MGM Studio's

[JLW11Hi]

Chad, I agree with your Muppet ride ideas! I thought about it for a bit and remembered all those Muppet movie parody T Shirts I have seen at MGM, and the Muppets would work great in a sort of "movie spoof" ride, where the Muppets would take the place of the stars.

I can't say I would like to see GMR converted into all Disney movies. At least for this one ride, I would like it to be a tribute to the movie industry as a whole. Disney already kinda does this with the movie collage at the end of the ride, using a ton of non-Disney and MGM movies.

If they were to update it, I would like the flow of the ride to be more consistent throuought the ride. The ride starts out rapidly going by 3 whole musicals, making the ride seem as if it will be pretty fast paced. But then as we move on, the scenes become larger, spending more time in each individual scene. The other flow problem I think the current ride has is that it starts out going through each movie genre (musicals, gangsters, westerns), but then just starts going into specific movies. This isnt a real problem, but it is something they coudl fix when they update the ride.

 

[FigmentDream]

Originally posted by Chad


Err..FigmentDream, it seems like the real argument comes down to whether or not to keep MGM, I see no real problem with it, though I'd still like to see GMR converted to all disney attractions, with Wizard of Oz (which DOES deserve its own dark ride! Think of how fun it would be! SPinning in the twister!) and 007 being the only rides representing MGM, and it would allow us to keep the theater..which I love..

1 MGM has nothing to do with the Chineese Theater that is a sperate matter

Here's my deal:

MGM is even at Disney because Disney was too insacure about it's own studio subject matter. To me MGM is a slap in the face of everything Walt and those after him did to build the subject matter that was avilible for them to use; atleast in the way they used it. Granted the park is there to celebrate Hollywood and the Studio Process, but at it's core this is a DIsney park and the centerpeice attraction had very little if no DIsney films in it. THink about it prior to the SUnset blvd. era of the Studios park, what woudl people remember from Disney-MGM studios, it was GMR, which was a salute to MGM, not Hollywood, and for the most part not Disney. If it would be changed to the GDMR then it would atleast glorify the work of the company that owns the park. Then if trhough out the rest of the park there are other attractions from other places that can be incorperated in to Disney or atleast celbrebrate a largrer view of Hollywood that is fine. I don't like names of lands that feature, Lucas or Henson for the aforemenstioned reasons, they do not further celebrate Disney or Hollywood in general, rather I woudl prefer to blur that line and make them part of a Disney Studio Lot.

 

[Chad]

Well, hey, I like the GDMR idea, you don't need to convince me there..But like you said, it's a celebration of ALL movies, not just Disney.. Some things to think about..

Disney does make some GREAT movies.. (Mainly under the Miramax label)
Too make a MOVIE RIDE three elements must be met:
1. The Movie has to have some 'ride applicable' scene or scenario..For example, a love story wouldn't make a good ride..
2. The Material must be APPROPRIATE..I could never see them making a ride for a WAR movie, due to all the casualties and such.
3. It must be MEMORABLE, a movie that has etched its way into every-day common knowledge

But the Majority of Disney Films are not ride convertable..

Recent Disney Fantasy movies DO NOT make a large enough impression on the public to be remembered..(I.E., Reign of Fire..)

Many of the good MIRAMAX films are either to Indy to be noticed by the mainstream, or, when they are, are too..Racy? (Pulp Fiction, for Example..)

By cutting out other companies (Henson, Lucasfilm, Mgm) You are very much so decreasing the amount of attraction possibilities available to you. Lets take a look.

Disney Stuff:
-ABC Area
2 Attractions
Great Disney Movie Rde
The Little Mermaid
Beauty and the Beast
Armagedon
Magic of Disney Animation
Rock and Roller Coaster (I believe Aerosmith is on the disney label...)
Back Stage tour
One Man's Dream
Mickey's Dark ride (doesn't have a name yet)
Total: 11

Non-Disney Stuff (Other Studios')
Star Tours
Indiana Jones
James Bond
Tower of Terror
MuppetVision
Muppet Water Ride
total: 6

Non-Disney Stuff (Miscellanious)
Action Stunt Show
SuperStar Limo
You Ought to be in pictures
total: 3

Not listed: Elvis attraction? Rock n' roll hall of fame

The Majority of attractions WOULD be disney, including the centerpiece, and alot of the TRUE behind the scenes studio stuff would indeed be Disney, but then most of the e-tickets would be Non-disney, because, those movies make better rides then say, Signs would.

