News Monster Inc Land Coming to Disney's Hollywood Studios

[mattpeto]

Muppets is getting evicted because Disney doesn’t want to pay to run it (and because every ride needs a land, but mostly the money thing).

Monsters Inc does have one musical number. One. Perhaps they’ll pay to write all new songs for a puppet intensive show, but I’m skeptical - especially since they just chopped up Nemo.

I also don’t think they’ll do a major show based on an intentionally terrible musical that appeared as a credits gag.

.

So they are getting rid of Muppets to save money now?

What else can you come up?

 

[Casper Gutman]

.

So they are getting rid of Muppets to save money now?

What else can you come up?

You understand that attractions cost money to staff and maintain, right?

Did you start following Disney last week?

Tell me about phase 2s. Tell me about the Epcot expansion and the pandemic. Tell me about the MGM overhaul.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Second best alternative to simply leaving MV3D alone, is the 1:1 re-location to Sunset Showcase w the new RNRC, and Monsters/Stitch are both gutted and replaced with some sort of darkride (Wall-E or smth along those lines could work well)

Sunset Showcase is too small for a 1:1 relocation.

We’re technically still gaining an attraction if I’m mapping this out correctly. RnRC stays but with a retheme. MuppetVision theater stays with a different show. Add in the Villains show and that means the attraction count at HS is the same as it is now. But then we have the door coaster being added which gives the park a +1.

For the same money they could be up at least +2. They’ve sunk billions into the park with no meaningful net gain and a ceiling to visitation.

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

For Pete’s sake, Disney doesn’t NEED to get anything right!

Tiana should have FINALLY put this nonsense to bed… if the previous two decades hadn’t.

No one will punish Disney. No one will hurt their bottom line. Fans will keep making excuses.

I just wish fans had ANY sort of accumulated memory. We go through the same thing over and over and over. Everyone’s always shocked! And forgets a month later.

I don’t think anyone forgets, I just think most people don’t take these things that personally and approach any replacement attraction as a new thing to be taken on it’s own.

While I understand that these parks have a lot of personal memories attached, there is a pocket of the fandom who seem to hold a grudge and get mad when others don’t. A lot of us have figured out that we can and will be sad about some things but that we ultimately have to move on because it’s out of our control.

We are not the villain here because we don’t want to hold a grudge against a theme park for taking an attraction out. In most cases, we feel just as sad as anyone else, but we choose not to hold onto that forever and ever and let it become some snowballing thing that turns us negative against anything and everything to do with the parks.

Things change, they come and they go, and part of being interested in an industry like this is learning to make peace with it. Some of us have made that peace, and some haven’t, but it’s not fair for those who haven’t to lay their frustrations at the feet of those of us who have. It isn’t our job to punish Disney and it isn’t our fault they make the decisions they do. Nothing we do is going to change how Disney operates.

 

[GoofGoof]

Why do we believe a stage show is coming? When was the last time Disney opened a major show designed for a dedicated theater? Have they done one since Nemo, which they recently chopped up because they don’t want guests in theaters?

Monsters isn’t a musical. It’s also an IP without adult human characters. Instead, the cast is full of creatures with inhuman body dimensions. Unless you’re just going to use the existing Mike and Sully outfits, which would be awful, you’re probably going to be relying on screens. That would mean something like Muppets, a type of attraction Disney clearly sees as dead and undesirable, or something like MILF, which doesn’t fit in that theater space at all.

Disney stuck that line in the release because, outside of the coaster, this is a fairly cheap overlay and they don’t want to remove or significantly alter the theater structure but having an empty venue of that size (especially after killing Muppets) looks bad.

What are they replacing the Tough to Be a Bug movie with at AK? It was announced to be a Zootopia 3D show. Is that also not going to open? Another fake announcement? I guess we will find out next year

 

[EagleScout610]

My only hope is that for the final showing of MuppetVision they bring Frank Oz out to perform the true, three hour, glorious version of A Salute to all Nations, but Mostly America and then actually destroy the theater afterwards

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

Sunset Showcase is too small for a 1:1 relocation.


For the same money they could be up at least +2. They’ve sunk billions into the park with no meaningful net gain and a ceiling to visitation.

