• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Marvel coming to WDW?!?!

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Because they don't need the entire concept. Prior to the Twilight Zone idea, they had plans to use Mel Brooks to narrate the story line. We've had the current story line for over twenty years. I think they should try another concept. And if they have to pay a licensing fee then they should include Micheal Jackson as our guide to the other side. They could call it "Moon walking in the ToT".
Yep, definitely never been on the ride:)
 

janoimagine

Well-Known Member
I guess my point is DCA's ToT isn't that well executed (or placed) to begin with. In terms of temporary overlays though, DLR has quite a few other good examples. Even the recent invasion of IP on a classic, Hyperspace Mountain, is tastefully done.
DCA's ToT looks great from the outside, but the ride lacks many of what makes DHS's version that much better, it's biggest flaw is that it only moves vertically and lacks the horizontal track system that DHS's version has. Its just too limiting in my opinion.
 

alphac2005

Well-Known Member
Because they don't need the entire concept. Prior to the Twilight Zone idea, they had plans to use Mel Brooks to narrate the story line. We've had the current story line for over twenty years. I think they should try another concept. And if they have to pay a licensing fee then they should include Micheal Jackson as our guide to the other side. They could call it "Moon walking in the ToT".

We've had the Haunted Mansion for more than four decades. Does that call for us to change the storyline? Pirates? Small World? The licensing fee is a pittance in cost in grand scheme of their expenses and the Twilight Zone concept simply works. It might be an intellectual property of the past, but that's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned because it's such an wonderfully integrated attraction. Does everything have to be a licensed property that Bob Iger has gotten the board to approve during his tenure?

Phase one of the past decade and a half has been to have the Pixar characters supplant Disney characters and now we're cramming in Lucasfilm and Marvel to the full hilt. I'm all for progress and using properties where they work, but my goodness, it's borderlines on a cluster...... Tomorrowland filled with Pixar, now the Studios with Pixar, don't forget your obligatory amount at Epcot, followed by the Star Wars Studios, and the shoehorning of Marvel in any way, shape, or form they can barely muster due to the legal agreement with Universal. It's pathetic.

I used to be saddened by the naysayers that saw Disney as nothing more than the example of America's phony consumerism and corporate shilling beyond comparison. When I see what the company has turned the parks into, I think that many of those people were onto something.
 
Last edited:

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
No, I apologize for not explaining in more detail. When DHS was first established in 1989 it was Disney-MGM Studios. They licensed the name MGM, the logo, Leo the lion and other content from MGM to legitimize the park. After all, as I said before, Disney was not a major player during the golden era of Hollywood. Disney was nothing more than a small independent studio.

MGM was the epitome of glamour and big studio production during the golden age of Hollywood. They, of course, weren't the only big studio but MGM was the leader during that period.

You see, the idea behind Disney-MGM Studios is that you had real working studio productions taking place while also celebrating the golden age of Hollywood. And it worked, for awhile.

The working studio concept dried up and MGM was filing lawsuits against Disney before the park even opened. And this was also the time when the ownership of MGM was being bounced around between Kirk Kerkorian, Ted Turner and others. Disney got caught in the middle while these brokers were pealing off the movie assets of MGM.

I liked the original idea of the park but I think Disney should leave that concept to Universal and instead concentrate upon their real strength.

For example, The Twilight Zone ToT has always seemed very weak to me. Why license the rights to an old CBS TV show? I think Disney is now asking the same question. Disney has many properties that could provide the theme for repeated drops from an old hotel. They could call it "Wally's Dumpster Drop".

Thanks for explaining. I agree that Disney should leave the whole working studio tour to Universal but I think they re already doing that. They already closed down the tram tour among other things. However, I don't think this means they have to abandon the Hollywood theme as a land. Especially since from what I hear and see in pictures it's one of the best themed lands at Hollywood Studios. All they need to do is change the name of the park. There's really nothing at the park that screams working studio anyway.

And I definitely don't think they should get rid of Twilight Zone for GOTG just because that franchise is popular NOW.
Is Disney forgetting what makes their parks so popular in the first place? Nostalgia. People have a nostalgic place in their heart for the Twilight zone franchise. Sure, kids may not have any clue what the Twilight Zone is but Im sure they have plenty of memories of riding TOT and that's nostalgic for them. What TDO will essentially be doing by getting rid of TOT is getting rid of that parks Haunted Mansion. Eventually it would be revered in the same sort of way, if not already.