This is my philosophy..The average guest isn't going to notice what company owns what...And as long as we do a QUALITY job, and pay attention to detaila nd make amazing attractions, the disney enthusiast isn't gonna care who own the name's either/ The Magic is blind to copyrights.

 

[FigmentDream]

Originally posted by Chad

By cutting out other companies (Henson, Lucasfilm, Mgm) You are very much so decreasing the amount of attraction possibilities available to you.

This is my philosophy..The average guest isn't going to notice what company owns what...And as long as we do a QUALITY job, and pay attention to detaila nd make amazing attractions, the disney enthusiast isn't gonna care who own the name's either/ The Magic is blind to copyrights.

As I said I do not have a problem with other studios represented, I just wanted Disney to be the main focal point and the other studios either blured into Disney(ie basically what you said about Magic is blind to copyrights) or a celebration of Hollywood ingeneral. I would have no-problem with the attractions you have laid out in a "Disney Studios" park. I think we miss-conected on the idea of the involvment of outside studios. I think the only difference is I would not premote the out-side studios with "area" names.

But other than that we are thinking very much alike, and you know what they say about those kinds of minds

PS Do you ever read the SOJI board anymore, nudge, nudge, hint, hint, wink, wink

BTW

I do not nesicairly agree with "rule" # 3 I see where you are comming from, but remember in general the greast DIsney attractions were based off of story lines they made up, so whether or not guests remember the Movie Plot, if the ride incorperates the plot, memerable or not, with a great ride expereince, the ride will be a smash.

 

[Chad]

Hmm, i think I forgot to put a statement in there...
I think it's /rude/ to simply 'blur' the production names away from the respective lands..Ecspecially in Jim Henson's Case..
Both of these companies are basically (Creatively) run by ONE person, and to not put their names on their work..is..is..Wrong! Sort of the same way musuems put the ARTISTS name on the painting, even though they OWN it..It's just the right thing to do...

Rule #3..I can see how what you're saying applies to a 'fantasy' park, but a movie park...It needs to be a semi-famous movie ATLEAST, people need to know about it..

 

[FigmentDream]

I guess I was not very clear, I am talking on multi-demsional levels here. On a thematic level "bluring" is needed, on an actuall "nominal ownership" level none would be fine. For instance have Jim Henson's Muppet Vision 4-D and Jim Henson's Muppet Movie Ride(sorry forgot the name) in the land "Studio Lot". Personally, I find you would have a problem going to the opposite extreme and thematically clashing by having Henson Production Lot at Disney Studios. To me it would be like having Lucas Plaza in Disneyland being the area where StarTours and Indiana Jones and the Temple of THe FOrbidden Eye would be contained. Rather of course in reality for thematic sake they are respectivley in Tommorowland and Adnventureland but in the true titles of the attraction Lucas is mentioned.

Going with what you have said in regards to "Rule #3" how would you expalin the popularity of ToT and RcnRC in the park? Plus popularity fades, but yet generations that were never exposed to Indy and other moves still throughly enjoy the attractions. I still contend that any attraction at any park can be made popular as long as the story is presented in a high qaulity and emmersive manner with a emmesive and thrilling* ride expereince.


*=Thrill, the mind, imagination, senses, body, or ect.

 

[Chad]

Hmm..You keep using references to Disneyland/Magic Kingdom, which is a completely different type of park fundamentally..I'm gonna go back to my original Metaphor...
Magic Kingdom=Your Home
MGM Studios=A Musuem

In Your home, it's your own collection, you may choose not to put the artists names on their respective artwork, because it's not one persons art, it's a collection of a bunch of different peoples, and it's there for 'decrative' purposes. Same way magic kingdom is pure entertainment, with the element of Fantasy.

A museum, on the other hand, is a tribute to that person's artistic achievments, so you put their names on it, you put how they made it, where they made it, etc...Because it's a display of their TALENT. Thats what MGM is, a museum of movies, it's not just pure entertainment, it's got a more specific purpose.

