If Modern Imagineers made an Original IP Attraction

[Miru]

Imagine this: Iger/Chapek has released today’s American imagineers from the constraint of IP use, allowing them to build an attraction not tied to extant IP. However, there is a catch; they MUST do a non-IP attraction, and they aren’t able to back out of this, as Iger has noticed that they seemed unwilling to do original IP anyway. What would they do?

What do I think? I do get a little optimistic, but then I remember the closest thing to that attempt recently; Habit Heroes, and shudder a little. Otherwise, I have no expectations, as no original rides have been done in America since Expedition Everest.

 

[MichaelVN]

It's an interesting question.

Surely, there's no shortage of potential ideas. I think maybe AK would be the best park for a non-IP ride, for a couple of reasons. For one, there aren't that many IPs that would fit in AK anyway, and certainly not as many as in the other parks. And two, there are so many different animals that would make great themes for a ride.

It's disappointing, though, that EE was the last non-IP ride at WDW. That just feels like forever ago. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I always saw EE as a ride that was well-received. So, maybe a bit odd that they just stopped building original rides after that one and not after, say, one of the others that weren't as popular.

 

[Pi on my Cake]

I think the modern imagineers have done good jobs creating original stories/worlds using existing IP. Galaxy's Edge and Pandora are both great examples of that. I'd argue Mission Break Out as a ride that stands on its own seperate from the GotG franchise and expands it in new directions.

I think they'd be fine without IP. But probably would rely heavily on classic tropes and archetypes.

 

[RobWDW1971]

I think the modern imagineers have done good jobs creating original stories/worlds using existing IP. Galaxy's Edge and Pandora are both great examples of that. I'd argue Mission Break Out as a ride that stands on its own seperate from the GotG franchise and expands it in new directions.

I think they'd be fine without IP. But probably would rely heavily on classic tropes and archetypes.

There would be lots of annoying shouting, awkward silence, and lots of things to translate on an app.

 

[Miru]

It's an interesting question.

Surely, there's no shortage of potential ideas. I think maybe AK would be the best park for a non-IP ride, for a couple of reasons. For one, there aren't that many IPs that would fit in AK anyway, and certainly not as many as in the other parks. And two, there are so many different animals that would make great themes for a ride.

It's disappointing, though, that EE was the last non-IP ride at WDW. That just feels like forever ago. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I always saw EE as a ride that was well-received. So, maybe a bit odd that they just stopped building original rides after that one and not after, say, one of the others that weren't as popular.

There was also the infamous Habit Heroes. I think that might be where they stopped.

 

[RobWDW1971]

There was also the infamous Habit Heroes. I think that might be where they stopped.

Yeah, Disney figured there was more money in pushing fireworks dessert parties and Kitchen Sink sundaes than educating WDW guests about the dangers of obesity. Lesson learned.

 

[Pi on my Cake]

There was also the infamous Habit Heroes. I think that might be where they stopped.

To be fair, later years of Innoventions wasn't exactly being handled by the A Team of Imagineers lol. But I get what you mean

 

[Miru]

Yeah, Disney figured there was more money in pushing fireworks dessert parties and Kitchen Sink sundaes than educating WDW guests about the dangers of obesity. Lesson learned.

And the way they did that... basically amounted to heavy-handed shaming of those who embrace those bad habits. The attraction’s experience was lousy too.

 

[RobWDW1971]

And the way they did that... basically amounted to heavy-handed shaming of those who embrace those bad habits. The attraction’s experience was lousy too.

1970's: Don't smoke it will kill you. (Informative)
2010's: Don't be fat it will kill you. (Shaming)

 

[Voxel]

It should be noted that Hong Kong Disneyland has been a great example of what happens when you let the Imagineers work outside of the IP standard. Mystic Manor and Grizzly Mountain are two modern attempts to think outside of the IP market..

 

[Miru]

It should be noted that Hong Kong Disneyland has been a great example of what happens when you let the Imagineers work outside of the IP standard. Mystic Manor and Grizzly Mountain are two modern attempts to think outside of the IP market..

Yeah, but they’re not quite modern enough for this topic. And the imagineers there are clearly not the same crew behind stuff like Mission Breakout.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Yeah, but they’re not quite modern enough for this topic. And the imagineers there are clearly not the same crew behind stuff like Mission Breakout.

Both opened after the first iteration of Habit Heroes which you keep bringing up. Major attractions are almost all designed in Glendale. The local field offices handle smaller projects.

 

[Miru]

Both opened after the first iteration of Habit Heroes which you keep bringing up. Major attractions are almost all designed in Glendale. The local field offices handle smaller projects.

Thanks for the info, but I think they were most likely developed long before stuff like MB. I think something like one of those, but stateside, is the best result, and what we’re likely to get. They might want to make it extra good because of the lack of an IP.

