Rumor Is Indiana Jones Planning an Adventure to Disney's Animal Kingdom?

[EricsBiscuit]

I still beat my drum on lazy storytelling vs not. As I look to MoanaTiki, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Profit, etc. this really comes down to how it's done. It's about natural flow of theme - regardless of how you define that. And, most of that comes down to simple storytelling.

Pandora is my best recent example. As a staunch "fanboy" with huge expectations for consistency - that was done wonderfully (save for Navi's length). It used an extablished IP but built it into something new. It didn't rehash or simply tweak the IP itself.

I really wonder if the main issue here is the brand strategy folks running herd over the parks. I've heard horros of not allowing guests to have two princesses on a wedding cake because of brand. Or, color lock downs creating outages of food/merchandise supply when you could easily go in a different direction. I think all of these IPs could be used successfully in the location. But, when corporate and branding/brand synergy take over - they actually are throttling the creative story process. They now require the land or area of WDW to conform to the IP vs. having them work in harmony.

The great irony is that actually lessens and cheapens the brand long-term. We're seeing so much IP expansion at the theaters and on TV. New stories beyond the "canon". I am disheartened that we don't see that now in the parks in a way that gives credibility to the past/fan boys and uses the IPs the masses want to create something new that pleases everyone.

THAT's the laziness and corporate/MBA branding BS that frustrates me to no end (no offense MBAs on the boards).

Walt Disney's brand model for Disneyland since day one was synergy. Also Navi Tiver journey is a 6 minute C ticket attraction. That's three times longer than Peter Pan.

 

[marni1971]

Walt Disney's brand model for Disneyland since day one was synergy. Also Navi Tiver journey is a 6 minute C ticket attraction. That's three times longer than Peter Pan.

3 minutes 58 seconds.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

3 minutes 58 seconds.

Depends how long you're backed up but even by that count it's twice the length of Peter Pan. It's a C ticket and I honk people are way too harsh on it.

 

[marni1971]

Depends how long you're backed up..

You could say that about any ride. But a back up isn't ride time. It's unplanned downtime.

 

[AEfx]

Walt Disney's brand model for Disneyland since day one was synergy.

It's so refreshing to see the truth.

It's funny, but a lot of the "original" things, like Frontierland, were vehicles for Disney properties of the time like Davy Crocket, it's just that culturally they haven't stood the test of time so people conveniently forget. Or the fact that Sleeping Beauty had a castle years before she had a film, LOL.

 

[MisterPenguin]

3 minutes 58 seconds.

4 minutes 58 seconds.

 

[bclane]

4 minutes 58 seconds.

Good grief the colors in that video do not do the ride justice at all. They look terrible compared to being on the actual ride.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Walt Disney's brand model for Disneyland since day one was synergy. Also Navi Tiver journey is a 6 minute C ticket attraction. That's three times longer than Peter Pan.

The “synergy” of early Disneyland was minor and not at all similar to what is done today.

It's so refreshing to see the truth.

It's funny, but a lot of the "original" things, like Frontierland, were vehicles for Disney properties of the time like Davy Crocket, it's just that culturally they haven't stood the test of time so people conveniently forget. Or the fact that Sleeping Beauty had a castle years before she had a film, LOL.

Davey Crockett came from Disneyland. It’s telling that the go to example of constant contemporary synergy is a lie.

 

[JBIRDTO]

I absolutely love Peter Pan's Flight for the nostalgia. I only ride it when I can run to the entrance or if I have a Fast Pass or attend one of the parties. Just got back from Pandora and did not ride River Journey due to the long long lines.

I was able to queue for 45 minutes at rope drop for Flight and then had another fastpass for the afternoon. I suspect if I can walk on River Journey or wait max 30 minutes I would have the same affinity for it as I do Peter.

It's unfortunate but the reputation of the ride is being directly related to time in line (which I don't argue with at all). You only have so much time in the park and not all are as fortunate as some to go more than once in a lifetime.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

The “synergy” of early Disneyland was minor and not at all similar to what is done today.


Davey Crockett came from Disneyland. It’s telling that the go to example of constant contemporary synergy is a lie.

Both statements are false. Davy Crocket came from the Disneyland TV series BEFORE the park opened. Also almost every ride was an IP related attraction. People often forget that the Jungle Cruise was originally about the True Life Adventure series before Marc Davis cleaverly added humor to the attraction. Furthermore, the castle was 4 years early! 4 years before the movie even came out she had a castle! All the Fantasyland rides. And then TL was the exception.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Both statements are false. Davy Crocket came from the Disneyland TV series BEFORE the park opened. Also almost every ride was an IP related attraction. People often forget that the Jungle Cruise was originally about the True Life Adventure series before Marc Davis cleaverly added humor to the attraction. Furthermore, the castle was 4 years early! 4 years before the movie even came out she had a castle! All the Fantasyland rides. And then TL was the exception.