Rule #3...How do i account for the popularity of Tower of Terror, Indy, and Rock n' Roller Coaster? Simple..Aerosmith is STILL making music, everyone has atleast heard of them..Their last CD, Just Push Play' was released last year (if not the year before)..DO you think it would have been as high quality attraction if they would have put, say, Oxygen Supply in there? a little known band that completely faded from history...? WHile the ride would have be fun..noone would be able to sing along, or recognize the band.

Twilight Zone...You can't tell me that if you went into a crowded room and starting humming the 'Doo-doo doo doo..' thing from the twilight zone theme song, noone would recognize it, can you? Not to mention the fact that the UPN is starting up the twilight zone, (tonight, in fact, the premiere episode is at 9pm)

Indy-The least known of the examples you listed, and yet, still widly popular..Cameos featured on Doug (the Cartoon) and Rugrats, it's exposed a new generation to it, I was too young to see the movies in theaters, yet I still know of them..There's also a 4th installment rumored, and it sounds like it's a go..


Ok, so lets see.
Yes- I still read the SOJI boards, what kind of moderator do you think I am! I got the message about the Labs, and found them on the appropriate post, thanks I've just stopped on the boards until the reboot, thats all.

Yes- Great minds think alike..and for all y'all out there, me and FigmentDream do this all the time..don't worry..

I started to picture what you were talking about...converting the entire area from newyork to hollywood into big 'studio' buildings, and I think that would be prettty darn cool. Ecspecially if everything looked nice and normal...until you walked into the building, where theming could be exploded...

 

[JLW11Hi]

I will have to agree with Chad on how the Studios are more of a tribute to others than just Disney's doings.

I am afraid I cant say Disney has made to many rememorable live action movies. The best one IMO was mary Poppins, which I believe deserves a ride, only I was thinking in Fantasyland.

Now the Great Movie Ride has NOT been a tribute to only Disney and MGM. The Public Enemy and Casablanca for instance, are Warner Bros. titles. I think Footlight Parade is, too. And lets not forget the movie collage at the end of the ride, which touches on most of the best movies ever made, regardless of who made them.

On another note, deciding what movies are worthy enough for their own ride is VERY hard, because everyone has many different opinions on movies. Therefore, I would think it best for Disney to try to vary the types of movies they "celebrate". For me, I happen to love just about everything Disney has put in their attractions at the Studios. But since I am a big fan of the movie industry, I have a wide variety of movies I enjoy. The classics like The Public Enemy, Casablanca, Wizard of Oz, and Singin in the Rain are all favs of mine, but for many people, their opinions would be different. So a mix of just about any kind of movie would be good for the place. I just dont want to see the Studios turn allt heir shows over to more recent movies, just because they are more popular with people. if they are good, timeless movies, they should be recognized. But if they make a ride out of, say, Hannabal, (which they would never do, but just as an example) that would go a bit to far. Not saying that Hannibal wasn't a good movie, just that there are many more famous movies that have that timeless quality to them that if people havent heard of them, then Disney can make it their job to inform the guests about them. This is what I mean by having the Studios be a tribute to the industry in general. I just dont think it woudl be as fun if it were all Disney.

Remember, Hollywood was around long before Walt came into the picture. heck, even he wanted to get into the acting business. I dont think it would be a slap in the face to him or the company.

Heres an idea: How about a place dedicated to the silent era of Hollywood? Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton movies could have their own attraction. Ride? Show? I think we can come up with something! I always thought it would be cool if there was an area done up completely in shades of black, white, and gray, to make it feel like you are actually in a black and white movie. The buildings, streets, props would be in shades of gray, CM clothing would be, too. Mabey they could make fake trees/plants so they could be painted grey, too? It woudl be funny if the CMs wouldnt talk, just make gestures, but that could be hard when dealing with the public. mabey CMs who are introducing a show or something could be silent, and have their words projected behind them on a screen. Any thoughts?

 

[FigmentDream]

Glad we can atleast see eye to on the Studio Builings, well that is one thing, lol :lol:



Okay Chad you win on Rule #3

I should really think out counter-examples more throughly before I post them.............


