probably correct, but if "fitting" means an attraction with characters that were popular with kids 50 years ago and not-fitting means attractions with characters that are popular with kids today . . . isn't there something to be said for attractions that don't fit?

Now that Disney has let Pixar go, they may have to think about bringing characters in from other sources. I hate to say it, but Disney's recent track record makes it look like they may not be capable of creating new characters that kids will want to see.

Is this a completely serious post by you?

You couldn't throw a fart in or something?

I completely agree though.

What would kids rather see in a movie?

1. A Child wizard that has incredible powers and fights the forces of evil.
2. A cool looking group of monsters that look mean but are as nice as teddy bears
3. A bunch of cows?

Honestly...choose your top 2 :lol:

 

[Matt56]

What happened to the Little Mermaid area (similar to TLS) that was supposed to replace 20k?

 

[SBW]

Mr Potter is so 5 minutes ago...

 

[cherrynegra]

Originally posted by SBW
Mr Potter is so 5 minutes ago...

Not according to the millions of books that have been sold and another movie coming out that will be a hit. And just wait till the last book comes out. The hysteria will be unbearable. If this is your idea of five minutes ago, I'd hate to see what you think is now.:lol:

 

[Hank Scorpio]

Originally posted by Matt56
What happened to the Little Mermaid area (similar to TLS) that was supposed to replace 20k?

Its still there... its called Ariel's Grotto. But it was never going to replace the entire lagoon, it just sits to the side.

 

[DisneyNme]

I Do not think that Harry Potter should be put in the MK. I think if it was Put in Disney World It should be put in the studios. Correct me if im wrong but Everything Disney Is in the MK. Harry Potter is NOT Disney. Its like Putting Bugs Bunny In the MK, it doesnt fit.

 

[General Grizz]

Originally posted by WDWFREAK53
Is this a completely serious post by you?

You couldn't throw a fart in or something?

I completely agree though.

What would kids rather see in a movie?

1. A Child wizard that has incredible powers and fights the forces of evil.
2. A cool looking group of monsters that look mean but are as nice as teddy bears
3. A bunch of cows?

Honestly...choose your top 2 :lol:

Disney's failures in WDI and Feature Animation should not call for the bringing in of outside sources. That's a signal that Disney is dead creatively.

Don't like it? Change management: www.savedisney.com - -

- - Unless, of course, we want Disney to die slowly. . . which would be signalled by Dino-Ramas and outside films coming into the Magic Kingdom.

 

[brentley2]

So looking at who owns Harry Potter in the States should you think that a ride is likely?? It is possible but the ride would be based on the books not the movies because I don’t see Warner who owns it’s own chain of theme parks letting Disney use images from their films and pervious merchandise based solely on the books had hot been well received on a mass market scale.

Also because of Disney policies if Hogwarts were to be built in Fantasyland it would be on such a small scale so that it would not dwarf the castle. [/B][/QUOTE]


I was thinking the same thing about the castle....

Personally, I can't believe that we have all waited this long for something to be done with that area, and we might (I emphasize MIGHT) get a HP attraction.

I want something Disney- the Villains thing, the Little Mermaid attraction, anything would be a better option than this god-forsaken idea.

Put Potter at the Studios or AK...PLEASE!

Keep Fantasyland the Disney part of the park!

 

[Wilt Dasney]

I agree with what someone said earlier that adding Harry while it's a hot property could send a "bandwagon" message to the public and give the impression that Disney was just trying to cash in on a current trend.

I for one absolutely love HP and think that it will prove to be a timeless commodity. As a Harry fan, though, I would be happy to wait 10 or 15 years until Harry moves from the realm of "it's now, it's wow" to a more established place in pop culture, just so people wouldn't say some of the things that are being said here vis-a-vis this being an attempt to make money off a flash in the pan kiddy trend.

HP will, in my opinion, go down as one of the great fantasy sagas of the modern age. As a fan, I'd be more than happy to wait until the story is complete and the hype has died down before Disney goes ahead with any possible plans here.