George Lucas on a Bench
Well-Known Member
Why can't they refurb Mansion when it's HMH? Ugh!
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Miceage Update 12/1/2015
- Thread starter Genie of the Lamp
- Start date
GiveMeTheMusic
Well-Known Member
For Marvel, I wouldn't expect more than one knockout E-ticket and maybe one smaller ride, plus minor meets/shops/food.
GiveMeTheMusic
Well-Known Member
According to Disneyland.com (which isn't always accurate), HM reopens on January 22.
Stevek
Well-Known Member
And yet it's pretty much packed everytime we visit. Not saying it's great thematically but it still draws heavy crowds.
Stevek
Well-Known Member
I agree with some of this...I'm guessing you and I are close in age. We went through a phase where everyone we hired had to have an MBA...know what, they all wanted to be a VP in a year...know what, none of them survived and I'm still here 23 years later. I work with a few big consumer (food) manufacturers that still will pretty much only hire with a MBA. But, I have met a few under 50 that are just as down to earth as the next guy/gal, no attitude, no issues, just want to do what's best for the org. Unfortunately, they all get saddled with the same stereotype...especially those USC grads (which all kinda deserve itWhere did you get your MBA?
I'm old. And I was in the business world for decades. Around the late 1990's the MBA community changed noticeably, and I have not met a single MBA under 50 who wasn't at least semi-pompous. And many of them are hysterically pompous and can only communicate in corporate psychobabble and trendy jargon. None were fun to be around, and very few added anything to the conversation or helped with the task at hand.
The negative MBA stereotype exists for a reason.
)
Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
That's fine. I personally don't like DtD.
dweezil78
Well-Known Member
The Grove is themed.
According to Wikipedia -- "Caruso Affiliated claims to have modeled its architectural designs on indigenous Los Angeles buildings, influenced by classic historic districts, with shopping alleys, broad plazas, and intimate courtyards. The design features a series of Art Deco-style false fronts, with boxy interiors similar to those found in other contemporary stores."
If I were to post the same thing and replace "Caruso Affiliated" with Walt Disney Imagineering while telling you that was the description for Buena Vista Street, it would sound pretty accurate.
Edit: Since I know I will get called out for it -- no I'm not implying it's a theme park or themed entertainment. But it's certainly themed to harken back to an earlier time in LA's history. To say something is themed is nothing more than saying it has been designed to evoke a certain setting/time/etc.
Last edited:
George Lucas on a Bench
Well-Known Member
Never been to The Grove, but after looking at images of it, I honestly feel like Disney ripped it off with Buena Vista Street.
dweezil78
Well-Known Member
Kinda/sorta, but without Disneyland and Main St., the Grove would never exist in the first place. Most people who have visited will tell you that it feels like a very Disney-ish place -- and that was long before Buena Vista street came along.
Also, if you've never been and live in SoCal, you should definitely pay it a visit. The Farmer's Market alone makes it worth a visit IMO. (You'll feel like you're on Sunset Blvd. at Hollywood Studios!
)
Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
If this "theme" was consistent, sure, I'd agree, but it's not. The theater looks like one of the movie palaces on Broadway, the area where the alley is looks like somewhere in Europe, as well as the building that used to house Abercrombie and Fitch and the fountain, and a lot of the facades on the shops are contemporary in design. It's a hodgepodge.
The whole point of me bringing up The Grove was to speak on its classy look. Whether it's themed or not, the buildings look nice. DtD could use that. That was my main and only point from the beginning.
Last edited:
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Themed means all aspects of the experience reiterate that story concept and the view of the experience is unaware of its fictional existence. The Grove never takes the position that it is anywhere else or in any other time. The paragraph about The Grove is simply describing its pre-Modern precedent; it is revival architecture. Nobody calls Paris a themed city even though its design language often evokes Greco-Roman forms and imagery.
George Lucas on a Bench
Well-Known Member
"Where's Five and Dime??"
D
Deleted member 107043
"Nobody calls Paris a themed city even though its design language often evokes Greco-Roman forms and imagery."
