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

[Monorail_Orange]

Do I smell a Dinosaur reboot?

No, it's the layer of B.S. that WDI's having to lay down to cover Bob's and Bob's "shove IP into the parks no matter what" mandate.

 

[Suspirian]

No, it's the layer of B.S. that WDI's having to lay down to cover Bob's and Bob's "shove IP into the parks no matter what" mandate.

I wasn't serious. Just poking fun at the current WDS pattern lol

 

[Monorail_Orange]

I wasn't serious. Just poking fun at the current WDS pattern lol

I figured you were being funny, I just saw an opportunity to build on it a little, and poke some fun at the current WDPR pattern myself.

 

[britain]

So, just as an update. No one, not one person, has come to me to confirm that this is a real thing that is being planned. This usually means one of a few things:

Either

• This project is spur of the moment, and that means it is imminent, most likely a knee-jerk response to Pandora making Animal Kingdom one-sided. Bob Chapek at his best. It would be happening so quickly that no one wants to talk about it for fear of losing their job. If this is the case, we would know very quickly, by December even, if it will happen.
• This project is completely made up and is a product of the internet repeatedly quoting itself. That said, I feel like we'd be able to find the original rumor if that was the case, and I haven't found it yet on any site.
• The project is a brand new proposal and so few people know about it that most "sources" really are just still in the dark. You see, each park has an options list of things that could be built or implemented in the future. These lists are prepared to show Disney executives. The executives then choose items out of the list almost like you order dinner at a restaurant. The only difference is that this "menu" has times attached on when your "dinner" will be ready. Some dinners can open a year from now, some take 5 years. The projects on these menu timelines are usually 50-80% ready to go. They have estimated budgets, they have locations in mind, and the plans are usually rock solid. If a project makes it on to one of these lists, it usually happens, but because these lists can be pretty long, we may not see what happens until 5 or even 10 years down the road. If this Indy project made it on to a list, its brand new and will take a long time to see the light of day, if it ever does.

Those are the three most likely scenarios.

Hopefully it's not just the internet repeatedly quoting itself, but right now that's just as possible as it being a legitimate project. I'll keep you informed in the future if I hear anything new, but until then, take this one with a grain of salt. (Though I'd still get my rides in on Dinosaur sooner rather than later, because anyone will be able to tell you that ride needs some TLC)

If this is spur of the moment, I definitely see it as being instigated by wanted to tie-in to the opening of Indy 5 in 2019. Worked for GotG, it's the plan for SW:GE. Hey, it's the plan for the Incredibles overlay of Screamin'.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Both Dinosaur films were flops.

Dinosaur actually made more money then The Good Dinosaur and was the 5th highest grossing movie of 2000.

It's just that a little thing called Walking With Dinosaurs completely stole its thunder and became the most memorable piece of Dinosaur media of the turn of the century.

Indeed, Dinosaur made more than twice its budget and got a passable grade from critics. The Good Dinosaur roughly the same.

They were by any account not flops... except by the expectations of Disney and Pixar. They fail by comparison. They didn't get enough earnings to justify a sequel nor to be a park attraction. Maybe they'll grow in stature over time through home video (many of the beloved classic WD films were weak at the box office, but grew in stature over time).

Ya know, if Disney used their TV channels to show these movies on a regular basis, you'd have a whole generation growing up with them and looking for them in the parks. Why The Muppet Show isn't playing nightly on ABC at 2 AM, I don't know. You think synergy wouldn't be hard for Disney.

 

[beertiki]

Animal rights is not a priority for me too. Some animals are ok in cages, some on a sandwich, some on the end of my fishing rod. Hunting is fine with me, and in some instances, necessary population control. I have seen too much death at zoos and aquariums to not have a skeptical opinion of them.

Even with all the deaths at zoos and aquariums, none of it compares to the deaths from overfishing and habitat destruction.

