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

[Timothy_Q]

Let's say you and your spouse are ready to build your dream house. After looking at the plans and the cost, you decide that the third garage is overkill and you'd rather spend the money elsewhere. Fifteen years later, your children have the right to complain that you and your spouse are cheap tightwads who only care about the bottom line and not at all about your family's happiness because of the "cuts" you made to the household.

Except in this family, the dad makes 50 million dollars a year

 

[MisterPenguin]

Except in this family, the dad makes 50 million dollars a year

It was a seven million dollar garage and would have delayed the building of the house by a year.

 

[Timothy_Q]

It was a seven million dollar garage and would have delayed the building of the house by a year.

That’s what happens when you keep postponing important stuff. You run out of time

 

[BrianLo]

Let's say you and your spouse are ready to build your dream house. After looking at the plans and the cost, you decide that the third garage is overkill and you'd rather spend the money elsewhere. Fifteen years later, your children have the right to complain that you and your spouse are cheap tightwads who only care about the bottom line and not at all about your family's happiness because of the "cuts" you made to the household.

Lol!

It was a legitimate question. I thought he was talking about something else, since he was referencing green-lit announced attractions (Tron, The Theatre) being pulled after the fact.

The Iger era has been relatively good about seeing through things they announce in some form. There isn't much reason to suspect both those projects would be fully canned without at least some sort of substitute.

 

[marni1971]

I’m guessing another park wants to use the FoP tech for a different IP but AK wants it exclusively for a few years. Or are you saying AK wants to add something new that another park wants? I of course understand if you can’t say more at this point.

FOP tech isn't exclusive. There's proposals for it elsewhere, and if they want it it would happen.

@marni1971 is the Indiana Jones Land coming to AK going into the entirity of DinoLand as well (or any other place?), if so, is there any chance of the Dinosaur theme being used somewhere else at the park?

Also, are there any other hints you can give about the attraction you previously teased to be in either AK or another park?

All I know of Indy is it's one of a few proposals for DAK. I've heard of proposals that wouldn't affect the Dinosaur EMV ride.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Let's say you and your spouse are ready to build your dream house. After looking at the plans and the cost, you decide that the third garage is overkill and you'd rather spend the money elsewhere. Fifteen years later, your children have the right to complain that you and your spouse are cheap tightwads who only care about the bottom line and not at all about your family's happiness because of the "cuts" you made to the household.

Let’s say it’s more like building a glamorous movie palace. It’s an expensive proposition. You decline to keep design elements that would allow the facility to do things you can’t afford now that would keep it at the cutting edge. To lose those elements means future enhancements of the kind currently envisioned would be expensive if not impossible to reinsert.

Which is a pretty good metaphor for both the cuts I refer to and the entire Galaxy Edge’s proposition.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Let’s say it’s more like building a glamorous movie palace. It’s an expensive proposition. You decline to keep design elements that would allow the facility to do things you can’t afford now that would keep it at the cutting edge. To lose those elements means future enhancements of the kind currently envisioned would be expensive if not impossible to reinsert.

Which is a pretty good metaphor for both the cuts I refer to and the entire Galaxy Edge’s proposition.

Every project ever can have envisioned extras. Just because they don't make it to the final plan does it mean "there were cuts." When you're already spending billions, it's rather absurd to imply cheapness. Of course Imagineers will shoot for the moon. And of course budgetary concerns scaled those dreams back. When you get two E-tickets, theming as extensive as a Potter Land, and immersive story-telling through light role-playing, crying over the proposed Bantha ride as a sign of Disney's cheapness is ridiculous.

 

[GeneralZod]

I guess to me Moana fits AK as much as A Bugs Life, Finding Nemo/Lion King, a Yeti, a time traveling ride, and a sci-fi fantasy about giant Indian smurfs. But really, I just want a immersive South Pacific Land where HeiHei gets to save the day...so I’m obviously biased.

Mr. Iger?

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Every project ever can have envisioned extras. Just because they don't make it to the final plan does it mean "there were cuts." When you're already spending billions, it's rather absurd to imply cheapness. Of course Imagineers will shoot for the moon. And of course budgetary concerns scaled those dreams back. When you get two E-tickets, theming as extensive as a Potter Land, and immersive story-telling through light role-playing, crying over the proposed Bantha ride as a sign of Disney's cheapness is ridiculous.

There were more cuts.

 

[Timothy_Q]

There were more cuts.

Please expand on that

 

[larryz]

Well, yeah, I suppose, if you say an IP is strictly an IP. I meant more a popular IP...like a character tie in.