That's because the buildings and facades in Paris, for the most part, are real and authentic, not set dressings like what's on display at The Grove and Disney resorts.
That's because the buildings and facades in Paris, for the most part, are real and authentic, not set dressings like what's on display at The Grove and Disney resorts.
britain
Well-Known Member
But you said it yourself, they have facades. The majority of the Greco Roman facades in Paris have nothing to do with the actual structure of the buildings. They are in every way set dressings.
Iif they had the phrase "themed" back then, they definitely would have said "we proudly have Greco Roman themed buildings here in Paris!"
...in French of course.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
They're not themed because they do not take the position that you are in Ancient Greece or Rome. That is what makes theming, not the inspiration but the goals. The experience of The Grove or Paris is being at The Grove or Paris, not some external place. Main Street, USA is about being in another place during another time; neither happens at The Grove or Paris.
D
Deleted member 107043
There's a lot more to it than that I'm afraid. I would love to know where you're pulling all of your design definitions from.
The Grove is a shopping mall where a developer is leveraging entertainment architecture to competitively attract customers. This, aside from the fake period storefronts, is perhaps one of the more obvious reasons why making comparisons of The Grove to Disney's thoroughfares is appropriate. On another note, I'm not the first person to draw parallels between Main Street and a shopping center.
Paris, on the other hand, is a living breathing European capital where the typical commercial, government or residential building wasn't designed with the specific purpose to amuse, convey a story, or attract tourists to spend money.
choco choco
Well-Known Member
My guess is that the Storm Trooper chase attraction is screen based as well, where the trackless vehicle moves from screen to screen, a la Ratatouille. Like that ride, there will be plenty of effects and physical sets in between screens, but the bulk of the shooting happens while you are parked in front of each.
The Millenium Falcon ride is intriguing, because I'm not sure what they are going for. An early iteration of Star Wars land intended for there to be a full scale replica of the Falcon and have it be a walk-through attraction. I loved that idea. But making it into a ride seems tricky. A large scale Star Tours-like cabin doesn't fit the theming of the Falcon, where no such room exists. I'm wondering if they are going with the Mission:Space setup, where the ride vehicle is a bunch of 3-4 person pods made to look like the Falcon's cockpit. Each pod is then its own simulator, although how they are going to load and unload multiple pods in a way that makes it feel like each person is going into the Falcon's ONE cockpit seems hard. Also, what is the point of this ride? If it really is just a simulator under new digs, it's not going to feel like anything more than a souped up Star Tours, which might be disappointing. Especially if they intend to keep Star Tours running.
George Lucas on a Bench
Well-Known Member
I'd like to be pleasantly surprised, but I don't see the actual rides turning out well. Of course, everyone will say that all I do is complain and that I'm a loon, but whatever.
I've noticed from reading the internet that when it comes to discussion of the actual rides, most people seem resigned to the fact that they will most likely be heavily screen-based. That's what I expect. I've even seen people making excuses for this and saying that the Star Wars universe is too broad to restrict to three-dimensional environments and screens are basically the only option. That being said, that's NOT what Star Wars needs! Universal made that mistake with Harry Potter where they created an immersive uber-themed land and the attractions were basically dumb thrill rides with screens. That's become the norm for Universal, but I digress.
The Harry Potter ride system is impressive from a technological standpoint (I guess, in that it can certainly, uh, fling you around quite efficiently?), but that ride left me cold and fairly disappointed after exploring the land and queue line. You're basically just being jostled around and flung in front of screens (Well, and an admittedly cool dragon that's kind of ruined by the fact that it shoots smoke at you. This is so utterly asinine because they attempt to immerse you in this world and ultimately a fire-breathing dragon has a ******* fog machine in its throat). This is where I feel Disney actually did one better because RSR is almost completely three-dimensional. It feels like you're actually exploring an environment and not looking at screens. And you are.
That's the sort of thing that Star Wars needs to be and RSR is the only thing that gives me hope for at least one of the rides. But then I think about it, and both rides will surely have to be screen-based. I want to be wrong.