The park just finished a massive period of development less than 5 years ago. It isn’t like this is the first addition HS has seen in ages. I’m not saying this is the perfect utilization of the funding but this is simultaneous 3 park development and this park has been completely transformed very recently. I would 100% be on board with you if this was all happening in isolation but it isn’t. This isn’t a HS only developmental period. It’s also known to those with the access that a whole other area is on the verge of redevelopment (AC).

 

[lazyboy97o]

The park just finished a massive period of development less than 5 years ago. It isn’t like this is the first addition HS has seen in ages. I’m not saying this is the perfect utilization of the funding but this is simultaneous 3 park development and this park has been completely transformed very recently.

Yes, they transformed the park and the result was a park that is still severely lacking in capacity. They are now spending even more money for more of the same. That they’re again choosing to keep the park limited has nothing to do with projects elsewhere.

 

[Casper Gutman]

I don’t think anyone forgets, I just think most people don’t take these things that personally and approach any replacement attraction as a new thing to be taken on it’s own.

While I understand that these parks have a lot of personal memories attached, there is a pocket of the fandom who seem to hold a grudge and get mad when others don’t. A lot of us have figured out that we can and will be sad about some things but that we ultimately have to move on because it’s out of our control.

We are not the villain here because we don’t want to hold a grudge against a theme park for taking an attraction out. In most cases, we feel just as sad as anyone else, but we choose not to hold onto that forever and ever and let it become some snowballing thing that turns us negative against anything and everything to do with the parks.

Things change, they come and they go, and part of being interested in an industry like this is learning to make peace with it. Some of us have made that peace, and some haven’t, but it’s not fair for those who haven’t to lay their frustrations at the feet of those of us who have. It isn’t our job to punish Disney and it isn’t our fault they make the decisions they do. Nothing we do is going to change how Disney operates.

Stoicism in the face of a company that keeps making choices that make you sad isn't a virtue. This isn't a religion.

Disney's decisions - including the decision that every new attraction has to replace an old one - aren't inevitable. This isn't erosion or the tides. Its a bunch of not particularly bright guys in a room making a decision. They can be persuaded by consumer activity - they're investing now because they're afraid of how EU will change guest behavior.

Not comparing an attraction to what it replaced makes no sense and isn't how folks behave in almost any other branch of life. I believe the consensus here is that most of Disney's replacements have been downgrades. Even the one I champion, MMRR, is controversial. And remember, DISNEY DOESN'T HAVE TO REPLACE ATTRACTIONS TO BUILD NEW ONES. Disneyland, which genuinely DOES have problems with a lack of room for expansion, only lost a BBQ restaurant and half of the Rivers of America to gain SWL and their MMRR was a new build.

Again, if you feel a resort that has been exponentially raising prices (this isn't in dispute) has also been degrading the product, the theory of capitalism says you will register your discontent with your wallet. That's the way the "invisible hand" works, the way companies are supposed to be forced to be responsive.

 

[Grantwil93]

Sunset Showcase is too small for a 1:1 relocation.


For the same money they could be up at least +2. They’ve sunk billions into the park with no meaningful net gain and a ceiling to visitation.

It might be too smal for a 1:1, but I actually could see it as a modified version in there. Heck, I could even see them show it at imagination in epcot. Or even in the mickey shorts theater. Some kind of updated version with a new finale, maybe updated 3d effects. I would not be shocked to see it find a home somewhere with some amount of changes.

I doubt it, but it's not totally impossible. But do we want it back if it's a kneecapped experience?

 

[JackCH]

I think this is a net positive for the park for the majority of people. I know a lot are sad about MV3D, but I think this is still overall going to make the park better, even though of course I think there might have been better options.

But honestly my final verdict depends on what comes next. Assuming they still do something decent with AC, then I'm okay with this because honestly it was inevitable MV went away at some point and this was at least an interesting small expansion.

 

[Casper Gutman]

To everyone shocked, SHOCKED by the suggestion that some announced additions may not get built, what is it this board always says about Phase 2s? That they always happen?

Disney is getting a new management team in 2026. What happened to projects under construction the last time the company got a new CEO? How does Wall Street feel about theme parks and the massive capital expenditures they require? Is a new CEO in the modern age likely to try and make a strong impression by increasing, ignoring, or slashing such expenditures?

What effect will changes in the national economy have on new construction? What effect has economic instability had on past Disney World projects? Are high tariffs and massive labor shortages likely to raise, lower, or not effect construction costs? How is a new management team likely to respond to an uncertain economy?

