aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
It's also possible it won't happen at all.
But right now Burbank wants both.
If TDO says no though, Burbank could just override/force it anyway right? Which unfortunately is probably what will happen.
It's also possible it won't happen at all.
But right now Burbank wants both.
If TDO says no though, Burbank could just override/force it anyway right? Which unfortunately is probably what will happen.
I do think a RnRC overlay would be better. However, I keep thinking about how excited we would all be if GotG were getting a stand alone, novel attraction. We'd all be conjecturing about ride layout, tech used, desperately wondering if blue prints were going to be leaked, and drooling over perspective concept art. Instead, we're just discussing the myriad ways this concept sets a new bar for stupidity.
Oh I'm with you 100%. What a world that would be, right? I'm simply trying to make cake out of crap.
The most logical use of the elevator shaft would be escaping from Prison.Remember that scene in GoT where they all got in an elevator and it feel 13 stories... oh wait, that never happened.
So many times when an intellectual property is used in an attraction it's the focal point. When it's the focal point that focus shifts into trying to put you into that world. That's the typical Universal approach. Often times it works, but not always. More importantly though when you make the intellectual property the focus point of the attraction you are transferring from one medium to another (typically film/television to an attraction/physical environment). Again, that doesn't always work.Perhaps in this case it's the rare perfection of IP, story, setting, building, ride system and execution all coming together perfectly to greater than the sum of its parts. Much like Splash Mountain.
But remove one cog of the machine and the other parts can't make up for it.
The only kind of book report ride at Universal I can think of is Gringotts due to the fact it's based on a specific event from the 7th book even if somewhat changed to include us guests and Voldemort. Everything else seems to be exactly what you said about a new story in a new medium.So many times when an intellectual property is used in an attraction it's the focal point. When it's the focal point that focus shifts into trying to put you into that world. That's the typical Universal approach. Often times it works, but not always. More importantly though when you make the intellectual property the focus point of the attraction you are transferring from one medium to another (typically film/television to an attraction/physical environment). Again, that doesn't always work.
Part of the reason why the Twillight Zone Tower of Terror works as an attraction is because it's inspired by the intellectual property, it's not driven by it. It's using layers of story inspired by the Twilight Zone to tell an entirely new story in a new medium. It's one of the biggest complaints about Little Mermaid, that's simply a book report where we're inserted in the middle of it. Comparitively, Splash Mountain isn't a true book report, it has many elements of Song of the South, but it is more inspired by the story.
It's part of the reason why I'm somewhat optimistic about the ride itself for Frozen Ever After, it doesn't seem like the ride will be a book report. The thematic fit aside, it sounds like the ride will be telling a different story using characters we're familiar with. It's not truly the same thing as Tower of Terror, but it's better than a book report.
For Guardians in Tower of Terror we're all looking for a story straight out of the movie we all know. It's the same thing we do with Avatar or anything else we have yet to actually experience. I think a Guardians of the Galaxy overlay to Tower of Terror could very well be a good attraction, but we already have a good attraction that wasn't broken. It's a classic and doesn't need to be replaced. It would be the biggest attraction replacement in the history of Walt Disney World.
Well said. The IP is not the focus of the attraction but it blends seamlessly with the story of the ride.So many times when an intellectual property is used in an attraction it's the focal point. When it's the focal point that focus shifts into trying to put you into that world. That's the typical Universal approach. Often times it works, but not always. More importantly though when you make the intellectual property the focus point of the attraction you are transferring from one medium to another (typically film/television to an attraction/physical environment). Again, that doesn't always work.
Part of the reason why the Twillight Zone Tower of Terror works as an attraction is because it's inspired by the intellectual property, it's not driven by it. It's using layers of story inspired by the Twilight Zone to tell an entirely new story in a new medium. It's one of the biggest complaints about Little Mermaid, that's simply a book report where we're inserted in the middle of it. Comparitively, Splash Mountain isn't a true book report, it has many elements of Song of the South, but it is more inspired by the story.
It's part of the reason why I'm somewhat optimistic about the ride itself for Frozen Ever After, it doesn't seem like the ride will be a book report. The thematic fit aside, it sounds like the ride will be telling a different story using characters we're familiar with. It's not truly the same thing as Tower of Terror, but it's better than a book report.
For Guardians in Tower of Terror we're all looking for a story straight out of the movie we all know. It's the same thing we do with Avatar or anything else we have yet to actually experience. I think a Guardians of the Galaxy overlay to Tower of Terror could very well be a good attraction, but we already have a good attraction that wasn't broken. It's a classic and doesn't need to be replaced. It would be the biggest attraction replacement in the history of Walt Disney World.
The only kind of book report ride at Universal I can think of is Gringotts due to the fact it's based on a specific event from the 7th book even if somewhat changed to include us guests and Voldemort. Everything else seems to be exactly what you said about a new story in a new medium.
like those cost cuts and price hikes and price surges didnt do it already..?It was getting almost too positive. They had to find a way to upset us somehow.
"that would be the PLUS MAGICAL modification for a mere 150 USD!"This is Disney we're talking about. Attractions can always be plussed:
View attachment 135223
Knew I was forgetting something.Cat in the Hat. Less "report" more "actual book." As is most of Seuss Landing.
Good, you don't need that kind of negativity in your life.Surveyed some coworkers today about the possible retheme. Two groaned, but one squealed in delight.
I told her I'd never talk to her again.
Not entirely true.Right now TDO hasn't had for a few years any say in whether attractions are built in the swamps that is Burbank's discretion.
Well said. The IP is not the focus of the attraction but it blends seamlessly with the story of the ride.
I also agree that you could probably have a pretty decent GoTG ride using the ToT show building, but not if its still a hotel. In order to make a GoTG story fit properly into that building the building can't be a 1930s era Hollywood hotel anymore. Maybe it's a prison or some other building that would fit with the GoTG world. Then you need to either redo the entire Sunset Blvd section or try to explain why an "alien prison" is at the end of a street on Sunset Blvd in 1930s Hollywood.
that would impact IOA right?
Not so much, because WDW is bound by the contractual obligations Marvel signed with Uni. Someone else can (and no doubt will) explain it in more detail, but there are certain characters Disney can in no way use in any park. The Guardians of the Galaxy, however, do not appear to fall into that category, which would make sense, as they weren't even a thing yet when the deal was signed.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.