I agree that Disney should leave the "working studio" park to Universal but I also think they should leave the nostalgia killing, continuously switching out attractions for the hottest IP to Universal as well. I know that a park needs to stay current and relevant. However, killing a classic like TOT for GOTG is not the way to go about it.

If Disney thinks GOTG is such a great IP then they should take their time and build an attraction that does the IP justice. If this a quick and cheap money grab then they should just retheme RNRC and nobody would bat an eye.

Oh ya , I really don't think this has as much do with Disney not wanting to pay the licensing fees as it is that they just NEED to get Marvel in the parks ASAP generating revenue. I mean , how much could the licensing for Twilight Zone cost for goodness sake?
 
Last edited:

TP2000

Well-Known Member
I find the timeline interesting as well. In DCA, they are going to close the ride for 5 months? That's long enough to do a complete re-theme? What kind of halfassed project is this going to be?

The ride system and building aren't going away, just reworking the interiors and and decor, new audio and video throughout, set dressings, signage, etc.

In Anaheim they switch from regular Haunted Mansion and Small World to the Holiday versions of both those rides every fall with rehabs that last only 12 to 14 days, with 8 to 10 days for removal in January. Turning Space Mountain to Ghost Galaxy or Hyperspace Mountain takes only a day to hang some signs and flip a switch on the new ride program.

Five months seems plenty of time to redress and redecorate and reprogram an existing ride.
 

Atomicmickey

Well-Known Member
I used to be saddened by the naysayers that saw Disney as nothing more than the example of America's phony consumerism and corporate shilling beyond comparison. When I see what the company has turned the parks into, I think that many of those people were onto something.

THIS. I have tons of academic studies on the topic of Disney and American (and world) consumer culture.
There's no denying that Walt was a salesman--hey, the Disneyland TV show was just a huge commercial
for the park, which in itself was a commercial for all sorts of companies, even Aluminum! And he rented
out Main Street U.S.A. to vendors, including a lingerie shop of all things.

Despite all that, there was a sincerity of purpose, a clarity of vision, and a commitment to a singular experience.
Well, rose colored glasses would have us believe this. Perhaps it has always been so.

But I can't see Walt doing a Sci-Fi overlay in Adventureland, or anything like that.

Again, I can see this for RnRC. Just not for one of the crown jewels of Disney Parks™ worldwide.

Maybe someone from Glendale showed up and figured that the Tower was neglected anyway, what with all
that dust and cobwebs everywhere. The place is dingy. And the elevator is broken. :p
 

FigmentForver96

Well-Known Member
Thanks for explaining. I agree that Disney should leave the whole working studio tour to Universal but I think they re already doing that. They already closed down the tram tour among other things. However, I don't think this means they have to abandon the Hollywood theme as a land. Especially since from what I hear and see in pictures it's one of the best themed lands at Hollywood Studios. All they need to do is change the name of the park. There's really nothing at the park that screams working studio anyway.

And I definitely don't think they should get rid of Twilight Zone for GOTG just because that franchise is popular NOW.
Is Disney forgetting what makes their parks so popular in the first place? Nostalgia. People have a nostalgic place in their heart for the Twilight zone franchise. Sure, kids may not have any clue what the Twilight Zone is but Im sure they have plenty of memories of riding TOT and that's nostalgic for them. What TDO will essentially be doing by getting rid of TOT is getting rid of that parks Haunted Mansion. Eventually it would be revered in the same sort of way, if not already.

I agree that Disney should leave the "working studio" park to Universal but I also think they should leave the nostalgia killing, continuously switching out attractions for the hottest IP to Universal as well. I know that a park needs to stay current and relevant. However, killing a classic like TOT for GOTG is not the way to go about it.

If Disney thinks GOTG is such a great IP then they should take their time and build an attraction that does the IP justice. If this a quick and cheap money grab then they should just retheme RNRC and nobody would bat an eye.

Oh ya , I really don't think this has as much do with Disney not wanting to pay the licensing fees as it is that they just NEED to get Marvel in the parks ASAP generating revenue. I mean , how much could the licensing for Twilight Zone cost for goodness sake?
Even if you are not familiar with the show, the whole idea behind the ride makes it iconic. Think back to riding and watching the pre-show. The music gets everyone excited as Rod Serling begins to speak. At the very end everyone in their deepest voice repeat the word "The Twilight Zone" as it echoes off the walls and we prepare to enter the fifth dimension. The ride just would not have that same emotional connection if it was just a drop ride in a haunted hotel.
 