Most attractions were not IP related. That only works out by stretching the definition of IP to be more in line with genre and subject. Most of the film based attraction would also not be built today as they were box office duds and most definitely not franchises.

I said Davey Crockett was made for Disneyland. Italics are used to denote titles.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

Most attractions were not IP related. That only works out be stretching the definition of IP to be more in line with genre and subject.

I said Davey Crockett was made for Disneyland. Italics are used to denote titles.

Peter Pan, Snow White, Mr Toad, Canoes, Jungle Cruise, not opening day but close enough Dumbo, same but Casey Jr., 20,000 leagues walk through exhibit.

Here is a synergy chart from the man himself I found with a couple seconds of Googling.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Peter Pan, Snow White, Mr Toad, Canoes, Jungle Cruise, not opening day but close enough Dumbo, same but Casey Jr., 20,000 leagues walk through exhibit.

Here is a synergy chart from the man himself I found with a couple seconds of Googling.

You’re just a few naming attractions and the Jungle Cruise is an example of ridiculous warping of the well established definition of IP. And when was Indian War a Disney movie? You shouldn’t have to distort definitions and mix up chronology to make a point.

That chart isn’t any big surprise. It was made for shareholders of Walt Disney Productions and follows the legal issues surrounding WED Enterprises and Disneyland. Outside of a few pet projects, every biography of Walt documents his declining attention towards the Studio.

 

[AEfx]

The “synergy” of early Disneyland was minor and not at all similar to what is done today.

Davey Crockett came from Disneyland. It’s telling that the go to example of constant contemporary synergy is a lie.

Well, no, Davy Crocket came from North Carolina, and was born in 1786.

If you are trying to state that the television series pre-dated Disneyland, you would also be mistaken.

The first Davy Crocket miniseries premiered in December of 1954, before anyone ever set foot in Disneyland. Disneyland did not open until July, 1955.

You know, on the Disneyland anthology TV series that was created to showcase Disney properties in a deal to concurrently finance and promote the Disneyland park, called...wait for it...Disneyland.

It's really funny that this is the only place you will find people who don't credit the idea of this type of revolutionary synergy to Walt Disney. He practically invented the concept. Just because as modern Disney park fans it has become in fashion to use the word "synergy" as a pejorative when it is convenient for an argument, folks don't want to admit that this very idea was at the core of the design of Disneyland to begin with.

It is one of the most significant aspects to Walt's legacy, which shows just how forward thinking and creative he was - and the only people who debate this fact are those who try to revise this history for their own purposes, even though conversely (and rather ironically) the same folks complain when there isn't an obvious park/media synergy, i.e. all the posts about "how stupid Iger didn't have enough confidence in Frozen" to have a major attraction in the parks to coincide with its release.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Well, no, Davy Crocket came from North Carolina, and was born in 1786.

If you are trying to state that the television series pre-dated Disneyland, you would also be mistaken.

The first Davy Crocket miniseries premiered in December of 1954, before anyone ever set foot in Disneyland. Disneyland did not open until July, 1955.

You know, on the Disneyland anthology TV series that was created to showcase Disney properties in a deal to concurrently finance and promote the Disneyland park, called...wait for it...Disneyland.

It's really funny that this is the only place you will find people who don't credit the idea of this type of revolutionary synergy to Walt Disney. He practically invented the concept. Just because as modern Disney park fans it has become in fashion to use the word "synergy" as a pejorative when it is convenient for an argument, folks don't want to admit that this very idea was at the core of the design of Disneyland to begin with.

It is one of the most significant aspects to Walt's legacy, which shows just how forward thinking and creative he was - and the only people who debate this fact are those who try to revise this history for their own purposes, even though conversely (and rather ironically) the same folks complain when there isn't an obvious park/media synergy, i.e. all the posts about "how stupid Iger didn't have enough confidence in Frozen" to have a major attraction in the parks to coincide with its release.

Disney was an innovator in terms of synergy (he wouldn't have called it that, of course - that term came two decades later) just as he was in merchandising.

However...

Arguments along the line of "Disney used cross-promotion, so stop opposing GotG being added to EPCOT" ignore more than 50 years of very dramatic evolution in the film and television industries' understanding of cross-promotion. Particularly pronounced changes took place in the 80s and the early to mid-2000s - it is an ENTIRELY different beast, conceived of and executed differently at the corporate level, than it was in the 50s. The comparison of Crockett to GotG is apt - one is a subtle case of shared thematics and aesthetic elements, the other is a pronounced integration into an overarching franchise.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Well, no, Davy Crocket came from North Carolina, and was born in 1786.

