Marvel coming to WDW?!?!

[Matt_Black]

I'd be ok with this. After all, the current season of Agent Carter does take place in Los Angeles. They would be limited in the characters they could use though since aside from Captain America, most MCU movies are modern day.

Well, they could always mine the back-issue bin from Marvel's "Timely" period of the Golden Age and use characters from their.

 

[choco choco]

This.... I hope folks start calling TDA. On another note, I've Expressed why I think this is wrong for DCA in numerous posts in the DL forum and unfortunately I'm not getting very much support. Most people posting there seem to be indifferent to a GOTG takeover. Then again there's like 6 people that post there. To be fair nobody is all that excited for it either so that should also speak volumes. It's worth noting though that 5 Super Fans who think it's ok to shoehorn GOTG into DCA's tower just because it's the inferior clone arent really speaking for the average guest/ DLR APer.

I am under the impression that TDA has no say on what goes on regarding major attractions. Corporate wants what corporate wants.

Speaking as a So Cal native and life-long Disneyland'er, I've kinda given up on the DLR crowd. The quality of posts on Micechat has degenerated to the point where I don't even really bother. Many of the better, more intelligent posters disappeared around the same time Al Lutz left, and it's hard to have a conversation with the people now, many of whom idiotically keep asking for sources (they seem to not understand how MiceAge used to or needs to work and, plus, what exactly would be an acceptable source for them? The Associated Press? A name of an employee they've never heard of?).

As it goes with the audience...and so it goes with the park. I've kinda given up on it. Not in the sense that I can never have fun there, but that I've got to come to grips that the qualities that I admired about it are passe and have receded from memory. Nobody remembers anymore that attractions were once supposed to have content, to be actual self-contained works. Everybody's been conditioned now to think nothing of attractions simply being endless references, a self-perpetuating circle of selling Disney's various divisions (the movie tells you to ride the ride, the ride tells you to buy the figurines, the figurines tell you to watch the movie---it's Disney all circle-jerking themselves for money).

Nothing was more heartbreaking than the ride concepts I heard for Star Wars Land. An universe of endless possibilities, and the rides they came up with were a shooter about escaping the Death Star, and a simulator about riding the Falcon. Basically, taking exact scenes from the movie and porting them as literally as possible into a ride experience. They were too lazy to even consider coming up with a stand-alone ride, something that could still be a part of the Star Wars universe but be its own little self-contained story.

 

[Marc Davis Fan]

If DCA's Marvel land were indoors (a next-gen indoor-outdoor scene), that structure would also function as another part of the "DCA berm" that's slowly developing around the park.

 

[V_L_Raptor]

No, the new Kong: Skull Island film is supposedly set in the same universe as the most recent Godzilla movie... the next planned movie in that universe is the Godzilla vs Kong flick a few years ahead down the road. Unfortunate, IMO; we just had a lousy "vs" movie to endure, but whatever. At any rate, that's not to say that Godzilla will be coming to IOA anytime soon; that's a definite Dino conflict of interest.

Ehhh. Wait for the "vs" DVD and grab the Rifftrax when it's out. (Sorry... That's what came to mind when I read your post.)

 

[Mike S]

I am under the impression that TDA has no say on what goes on regarding major attractions. Corporate wants what corporate wants.

Speaking as a So Cal native and life-long Disneyland'er, I've kinda given up on the DLR crowd. The quality of posts on Micechat has degenerated to the point where I don't even really bother. Many of the better, more intelligent posters disappeared around the same time Al Lutz left, and it's hard to have a conversation with the people now, many of whom idiotically keep asking for sources (they seem to not understand how MiceAge used to or needs to work and, plus, what exactly would be an acceptable source for them? The Associated Press? A name of an employee they've never heard of?).

As it goes with the audience...and so it goes with the park. I've kinda given up on it. Not in the sense that I can never have fun there, but that I've got to come to grips that the qualities that I admired about it are passe and have receded from memory. Nobody remembers anymore that attractions were once supposed to have content, to be actual self-contained works. Everybody's been conditioned now to think nothing of attractions simply being endless references, a self-perpetuating circle of selling Disney's various divisions (the movie tells you to ride the ride, the ride tells you to buy the figurines, the figurines tell you to watch the movie---it's Disney all circle-jerking themselves for money).

Nothing was more heartbreaking than the ride concepts I heard for Star Wars Land. An universe of endless possibilities, and the rides they came up with were a shooter about escaping the Death Star, and a simulator about riding the Falcon. Basically, taking exact scenes from the movie and porting them as literally as possible into a ride experience. They were too lazy to even consider coming up with a stand-alone ride, something that could still be a part of the Star Wars universe but be its own little self-contained story.

Technically all we know is that it's a ride where Stormtroopers shoot at us at one point. Nothing about a shooter or escaping the Death Star. I'm fine with these concepts but I guess you wanted something like Star Tours in terms of original stories for the attractions.