Launchpad McQuack

Well-Known Member
Even if you are not familiar with the show, the whole idea behind the ride makes it iconic. Think back to riding and watching the pre-show. The music gets everyone excited as Rod Serling begins to speak. At the very end everyone in their deepest voice repeat the word "The Twilight Zone" as it echoes off the walls and we prepare to enter the fifth dimension. The ride just would not have that same emotional connection if it was just a drop ride in a haunted hotel.

All true. My wife has never watched a single episode of the Twilight Zone, but she LOVES the Tower of Terror because of the execution. It's the same with Splash Mountain. You would never say "well, no one even cares about Song of the South anymore, so let's put the Lone Ranger in there."
 

Matt7187

Well-Known Member
Even if you are not familiar with the show, the whole idea behind the ride makes it iconic. Think back to riding and watching the pre-show. The music gets everyone excited as Rod Serling begins to speak. At the very end everyone in their deepest voice repeat the word "The Twilight Zone" as it echoes off the walls and we prepare to enter the fifth dimension. The ride just would not have that same emotional connection if it was just a drop ride in a haunted hotel.
I can back this statement in personal experience. I have never see a second of any episode of The Twilight Zone, but it's in my top 3 rides anywhere, and the whole Twilight Zone aspect adds so much to the experience.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
All true. My wife has never watched a single episode of the Twilight Zone, but she LOVES the Tower of Terror because of the execution. It's the same with Splash Mountain. You would never say "well, no one even cares about Song of the South anymore, so let's put the Lone Ranger in there."
Good god man, don't put that out there. People from Disney actually read this stuff. They are doing a fine enough job messing things up without us helping them. If the next rumor to break is a change to Splash I'm holding you personally responsible;). It won't be Lone Ranger though since that flopped.
 

Chris82

Well-Known Member
Even if you are not familiar with the show, the whole idea behind the ride makes it iconic. Think back to riding and watching the pre-show. The music gets everyone excited as Rod Serling begins to speak. At the very end everyone in their deepest voice repeat the word "The Twilight Zone" as it echoes off the walls and we prepare to enter the fifth dimension. The ride just would not have that same emotional connection if it was just a drop ride in a haunted hotel.

I agree that the Twilight Zone is a great theme and ought to stay.

That said, I would be less opposed to a "re-theme" if the basic concept of haunted hotel was still kept and the atmosphere was still incredibly creepy and evocative. You could switch Twilight Zone to Alfred Hitchcock, or Unsolved Mysteries, or any other scary "brands" and my love for the place might take a little hit, but it wouldn't feel desecrated. The tremendous and obvious problem with Guardians of the Galaxy is that it does not communicate "scary" or "threatening" at all. It's an utterly tone deaf mismatch.

What makes the Tower of Terror so brilliant is how effectively it communicates emotional value from the moment you see it looming from the parking lot. It's the best build-up in theme park history, as far as I'm concerned. By the time you get to the drop, you're so hyped for it that it could drop you two feet like the Living Seas elevators and you'd still be thrilled. I'M still thrilled by it even though I've ridden it a jillion times and know exactly what's coming. Suspense and thrill is more about effective storytelling than ride mechanics.

Adding some goofy flash-in-the-pan franchise to Tower of Terror? How would any of that awesome be preserved?
 

DoTheImpossible

Active Member
I agree that the Twilight Zone is a great theme and ought to stay.

That said, I would be less opposed to a "re-theme" if the basic concept of haunted hotel was still kept and the atmosphere was still incredibly creepy and evocative. You could switch Twilight Zone to Alfred Hitchcock, or Unsolved Mysteries, or any other scary "brands" and my love for the place might take a little hit, but it wouldn't feel desecrated. The tremendous and obvious problem with Guardians of the Galaxy is that it does not communicate "scary" or "threatening" at all. It's an utterly tone deaf mismatch.

What makes the Tower of Terror so brilliant is how effectively it communicates emotional value from the moment you see it looming from the parking lot. It's the best build-up in theme park history, as far as I'm concerned. By the time you get to the drop, you're so hyped for it that it could drop you two feet like the Living Seas elevators and you'd still be thrilled. I'M still thrilled by it even though I've ridden it a jillion times and know exactly what's coming. Suspense and thrill is more about effective storytelling than ride mechanics.