Still though I hold fast to the whole nomencalture issue and I think we may have to agree to disagree about that one, the problem I have with your Musuem metaphor is that it does not have to have a binding theme. Here is the way I am looking at things given the musuem metaphor though:

Gallery ~ Land

Work ~ Atrraction

Park ~ Musuem

Exhibit ~ Sub-land

From my stand point one would be more likley to find a Gallery on post-impresionism then you would to find a Gallery on Picasso, which is basically where I am comming from, I don't have a problem with a sub-land devoted to Lucas or Henson, but a individual land seems (to me anyways) like an over extended topic, a land to me needs to be devoted to more than one person, pehapse as part of a comprimise one of the lands could be the Studio Lot, and in this land could be the LucasFilm Lot and Henson Production Lot, that I would find perfectly accetable. Bassically I look at is as a funnel, attractions broaden to Sub-lands, which braoden to lands, which broaden to a park, I have a problem making a thematic jump from Lucas and Henson to al of of Hollywood. Rather it would be much easier to bridge the gap with Studio Production.

Basically it would break down like this:

Hollywood=>Studio Production => (Lucas, Henson, Disney ect.)


Look at the whole park with the areas you suggested this is how I would arange it:

Hollywood ------------Backlot --Animation ----------The Studio Lot
Courtyard

Hollywood Blvd.
Sunset Blvd. New York
Hollywood Hills LucasFilm Lot
(Back Lot) Jim Henson Productions Lot

ABC Television Lot
Music Plaza



Basically 4 lands with varying numbers or no sub-lands, Hollywood would have 3(if I read your post correctly) Back Lot 2, inculding the Back Lot as an acutal self-contained sub-area of the same name or it coudl be called like Back Lot annex or something, or just be left like a City-State where the state is the capital city. Animation Courtyard would have no sub-lands and The Studio Lot would have 4 sub-lands Georaphically connecting Music Plaza would be problematic but not if the Hub is turned into the Studio Skylinshi center peice as I proposed.


I think also the core friction here has come from the fact that when you get down to the boes of it theme park design is an art and art rarley agrees from one artist to the next.

 

[Chad]

I liked your last statement figmentdream, it is an art form. But I actually DO agree with you, for once..
Having a land just called 'StudioLot' And having the lucasfilm and Jim Henson productions lots in it, sounds like the perfect compromise Bravo.

What I didn't quite catch was your land naming..I just saw a collection of words..This is what I got out of that post..

These would be the lands:
1. Hollywood (Which would include sunset blvd, GMR, etc.)
2. ABC Television Studios
3. Studio Lot
-LucasFilm Lot
-Jim Henson Productions
4. New York
5. Backlot
6. Animation Courtyard
7. The Music Land (Still want names for it!)

 

[Chad]

I liked your last statement figmentdream, it is an art form. But I actually DO agree with you, for once..
Having a land just called 'StudioLot' And having the lucasfilm and Jim Henson productions lots in it, sounds like the perfect compromise Bravo.

What I didn't quite catch was your land naming..I just saw a collection of words..This is what I got out of that post..

These would be the lands:
1. Hollywood (Which would include sunset blvd, GMR, etc.)
2. ABC Television Studios
3. Studio Lot
-LucasFilm Lot
-Jim Henson Productions
4. New York
5. Backlot
6. Animation Courtyard
7. The Music Land (Still want names for it!)

BTW..I liked that black-n-white idea...only thing is thta alot of people aren't all that familiar with them..Maybe a resteraunt would be cool...completely black and white or something

 

[Figment1986]

this is way long forma name, but Percussion Plaza.

Her i am a drummer, what elese to name the area with a percussion palace. and high school foot ball stadium. for the whole marching band concept.


(at leasr the high school staduim could go in, percussion Palace could be part of a latter paze for this land.)

 

[Figment1986]

heack, the land could have a wonderful sponcer that makes music, like Yamaha, or just the people who make the wonderful Percussion instuments most schools use, which is not yamaha.

 

[FigmentDream]

Originally posted by Chad

What I didn't quite catch was your land naming..I just saw a collection of words..This is what I got out of that post..

These would be the lands:
1. Hollywood (Which would include sunset blvd, GMR, etc.)
2. ABC Television Studios
3. Studio Lot
-LucasFilm Lot
-Jim Henson Productions
4. New York
5. Backlot
6. Animation Courtyard
7. The Music Land (Still want names for it!)