 

[JSchnitz]

They were by any account not flops... except by the expectations of Disney and Pixar. They fail by comparison. They didn't get enough earnings to justify a sequel nor to be a park attraction. Maybe they'll grow in stature over time through home video (many of the beloved classic WD films were weak at the box office, but grew in stature over time).

The same could be said for Ratatouille, but here we are. The same way it fit France is the same way The Good Dinosaur could fit into Dinorama. An existing Disney IP that fits, popular or not.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

Indeed, Dinosaur made more than twice its budget and got a passable grade from critics. The Good Dinosaur roughly the same.

They were by any account not flops... except by the expectations of Disney and Pixar. They fail by comparison. They didn't get enough earnings to justify a sequel nor to be a park attraction. Maybe they'll grow in stature over time through home video (many of the beloved classic WD films were weak at the box office, but grew in stature over time).

Ya know, if Disney used their TV channels to show these movies on a regular basis, you'd have a whole generation growing up with them and looking for them in the parks. Why The Muppet Show isn't playing nightly on ABC at 2 AM, I don't know. You think synergy wouldn't be hard for Disney.

The Good Dinosaur was a flop by every measure. Domestic gross was $123 million, international $209 million. Disney essentially gets half of the domestic gross, so $61.5 million. They get less than half of the global take, so maybe $85 million, so Disney's take-home for the global B.O. on this one would be roughly $146.5 million. Pixar movies usually carry a budget of around $180-$200 million. This film had a protracted and expensive development process, including recasting and shifting directors. There's no way The Good Dinosaur recovered its budget, and that budget doesn't even include marketing costs.

Disney knew it was a turd, which is why it was released two weeks before Star Wars VII with zero fanfare and little by way of pervasive marketing. Certainly nothing like Pixar films normally receive.

Dinosaur would have just barely recuperated its budget at the box office (before marketing costs are factored in) in 2000. But since people actually bought home videos at that time, Dinosaur was probably mildly profitable.

 

[MichRX7]

Oh no's.... A tie-in with Indy and Dinosaurs. Maybe Lucas is pushing the land to Disney since he never got to make the original movie he planned:
http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/little-known-sci-fi-fact-lucas-wanted-indiana-jones-2-be-dinosaur-movie

That and he wants to upstage Spielberg, who did make a movie about Dino's (Jurassic Park), and for stealing Kate Capshaw.

PS - I love reading 20+ pages of b*tch*ng and moaning. It always makes a Tuesday a little brighter. Maybe they can just build a Star Wars land expansion in DAK and change out all the Dino animatronic skins calling it "Beasts of Star Wars".

 

[Mike S]

It's true, you can't appreciate them properly on a screen. They are just far more available now than they were in the past.

Same goes for videos of rides at WDW yet people still go. People will always travel to see these things. You just have to put it out there. Am I mistaken or is the Safari one of the most popular rides at the resort?

 

[MisterPenguin]

The Good Dinosaur was a flop by every measure. Domestic gross was $123 million, international $209 million. Disney essentially gets half of the domestic gross, so $61.5 million. They get less than half of the global take, so maybe $85 million, so Disney's take-home for the global B.O. on this one would be roughly $146.5 million. Pixar movies usually carry a budget of around $180-$200 million. This film had a protracted and expensive development process, including recasting and shifting directors. There's no way The Good Dinosaur recovered its budget, and that budget doesn't even include marketing costs.

Disney knew it was a turd, which is why it was released two weeks before Star Wars VII with zero fanfare and little by way of pervasive marketing. Certainly nothing like Pixar films normally receive.

Dinosaur would have just barely recuperated its budget at the box office (before marketing costs are factored in) in 2000. But since people actually bought home videos at that time, Dinosaur was probably mildly profitable.

I stand corrected.