If you are trying to state that the television series pre-dated Disneyland, you would also be mistaken.

The first Davy Crocket miniseries premiered in December of 1954, before anyone ever set foot in Disneyland. Disneyland did not open until July, 1955.

You know, on the Disneyland anthology TV series that was created to showcase Disney properties in a deal to concurrently finance and promote the Disneyland park, called...wait for it...Disneyland.

It's really funny that this is the only place you will find people who don't credit the idea of this type of revolutionary synergy to Walt Disney. He practically invented the concept. Just because as modern Disney park fans it has become in fashion to use the word "synergy" as a pejorative when it is convenient for an argument, folks don't want to admit that this very idea was at the core of the design of Disneyland to begin with.

It is one of the most significant aspects to Walt's legacy, which shows just how forward thinking and creative he was - and the only people who debate this fact are those who try to revise this history for their own purposes, even though conversely (and rather ironically) the same folks complain when there isn't an obvious park/media synergy, i.e. all the posts about "how stupid Iger didn't have enough confidence in Frozen" to have a major attraction in the parks to coincide with its release.

The television show was created because of the park. It was intended to promote the park. That is in no way the same as the park being created to only promote franchises.

 

[AEfx]

The television show was created because of the park. It was intended to promote the park. That is in no way the same as the park being created to only promote franchises.

You must be training for the Olympics with those mental gymnastics.

 

[FigmentJedi]

Well, no, Davy Crocket came from North Carolina, and was born in 1786.

If you are trying to state that the television series pre-dated Disneyland, you would also be mistaken.

The first Davy Crocket miniseries premiered in December of 1954, before anyone ever set foot in Disneyland. Disneyland did not open until July, 1955.

You know, on the Disneyland anthology TV series that was created to showcase Disney properties in a deal to concurrently finance and promote the Disneyland park, called...wait for it...Disneyland.

It's really funny that this is the only place you will find people who don't credit the idea of this type of revolutionary synergy to Walt Disney. He practically invented the concept. Just because as modern Disney park fans it has become in fashion to use the word "synergy" as a pejorative when it is convenient for an argument, folks don't want to admit that this very idea was at the core of the design of Disneyland to begin with.

It is one of the most significant aspects to Walt's legacy, which shows just how forward thinking and creative he was - and the only people who debate this fact are those who try to revise this history for their own purposes, even though conversely (and rather ironically) the same folks complain when there isn't an obvious park/media synergy, i.e. all the posts about "how stupid Iger didn't have enough confidence in Frozen" to have a major attraction in the parks to coincide with its release.

And Disney turned Davy Crockett into a franchise because they had to represent Frontierland in some manner on the TV show designed to promote the park. Same thing with the Tomorrowland science shows.

Disneyland was just as much a driver of media development as it was a showcase for Disney's media properties.

 

[AEfx]

Arguments along the line of "Disney used cross-promotion, so stop opposing GotG being added to EPCOT" ignore more than 50 years of very dramatic evolution in the film and television industries' understanding of cross-promotion. Particularly pronounced changes took place in the 80s and the early to mid-2000s - it is an ENTIRELY different beast, conceived of and executed differently at the corporate level, than it was in the 50s. The comparison of Crockett to GotG is apt - one is a subtle case of shared thematics and aesthetic elements, the other is a pronounced integration into an overarching franchise.

I didn't say anything specifically about GotG, or any specific instance - simply that the notion that synergy wasn't a huge part of the creation of Disneyland is absurd. I mean, he called it...DISNEYland. If he had intended for it to be some separate entity and not cross-promote he would have started by giving it another name. Oh, and Sleeping Beauty Castle...

Not to mention, that completely ignores the fact that Disney was on the cusp of all these things, and the time and place he existed in. To think he would not have developed along with the times shows a fundamental lack of understanding of everything the man stood for.

It's the same "time in a bubble" argument people use to say that buying the rights to Winnie the Pooh or Mary Poppins was somehow different than Disney acquiring properties today - the only difference was, Disney couldn't buy the rights to things because they were not for sale, he could only "rent" them. So he just mined materials for stories that weren't under copyright for most everything else.

 

[AEfx]

And Disney turned Davy Crockett into a franchise because they had to represent Frontierland in some manner on the TV show designed to promote the park. Same thing with the Tomorrowland science shows.

Disneyland was just as much a driver of media development as it was a showcase for Disney's media properties.

I'm sorry, but that is really revisionist.

Disney made a financing deal with ABC to help pay for the parks, and they were faced with filling an hour long weekly television show. It wasn't some grand creative plan - it was marketing synergy. The only reason they kept doing Davy Crocket instead of moving on to various other historical figures as they had intended, for example, was the wild success of the merchandise. This is all well-documented.