 

[Wikkler]

Kind of hoping they actually extend the trolley into the land and add a third car.

They're only running one car now (#ThanksShanghai) so that's not likely.

 

[zooey]

I am under the impression that TDA has no say on what goes on regarding major attractions. Corporate wants what corporate wants.

Speaking as a So Cal native and life-long Disneyland'er, I've kinda given up on the DLR crowd. The quality of posts on Micechat has degenerated to the point where I don't even really bother. Many of the better, more intelligent posters disappeared around the same time Al Lutz left, and it's hard to have a conversation with the people now, many of whom idiotically keep asking for sources (they seem to not understand how MiceAge used to or needs to work and, plus, what exactly would be an acceptable source for them? The Associated Press? A name of an employee they've never heard of?).

As it goes with the audience...and so it goes with the park. I've kinda given up on it. Not in the sense that I can never have fun there, but that I've got to come to grips that the qualities that I admired about it are passe and have receded from memory. Nobody remembers anymore that attractions were once supposed to have content, to be actual self-contained works. Everybody's been conditioned now to think nothing of attractions simply being endless references, a self-perpetuating circle of selling Disney's various divisions (the movie tells you to ride the ride, the ride tells you to buy the figurines, the figurines tell you to watch the movie---it's Disney all circle-jerking themselves for money).

Nothing was more heartbreaking than the ride concepts I heard for Star Wars Land. An universe of endless possibilities, and the rides they came up with were a shooter about escaping the Death Star, and a simulator about riding the Falcon. Basically, taking exact scenes from the movie and porting them as literally as possible into a ride experience. They were too lazy to even consider coming up with a stand-alone ride, something that could still be a part of the Star Wars universe but be its own little self-contained story.

Walt didn't use Disneyland to sell Disney IP? Sleeping beauty castle was called that 4 years before the movie came out and it was originally considered to be Robon Hoods castle because of Robin Hood and his Merry Men coming out at the same time. Matterhorn? Third Man on the Mountain. All of Fantasylands dark rides were a ride through of the movie. Even rides that were not based on Disney movies are based on popular movie genres at the time that everyone would have recognized, like Jungle Cruise being closely related to exotic colonialism films like the African Queen. So, Disneyland has never been pure, it has always been a circle jerk of selling.
You also have to consider where the themed industry has gone and the expectations on the customer. If Harry Potter is the new standard, the whole idea is that you step INTO the films. You get to experience the places and stories you've seen in the films. This is expected. That's one reason I'm impressed with the Star Wars offerings. It's a new planet (I'm sure it will be in the films at some point) and its unfamiliar. They could have just built Tatooine and called it a day.

 

[choco choco]

So, Disneyland has never been pure, it has always been a circle jerk of selling.

It was and it wasn't. Let's not get into this again, but agree that there was a purity of intention to Walt that went beyond mere money. Nobody could have created what he created if they weren't on some level interested in leaving the world a better place than where they found it, and being driven by an imagination that transcended material gain.

If Harry Potter is the new standard, the whole idea is that you step INTO the films. You get to experience the places and stories you've seen in the films. This is expected. That's one reason I'm impressed with the Star Wars offerings. It's a new planet (I'm sure it will be in the films at some point) and its unfamiliar. They could have just built Tatooine and called it a day.

The new planet idea is quite good. I was specifically talking about the ride concepts. The land's concept art looks like the Imagineers looked into the afrofuturism aesthetic for inspiration. Which is not something any themed land has ever tackled. If they really do commit to this, really do the research and pull it off, I will give them major compliments.

Afrofuturism

 

[Mike S]

It was and it wasn't. Let's not get into this again, but agree that there was a purity of intention to Walt that went beyond mere money. Nobody could have created what he created if they weren't on some level interested in leaving the world a better place than where they found it, and being driven by an imagination that transcended material gain.




The new planet idea is quite good. I was specifically talking about the ride concepts. The land's concept art looks like the Imagineers looked into the afrofuturism aesthetic for inspiration. Which is not something any themed land has ever tackled. If they really do commit to this, really do the research and pull it off, I will give them major compliments.

Afrofuturism

To be in theme should I grow my own afro?

 

[RSoxNo1]

Great example. When you overlay something different onto an existing attraction you have to be careful. Flight to The Moon/Mission to Mars was never a great attraction, but it worked for a while. When the 90s came and Tomorrowland was redone Disney went for something very different using the existing infrastructure in Alien Encounter and, while some people had issues, it was quite successful creatively and pretty popular. Then came the idea of getting rid of mommies with special needs 8-year-olds complaints and adding Stitch (who was hugely popular at the time) into the MK quickly and cheaply. We all know how that turned out.

This is more Stitch than Alien. And that is what GotG could be. This is desired because it is cheap and easy (I'll add creatively lazy as well) and gets Marvel into the parks.