But, World of Motion didn't initially include that sort of IP. Neither did The Land. Neither did the Living Seas. Or Horizons.

At least not a recognizable one...

They had their own unique stories to tell, and told them well (especially Living Seas and Horizons).

That...isn't what they do anymore.

I consider those as "advertainment," sponsored by large corporations who made sure their logos were prominently displayed before, during and after the rides.

 

[larryz]

It (probably) saves the Tiki Birds and Dinosaur

Tiki Birds, yes, but Dinosaur, I don't know... if you put an outrigger shell on the Dino ride vehicles, and change out the Dinosaur sets to resemble island and open ocean scenes, you could crank in quite a ride based on Moana...

 

[bclane]

Mr. Iger?

Mom?

 

[englanddg]

I consider those as "advertainment," sponsored by large corporations who made sure their logos were prominently displayed before, during and after the rides.

Yeah, good point.

 

[Maeryk]

Well, yeah, I suppose, if you say an IP is strictly an IP. I meant more a popular IP...like a character tie in.

But, World of Motion didn't initially include that sort of IP. Neither did The Land. Neither did the Living Seas. Or Horizons.

At least not a recognizable one...

They had their own unique stories to tell, and told them well (especially Living Seas and Horizons).

That...isn't what they do anymore.

No, they had huge corporate sponsor logos all over the place.

 

[njDizFan]

Well, Epcot was really the only park that did that to any extent, so it's a little irrational to expect all the parks to do that. (I'm not dissing edutainment by any stretch - I want our original Epcot back.)

Actually the IP-centric(existing) attractions in the MK are mostly in FantasyLand where they belong. The 90's brought in a few more(1 or so in each land- Splash, Aladdin, Buzz). AK has very few and DHS is supposed to be an IP park. I would be happy if there was a mix(IP and non) with the slate of new attractions but that seems to be a thing of the past.

 

[DisneyDodo]

Actually the IP-centric(existing) attractions in the MK are mostly in FantasyLand where they belong. The 90's brought in a few more(1 or so in each land- Splash, Aladdin, Buzz). AK has very few and DHS is supposed to be an IP park. I would be happy if there was a mix(IP and non) with the slate of new attractions but that seems to be a thing of the past.

This distinction that certain parks are "IP parks" while others are "non-IP parks" simply does not exist. All three of MK, DHS, and AK were built with some attractions containing IPs and others not. (Epcot is it's own case as it was not built as a theme park, but rather a world's fair with sponsored pavilions. It would not have been very sensible to have outside companies sponsoring attractions filled with Disney's intellectual property.)

The fact that Disney has skewed more towards IP in recent years makes sense - they have a lot more of it. Disney's arsenal of IP is a lot more expansive now than it was decades ago, so Disney is generally able to make use of IP without pigeonholing itself too much.

 

[lazyboy97o]

This distinction that certain parks are "IP parks" while others are "non-IP parks" simply does not exist. All three of MK, DHS, and AK were built with some attractions containing IPs and others not. (Epcot is it's own case as it was not built as a theme park, but rather a world's fair with sponsored pavilions. It would not have been very sensible to have outside companies sponsoring attractions filled with Disney's intellectual property.)

The fact that Disney has skewed more towards IP in recent years makes sense - they have a lot more of it. Disney's arsenal of IP is a lot more expansive now than it was decades ago, so Disney is generally able to make use of IP without pigeonholing itself too much.

The adoption of a franchise only policy has nothing to do with quantity of properties owned.

 

[BrianLo]

There were more cuts.

I’ll pose the same question again, what are you referring to? Or at the very least are you talking about something that was announced and is no longer happening, or something that never made it past proposal?

Welcome to PM as well as I’m earnestly curious.

 

[marni1971]

This distinction that certain parks are "IP parks" while others are "non-IP parks" simply does not exist. All three of MK, DHS, and AK were built with some attractions containing IPs and others not. (Epcot is it's own case as it was not built as a theme park, but rather a world's fair with sponsored pavilions. It would not have been very sensible to have outside companies sponsoring attractions filled with Disney's intellectual property.)

The fact that Disney has skewed more towards IP in recent years makes sense - they have a lot more of it. Disney's arsenal of IP is a lot more expansive now than it was decades ago, so Disney is generally able to make use of IP without pigeonholing itself too much.

Epcot was a none IP park. MK was mainly none IP outside of Fantaysland as stated. Now IP is being shoved in anywhere they can, at the expense of an original story and original characters.