From what little information we have, we do know for certain that one of the E tickets will allow you to take control of the Millennium Falcon. That's what they've said. This scares the crap out of me because it will most likely turn out awful. Remember Mission SPACE where there are 4 separate joy sticks (!) that apparently control the ship? Well, they obviously don't do anything, but Disney expected you to buy the ridiculous notion that there could be 4 separate manual steering columns controlling the ship at the same time. Not to mention the buttons that don't do anything and you don't have to press. Groups of people taking control of the Falcon? This is sounding ludicrous.
I've noticed from reading the internet that when it comes to discussion of the actual rides, most people seem resigned to the fact that they will most likely be heavily screen-based. That's what I expect. I've even seen people making excuses for this and saying that the Star Wars universe is too broad to restrict to three-dimensional environments and screens are basically the only option. That being said, that's NOT what Star Wars needs! Universal made that mistake with Harry Potter where they created an immersive uber-themed land and the attractions were basically dumb thrill rides with screens. That's become the norm for Universal, but I digress.
The Harry Potter ride system is impressive from a technological standpoint (I guess, in that it can certainly, uh, fling you around quite efficiently?), but that ride left me cold and fairly disappointed after exploring the land and queue line. You're basically just being jostled around and flung in front of screens (Well, and an admittedly cool dragon that's kind of ruined by the fact that it shoots smoke at you. This is so utterly asinine because they attempt to immerse you in this world and ultimately a fire-breathing dragon has a ******* fog machine in its throat). This is where I feel Disney actually did one better because RSR is almost completely three-dimensional. It feels like you're actually exploring an environment and not looking at screens. And you are.
That's the sort of thing that Star Wars needs to be and RSR is the only thing that gives me hope for at least one of the rides. But then I think about it, and both rides will surely have to be screen-based. I want to be wrong.
From what little information we have, we do know for certain that one of the E tickets will allow you to take control of the Millennium Falcon. That's what they've said. This scares the crap out of me because it will most likely turn out awful. Remember Mission SPACE where there are 4 separate joy sticks (!) that apparently control the ship? Well, they obviously don't do anything, but Disney expected you to buy the ridiculous notion that there could be 4 separate manual steering columns controlling the ship at the same time. Not to mention the buttons that don't do anything and you don't have to press. Groups of people taking control of the Falcon? This is sounding ludicrous.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
The origins of Main Street, USA being reduced in commentary to just a shopping center are negative, often Marxist-oriented critiques that, unable to attack the resonance of its pre-Modern design and storytelling experience, had to reduce the Disneyland experience, by removing its storytelling component, to something already established and reviled, the shopping center. The shopping center is reviled because it contains commerce and pleasant (entertaining) design, components that from a Marxist construct only exist to reinforce the established superstructure in an attempt to hold off the inevitable class struggle, a new look for the old "bread and circuses." Some of the first places to receive such critiques were the boulevards of Paris because they were designed to be pleasant (entertaining) spaces where commerce could easily take place, but yes the city does not tell a story. Similarly The Grove does not tell a story but Main Street, USA does tell a story which is what makes it themed. All three use referential, pre-Modern design. The Grove gets tossed in with Disneyland because Postmodernism eventually reduced pre-Modern design elements to a sort of popular entertainment and did so by often actively invoking the design language of Disneyland while still ignoring its storytelling component. The Gove is only considered fake and different because it came after Modernism when such design was uniformly deemed fake.
Last edited:
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Using screens to move across vast distances isn't an excuse. There is no building a ride that actually does drop hundreds of feet and crosses thousands of feet, or in the case of Star Wars traverse across light-years. Radiator Springs Racers is physical because it is set at a scale now understood by most visitors, the car. The whole reason the Star Wars land is a new place is because most of the places shown in the films are rather empty, they aren't places that can really be explored. The planets and moons of Star Wars are often rather inhospitable.
Now the Stormtrooper attack ride is one that makes sense for physical props as that premise can be set some place that is human scaled, but it makes no sense for the Millennium Falcon unless you only want a Storybook Land experience.