 

[Amidala]

The Good Dinosaur was a flop by every measure. Domestic gross was $123 million, international $209 million. Disney essentially gets half of the domestic gross, so $61.5 million. They get less than half of the global take, so maybe $85 million, so Disney's take-home for the global B.O. on this one would be roughly $146.5 million. Pixar movies usually carry a budget of around $180-$200 million. This film had a protracted and expensive development process, including recasting and shifting directors. There's no way The Good Dinosaur recovered its budget, and that budget doesn't even include marketing costs.

Disney knew it was a turd, which is why it was released two weeks before Star Wars VII with zero fanfare and little by way of pervasive marketing. Certainly nothing like Pixar films normally receive.

Dinosaur would have just barely recuperated its budget at the box office (before marketing costs are factored in) in 2000. But since people actually bought home videos at that time, Dinosaur was probably mildly profitable.

I remember watching TGD for the first time and being truly shocked by how awful it was. There are decisions Pixar has made that I don't agree with (particularly this pattern of making sequel after mediocre sequel in order to establish 'franchises' after the success of this system w/ Toy Story and Cars), but even movies I found to be "so-so" compared to Pixar's usual fare (Cars, Finding Dory, Monsters U, etc.) were usually enjoyable enough and lovingly made. TGD felt uncreative, depressing, and...unusually violent for a children's movie. Some scenes were just plain unsettling, including the one where Arlo and Spot get "high" off wild berries. Meanwhile, Inside Out was one of the best original concepts Pixar has put out there in a while, and it came out the same year...So maybe the lesson here is for Pixar not to spread itself so thin, and to focus all of its efforts on making one quality film per year.........instead of one excellent movie and one horrible one.

Like everyone has said already, though, it really is sad that TGD was such a flop, creatively and in the box office. If infusing everything with IP is really the direction the company will be taking going forward, it would be nice to have some new & relevant IPs that actually fit DAK...otherwise the company will be forced to make excuses for the inclusion of Zootopia and other IPs that don't really "fit" thematically.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

I stand corrected.

You raise an interesting point though about Disney films gaining appreciation over time, even if they are initially flops. I honestly think there's less chance of that occurring now with how the public consumes media and how much media there is to consume. Disney used to faithfully rerelease its films to theaters, even after VHS happened. Maybe if the Disney only streaming service takes off we'll see some resurgence in some titles. Will be interesting to see.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

I remember watching TGD for the first time and being truly shocked by how awful it was. There are decisions Pixar has made that I don't agree with (particularly this pattern of making sequel after mediocre sequel in order to establish 'franchises' after the success of this system w/ Toy Story and Cars), but even movies I found to be "so-so" compared to Pixar's usual fare (Cars, Finding Dory, Monsters U, etc.) were usually enjoyable enough and lovingly made. TGD felt uncreative, depressing, and...unusually violent for a children's movie. Some scenes were just plain unsettling, including the one where Arlo and Spot get "high" off wild berries. Meanwhile, Inside Out was one of the best original concepts Pixar has put out there in a while, and it came out the same year...So maybe the lesson here is for Pixar not to spread itself so thin, and to focus all of its efforts on making one quality film per year.........instead of one excellent movie and one horrible one.

Like everyone has said already, though, it really is sad that TGD was such a flop, creatively and in the box office. If infusing everything with IP is really the direction the company will be taking going forward, it would be nice to have some new & relevant IPs that actually fit DAK...otherwise the company will be forced to make excuses for the inclusion of Zootopia and other IPs that don't really "fit" thematically.

I have never clutched my proverbial pearls during a Disney or Pixar animated film the way I did watching TGD. One dumbfounding decision after another. I agree completely with your assessment - unsettling, violent. I'd add derivative to the mix.

Pixar has had a marked decline in quality and consistency since Mark Andrews campaigned to shift the studio to a faster 2-films-per-year goal. I'm cautiously optimistic about Coco and have full confidence in Brad Bird for Incredibles 2. I don't have as much faith in Toy Story 4, but would be thrilled to be proved wrong.

 

[2351metalcloud]

Dinosaurs are compelling regardless of IP because Dinosaurs are awesome.