Ya, the spacing got all messed up after it expanded out of the form onto the post let me re-do that:


Actually re-thinking it I have two senerios:

#1
1.Hollywood
-Hollywood Blvd.
-Sunset Blvd.
-Hollywood Hills
2.The Studio Lot
-LucasFilm Lot
-Jim Henson Productions
3.ABC Television Studios
4. Golden Hollywood Records Recording Studios
5.The Backlot
6.New York Set
7.Animation Courtyard

#2
1.Hollywood
-Hollywood Blvd.
-Sunset Blvd.
-Hollywood Hills
2.The Studio Lot
-LucasFilm Lot
-Jim Henson Productions
-ABC Television Studios
-Golden Hollywood Records Recording Studios
3.The Backlot
-New York Set
-Backlot Annex
4.Animation Courtyard


Golden Hollywood Records would be a fictional Record company which would also be the parent company of G-Force Records. That way RnRC could fit into a more generalized storyline and then you could have other attractions based off of music lossley tied into the theme of it being all part of Golden Hollywood Records Recordin Studios (BTW I checked and as far as I can tell there is no company named Golden Hollywood Records)

 

[Chad]

#1 is great, thats the best way to divide it..I don't like 'New York' being part of the Backlot, and there's no way the 'Music' area could fit into the studio lot, simply cause they're on other sides of the park.

Just a thought-
Do you think it would be a better idea to put Cinamgique (if MGM gets it) Back where 'One Man's Dream' is now, and put OMD in the Odyessy center at Epcot, along with a display on imagineering?
That would keep the ABC area intact, and allow us to put attractions in there.

BTW, I don't really like the Golden hollywood records name, or whatever.. I don't really think that a 'record' name would be good, something more generally would be better..Like..Music Plaza, or Recording Plaza

 

[FigmentDream]

Originally posted by Chad
[BJust a thought-
Do you think it would be a better idea to put Cinamgique (if MGM gets it) Back where 'One Man's Dream' is now, and put OMD in the Odyessy center at Epcot, along with a display on imagineering?
That would keep the ABC area intact, and allow us to put attractions in there.
[/B]

Ya, that is fine, I can't really recall exactly where OMD is at the moment, but I will trust your judgmnet. I think it would be great to move OMD to the old Odessy Complex site, in fact we could put in a whole new mini-pavillion there devoted to Walt,Imagineering, and the views of current and past vissionaries; Sorta like a mini-horizons. EPCOT is supposed to inspire us towards the furture, and what could be more inspiring then seeing the dreams and effects of one of the greatest visionaries of the 20th century. Acutally, why not just call this new complex, the Visionary Complex. It would house the show OMD, Kiosks and Exhibits for Imagineering and a collection of interactive tributes to the greatst visionaries of all time.

Don't really care about the name of the Music Area; it was just a suggestion. Acutally I thought of it in like 2 secs so I did not expect it to stick, I don't see the problem with having "records" in the title considering acutally everything that is a sound is recorded onto a record, be it a vinyl record, a cassete tape a CD or a MP3 they are all differint types of Records, that is why proactically every music company has the word "Records" in their title.

 

[cookiee_munster]

...

Your ideas are really facinating...

I would really like to see an indy type show for the star wars area but consisting of blue screen and green screen on how they do it. Maybe in a smaller type room in a building like a sound stage...

 

[TheOneVader]

Actually, I think it'd be a good idea to replace the Odessy place and have OMD there. And I think it should be that Golden Records place or whatever cuz everything that's copyed onto anything is recorded, hence the name records.

 

[cookiee_munster]

Great Movie Ride Idea

Cus youve all come up with soooo many ideas forgive m if this idea has been said before...
Cus there Isn't that much space to build more scenes for the ride i think the GMR should focus on just MGM classics and not the animated movies like fantacia. One area they should do is a movie poster area... But behind the posters (which are like scrim) are moving scenes of that specific movie... so u see the poster then you see the moving scenes...

 

[JLW11Hi]

They really should expand the music plaza where RnRC is. Im not a big music fan,but I know people (teenagers especially) like that stuff.

I would think many people are familiar with the silent era of movies. IMO, people dont have to be familiar with a lot that Disney bases their rides on to get then to ride it. The rides are a great way to let people experience classic movies that they've never seen before. Look at GMR, for instance. And dont forget ToT, although people recognize the theme, I doubt many actually know what exactly the "Twilight Zone" was.

And Disney doesn't have to model every attraction off of an existing movie. They can make up their own movie, or just base the ride off of a specific genre, such as silent movies.

How about an area devoted to special effects? The Indy show would fit in there. How about an area devoted to susupence/horror?