 

[Casper Gutman]

I think this is a net positive for the park for the majority of people. I know a lot are sad about MV3D, but I think this is still overall going to make the park better, even though of course I think there might have been better options.

But honestly my final verdict depends on what comes next. Assuming they still do something decent with AC, then I'm okay with this because honestly it was inevitable MV went away at some point and this was at least an interesting small expansion.

NOTHING AT A THEME PARK IS INEVITABLE.

They won't touch AC for a decade or so.

How does getting rid of a high capacity family attraction in a park that lacks family attractions improve it? How does adding yet ANOTHER coaster-in-a-box improve the resort?

 

[Grantwil93]

I think this is a net positive for the park for the majority of people. I know a lot are sad about MV3D, but I think this is still overall going to make the park better, even though of course I think there might have been better options.

But honestly my final verdict depends on what comes next. Assuming they still do something decent with AC, then I'm okay with this because honestly it was inevitable MV went away at some point and this was at least an interesting small expansion.

AC is a plot i think they have bigger ambitions for than Monsters. I truly think they believe they have a chance at Marvel within 10 years. And it really can't go anywhere else. I think that area will sit until they give up on that.

I totally get why they chose the Muppet area for this. All the infrastructure is already in place. They only new build is the coaster itself. The rest is just rethemeing existing locations. Including a table service and quick service location. Which the Courtyard doesn't have either of.

 

[Grantwil93]

NOTHING AT A THEME PARK IS INEVITABLE.

They won't touch AC for a decade or so.

How does getting rid of a high capacity family attraction in a park that lacks family attractions improve it? How does adding yet ANOTHER coaster-in-a-box improve the resort?

But the family attraction is getting rethemed. Not replaced. You aren't losing anything in terms of variety. Quality is another story, but we don't know yet.

 

[larryz]

There is still that rumored Tower of Terror movie with Scarlett Johansson....

I thought they were saving her for the live-action Who Framed Roger Rabbit?...

 

[The Leader of the Club]

How does getting rid of a high capacity family attraction in a park that lacks family attractions improve it? How does adding yet ANOTHER coaster-in-a-box improve the resort?

1. They aren't getting rid of a high capacity family attraction. Simply replacing it with another one.
2. Adding another family coaster to this park takes some weight off of Slinky Dog Dash, which has the longest wait times in the park (and also the most unbearable queue).

You also keep insisting that the MV3D replacement is "phase 2." Its not. If it closes the same time as the rest of the land, it reopens with the rest of the land. You don't close rides for phase 2s until you start on phase 2.

 

[Casper Gutman]

AC is a plot i think they have bigger ambitionsfor than Monsters. I truly think they believe they have a chance at Marvel within 10 years. And it really can't go anywhere else. I think that area will sit until they give up on that.

I totally get why they chose the Muppet area for this. All the infrastructure is already in place. They only new build is the coaster itself. The rest is just rethemeing existing locations. Including a table service and quick service location. Which the Courtyard doesn't have either of.

Disney has no shot whatsoever at Marvel and if any executive thinks it does they should be fired right now. Right before the holidays. In front of their children.

MGM has LOTS of room for expansion. The idea they have to SAVE space is madness.

 

[JackCH]

AC is a plot i think they have bigger ambitionsfor than Monsters. I truly think they believe they have a chance at Marvel within 10 years. And it really can't go anywhere else. I think that area will sit until they give up on that.

I totally get why they chose the Muppet area for this. All the infrastructure is already in place. They only new build is the coaster itself. The rest is just rethemeing existing locations. Including a table service and quick service location. Which the Courtyard doesn't have either of.

Yeah I hope so. I wonder if they could still do a Marvel area that just skirts the rights issue. I did an armchair imagineering thing where I thought they maybe could put Wakanda (which I know has been rumored) covering the area from Indy to Star Tours and expand some into the parking lot? Have it be Wakanda themed with a ride and also work in Ant-Man or something for Star Tours?

 

[The Leader of the Club]

It might be too smal for a 1:1, but I actually could see it as a modified version in there. Heck, I could even see them show it at imagination in epcot. Or even in the mickey shorts theater. Some kind of updated version with a new finale, maybe updated 3d effects. I would not be shocked to see it find a home somewhere with some amount of changes.

I doubt it, but it's not totally impossible. But do we want it back if it's a kneecapped experience?

It'll suck not having all of the gags in the queue, but I'll take kneecapped as long as Statler & Waldorf stay.