Any plans for Dinoland USA that remove Dinosaur should just replace it with the original vision for a Dino safari that is a more efficient people eater, with a lower height requirement/less physically intense.

And this guy needs more love... and a Duffy like gang of AA Dino pals.

I agree that dinosaurs tend to be appealing to many people regardless of IP, but what if they had Indiana Jones ending up in Dinotopia? Or less strangely if the area was based on a place or places from the Dinotopia book and/or tv series? It would probably look more elegant in many people's opinion if it seemed very similar to the book than how things do now.

There could even be a reboot of the Dinotopia miniseries or ABC show set earlier or later than the show or as a remake. It could air on ABC or Disney's new streaming service.

That Lucky the Dinosaur kind of looks like something you would see in a Dinotopia book. It apparently appeared in the parks in 2003 while the show and mini-series came out in 2002.

Many people on here and maybe some Star Wars fans probably wouldn't like this idea, but if Disney wanted to save money, they could have the area of Dinotopia after it's built in Animal Kingdom be replicated in Paris with some changes to be an area based on Naboo from Star Wars. Part of Naboo shown in the Phantom Menace looks very similar to part of Dinotopia according to some people:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinotopia
"Many have claimed that some scenes in the film Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace (particularly those in the city of Theed on Naboo) unfairly copy images from Gurney's books.[8] Gurney acknowledges the resemblance but has remained positive about it.[8] In 1994, director George Lucas had met with producers to discuss some of the concepts and visuals behind a Dinotopia movie that was never made."

With UoE closed and now the possibility of Dinosaur closing, what is Disney going to do with all of these dino animatronics? Please don't tell me they're just going to get trashed.

Maybe they could move them to Disneyland Shanghai or maybe sell them to a theme park or museum there or elsewhere. I don't know that the dinosaurs Disney has are ones that would have been found in land that is now part of China, though. I'm not a paleontologist, but it seems like there are quite a few dinosaur fossils that have been found in China in the past few years. However, maybe it's just because it's a big country with decent funding for paleontology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Dinosaurs_Park
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zigong_Dinosaur_Museum

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Pixar has had a marked decline in quality and consistency since Mark Andrews campaigned to shift the studio to a faster 2-films-per-year goal. I'm cautiously optimistic about Coco and have full confidence in Brad Bird for Incredibles 2. I don't have as much faith in Toy Story 4, but would be thrilled to be proved wrong.

I thought Ed Catmull had pushed the studio beyond making one film a year.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

I thought Ed Catmull had pushed the studio beyond making one film a year.

I'll have to try and find the reference for it, but it was Andrews who sold Catmull on the idea.

 

[lazyboy97o]

You raise an interesting point though about Disney films gaining appreciation over time, even if they are initially flops. I honestly think there's less chance of that occurring now with how the public consumes media and how much media there is to consume. Disney used to faithfully release its films theaters, even after VHS happened. Maybe if the Disney only streaming service takes off we'll see some resurgence in some titles. Will be interesting to see.

You are much more optimistic than me. I’ve always figured that the reason Disney has never actually thrown open the doors to The Vault is fear of what would prove popular. Disney is committed to its current franchises, not that Walter drivel. Like with the parks, the narrative has to be shaped to justify the decision. People want more franchises in the cinema and the theme parks because that’s what’s they buy (and it’s all that they are offered).

 

[2351metalcloud]

You are much more optimistic than me. I’ve always figured that the reason Disney has never actually thrown open the doors to The Vault is fear of what would prove popular. Disney is committed to its current franchises, not that Walter drivel. Like with the parks, the narrative has to be shaped to justify the decision. People want more franchises in the cinema and the theme parks because that’s what’s they buy (and it’s all that they are offered).

It looks like there are quite a few movies on here:

https://techcrunch.com/2015/11/23/d...rvice-for-movies-tv-music-and-more-goes-live/

 

[prfctlyximprct]

"After the project"