 

[Voxel]

Thanks for the info, but I think they were most likely developed long before stuff like MB. I think something like one of those, but stateside, is the best result, and what we’re likely to get. They might want to make it extra good because of the lack of an IP.

I think this might be a good time to thing about the timeline and management approaches. Disneyland Shanghai got approval in 2009 and wasn't completed until 2016. Around this 2009 timeline CarsLand and the California Adventure was in the middle of it's redevelopment. Similarly at this time Hong Kong was under it's initial expansions. Aulani was also under development as this time.

Habit Heroes opened in 2012, but probably started development in late 2010 and 2011.

All four of these projects where HIGH priority for WED and I would suspect that most of the well known and talented Imagineers were working on these project. These projects were also being funded mostly or partially by the Walt Disney World Company

Habit Heroes was most likely being worked by the D-team (are you going to take resources away from Hong Kong and Shanghai, we could possibly argue that members of the California Adventure and Aulani team could have worked on this). I also don't believe that Habit Hero was paid for by Disney, it was sponsored by Florida Blue Cross. Typically this means Florida blue cross paid for the entire exhibit and had a strong say it What WED did.

What I'm getting at is Habit Heroes is a result of a low budget, third party influenced contract that Disney had little finacial skin in. The attraction (even it if was amazing) would not be the type of attraction that would increase guest visiting and spending, thus why would management waste the time and talent of the more important imagineers.

 

[Voxel]

Imagine this: Iger/Chapek has released today’s American imagineers from the constraint of IP use, allowing them to build an attraction not tied to extant IP. However, there is a catch; they MUST do a non-IP attraction, and they aren’t able to back out of this, as Iger has noticed that they seemed unwilling to do original IP anyway. What would they do?

What do I think? I do get a little optimistic, but then I remember the closest thing to that attempt recently; Habit Heroes, and shudder a little. Otherwise, I have no expectations, as no original rides have been done in America since Expedition Everest.

To answer this question, I believe WED is extremely capable of designing an IP-less attraction the biggest issue is honestly the question of who is footing the bill. Walt Disney Company at this time appears have the believe that an attraction is only worth funding if there is a 100% gurantee that it will make it's money. This translates into USE IPS in the American and Paris Parks.

The Asian parks don't have this issue because those parks are not as great of a Finacial Risk for WED or Walt Disney Company. At Hong Kong and Shanghai the Disney Company only has to pay at most HALF the cost for the attraction and none of the running cost. In Tokyo, the Disney Company pays nothing and get the profits. In those type of situations the Disney Company is going to be much more willing to allow for a "Riskier" IP-less attraction to be build.

I hope that explains why there is no IP-Less attractions from Disney in America.

 

[Miru]

To answer this question, I believe WED is extremely capable of designing an IP-less attraction the biggest issue is honestly the question of who is footing the bill. Walt Disney Company at this time appears have the believe that an attraction is only worth funding if there is a 100% gurantee that it will make it's money. This translates into USE IPS in the American and Paris Parks.

The Asian parks don't have this issue because those parks are not as great of a Finacial Risk for WED or Walt Disney Company. At Hong Kong and Shanghai the Disney Company only has to pay at most HALF the cost for the attraction and none of the running cost. In Tokyo, the Disney Company pays nothing and get the profits. In those type of situations the Disney Company is going to be much more willing to allow for a "Riskier" IP-less attraction to be build.

I hope that explains why there is no IP-Less attractions from Disney in America.

Thank you. Thank you very much. That’s all that needs to be said. This is why I decided Pretoria Disneyland would not be owned by the Walt Disney Company.

Another note is that Disney used to not wholly own Disneyland Paris, but they bought it in 2017.

 

[Voxel]

Thank you. Thank you very much. That’s all that needs to be said. This is why I decided Pretoria Disneyland would not be owned by the Walt Disney Company.

Another note is that Disney used to not wholly own Disneyland Paris, but they bought it in 2017.

Good catch! Your more than welcome. I think the ownership aspect is why I love Tokyo Disneyland so much. You can tell the Oriental Land Company gave the imagineers a blank check to follow their dream and go big. Idk if you have see the new Imagineering Documentary on Disney+ yet but the latest episode had a line that stuck with me. After the Death of Wells Imagineering had to learn a new means of engineering, the engineering that revolved around spreadsheets and budgets. This was something they never really had to worry about until this point.

If you ever get the chance to go to Tokyo Disneyland it is a must. It's the disney quality I remember as a child and it's just magical. I'm actually planning a second trip to the park for 2021.

Also good catch. I keep forgetting when Disney gained full ownership Paris.

 

[Miru]

Turns out, they did make an original IP thing just recently; Awesome Planet.