The entire ToT concept for BOTH parks was designed with Twilight Zone in mind. Removing it means shoehorning something into a place it doesn't belong. Why not take Pirates and do a different boat ride in the building, but reuse some sets and show pieces. You just don't. No. Sorry, Chappie. Go back to selling Thor hammers and Tink hoodies. Stuff you were capable of handling.

I've said it on several things before but character infusion is the laziest form of Imagineering typically because it's mandated from above. But at this point, I haven't seen Imagineers prove they can handle such mandates from above so they need to get at least some of the blame. Universal has a better track record of re-using existing infrastructure.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Walt didn't use Disneyland to sell Disney IP? Sleeping beauty castle was called that 4 years before the movie came out and it was originally considered to be Robon Hoods castle because of Robin Hood and his Merry Men coming out at the same time. Matterhorn? Third Man on the Mountain. All of Fantasylands dark rides were a ride through of the movie. Even rides that were not based on Disney movies are based on popular movie genres at the time that everyone would have recognized, like Jungle Cruise being closely related to exotic colonialism films like the African Queen. So, Disneyland has never been pure, it has always been a circle jerk of selling.
You also have to consider where the themed industry has gone and the expectations on the customer. If Harry Potter is the new standard, the whole idea is that you step INTO the films. You get to experience the places and stories you've seen in the films. This is expected. That's one reason I'm impressed with the Star Wars offerings. It's a new planet (I'm sure it will be in the films at some point) and its unfamiliar. They could have just built Tatooine and called it a day.

The use of films as a basis in early Disneyland is nowhere near the same as it is today and your case requires significant stretching.

 

[Mike S]

I've said it on several things before but character infusion is the laziest form of Imagineering typically because it's mandated from above. But at this point, I haven't seen Imagineers prove they can handle such mandates from above so they need to get at least some of the blame. Universal has a better track record of re-using existing infrastructure.

In the case of Furious and Fallon the exteriors are pretty much all that's left. These aren't your standard redos.

 

[OliveMcFly]

Just got off the phone with someone from George's office. Was a very pleasant guy, thanked me for my passion for the area and attraction and of course told me that there were no plans for either Disneyland or Disney World. He agreed with me when I said Guardians deserved its own ride and his exact words were: "its a time and a place thing, Guardians deserves a ride, but not on Tower of Terror." He was great, actually! I was very impressed with his candor. He did ask about what I had heard about the rumor since I had sent my email, presumably to see if there outreach has been working. Supposedly they've received a ton of calls and emails about this.

So take it for what its worth, but I tried to do my part!

This has calmed me a bit. I can't see them taking away TOT for this. There's plenty of room on WDW property for other things.

 

[CrescentLake]

This has calmed me a bit. I can't see them taking away TOT for this. There's plenty of room on WDW property for other things.

Me too, but I am still worried until the insiders here tell us that the project has been killed.

 

[OliveMcFly]

Me too, but I am still worried until the insiders here tell us that the project has been killed.

You're right. To me it's iconic and I find it hard to even entertain the idea of a new theme.

 

[MUTZIE77]

There is plenty of room, but building new attractions costs much more than retheming existing attractions. Just when it seemed that the purse strings were loosened for the DHS redo, the tighten them back up.

 

[dstrawn9889]

There is plenty of room, but building new attractions costs much more than retheming existing attractions. Just when it seemed that the purse strings were loosened for the DHS redo, the tighten them back up.

the real savings, mostly, is time. time that you do not have to spend putting a roof up, time not spent prepping the site and demo. it would be less about the amount of money

 

[michmousefan]

Ehhh. Wait for the "vs" DVD and grab the Rifftrax when it's out. (Sorry... That's what came to mind when I read your post.)

No need to be sorry; doesn't seem like a very good idea anyway.

 

[zooey]

The use of films as a basis in early Disneyland is nowhere near the same as it is today and your case requires significant stretching.

I'm not saying Walt and WED weren't passionate about what they were doing. I think WDI is too. But there has always been that other side of business and key players who make sure it works as a business. What I'm saying is the synergy Walt established was not by accident it was so far ahead of its time that it set the course, he wrote the book. TWDC is still using the same book but in a much bigger media landscape.

That being said, Marvel or any other IP can be used rightly or wrongly. In this case with ToT it's very wrong. But I can't object to new offerings being IP based if done well.

 

[WDW1974]

Some of the people that are being named here as Disney reps do NOT exist as actual human beings. That would include Mr. Donaldson. It has even been suggested to me that some of these folks may not even be based anywhere near Orlando or Anaheim.

Disney is a good, caring, ethical company that feels it needs to make names up for employees to deal with customers.
Take it for what it is worth.

For people sending me notes, though, I can't do this for you. This isn't a job and I am not being compensated. Not as much as a cupcake ...