Adding some goofy flash-in-the-pan franchise to Tower of Terror? How would any of that awesome be preserved?

It wouldn't be preserved. The more I think about it, the more extensive the re-skin would have to be. I mean how do you even start on the exterior? It's just so much work to destroy one of the most iconic rides in WDW.
 

Launchpad McQuack

Well-Known Member
Good god man, don't put that out there. People from Disney actually read this stuff. They are doing a fine enough job messing things up without us helping them. If the next rumor to break is a change to Splash I'm holding you personally responsible;). It won't be Lone Ranger though since that flopped.

Sorry, you're right. It won't be Lone Ranger. Maybe it'll be Star Wars, with X-wing boats that kamikaze dive into the Death Star "brier patch". Instead of Brer Rabbit animatronics, it'll be Jar Jar.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
DCA's ToT looks great from the outside...

Really? I think it only looks good at night, and even then it's not that great, just an improvement over its relatively flat and mediocre daytime aesthetic.

tower_of_terror_florida_vs_california.jpg


DCA's Tower of Terror was the last big but cheaped out project opened under the idiot duo Paul Pressler and Cynthia Harriss with Michael Eisner at the wheel and approving of their idiocy. It was that type of lowered expectations that led to all three of those execs being shown the door, and then Paul and Cynthia ruined The Gap and were shown the door there a few years later. Both are working in relative obscurity now, in mid level exec roles for small firms.
 

Phil12

Well-Known Member
Do you like trolling or are you just oblivious?
I have no desire to be offensive or provocative in my comments. If you perceive my comments that way then look within. I admit knowing that the audience here is full of zealots with some overbearing and single minded adherents. But there are also some people that are willing to consider and even embrace my viewpoints as well. I am willing to share my thoughts with others in this forum not so much in an attempt to arrive at a consensus, but rather interject that other worthwhile concepts should be considered.

There are many answers to how theme should be used at DHS and I am not a fan of their current methods. The "golden era" of Hollywood concept never worked right IMO. I think Disney recognizes that and they're going to make some changes. With the advent of SW, GotG and other IP, DHS will finally get the themed planning that it so richly deserves.

From its start in 1989, DHS (i.e. Disney-MGM Studios) was rushed into being and was not put together well. ToT was rushed into being as well to fill the lack of attractions in DHS. Did you know that the site for ToT had to be moved due to a sinkhole that was found during the original geological assessment?

Of course, it would have been better to have a solid and comprehensive plan prior to the 1989 opening but what's done is done. This time around Disney can redo the park, put up a huge icon and kick the "golden era" of Hollywood to the curb.
 

Launchpad McQuack

Well-Known Member
I have no desire to be offensive or provocative in my comments. If you perceive my comments that way then look within. I admit knowing that the audience here is full of zealots with some overbearing and single minded adherents. But there are also some people that are willing to consider and even embrace my viewpoints as well. I am willing to share my thoughts with others in this forum not so much in an attempt to arrive at a consensus, but rather interject that other worthwhile concepts should be considered.

There are many answers to how theme should be used at DHS and I am not a fan of their current methods. The "golden era" of Hollywood concept never worked right IMO. I think Disney recognizes that and they're going to make some changes. With the advent of SW, GotG and other IP, DHS will finally get the themed planning that it so richly deserves.

From its start in 1989, DHS (i.e. Disney-MGM Studios) was rushed into being and was not put together well. ToT was rushed into being as well to fill the lack of attractions in DHS. Did you know that the site for ToT had to be moved due to a sinkhole that was found during the original geological assessment?

Of course, it would have been better to have a solid and comprehensive plan prior to the 1989 opening but what's done is done. This time around Disney can redo the park, put up a huge icon and kick the "golden era" of Hollywood to the curb.

I'm honestly fine if the overall theme of DHS moves away from the "old Hollywood" look. However, even if we were to go with a grab bag of themes for various areas of the park, there is no need to get change the overall experience of one of the most popular attractions in the world. There is going to be no singular theme for the DHS park, so there's no problem having this one relic of the old Hollywood theming.

Let's look at Tomorrowland over in Magic Kingdom. The whole concept of Tomorrowland has been abandoned for several attractions, but who would say "well, the whole futuristic idea has tanked, let's change Space Mountain to something fresh"?
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom