News Monster Inc Land Coming to Disney's Hollywood Studios

[Casper Gutman]

Keeping the area a dead-end is more proof this is a hasty, relatively cheap overlay with no planning for the parks larger needs.

 

[celluloid]

There is already a Star Wars Land there. There is a ban on most Marvel stuff with GoTG being the obvious exception but already built at EPCOT. Indy is going to DAK. TWDC seems very opposed to building non-IP based rides anymore. As a result of all of this I don’t see them pausing animated based attractions at DHS.

I would not be opposed to pausing the concept of entire lands based on one franchise (animated or not). I’d love to see them turn either AC or Echo Lake or both into more generic lands like Fantasy Land for DHS or a Super Hero land. I don’t need to be “transported to the world of the incredibles“ but an E ticket based on them would be cool. They could work in some of the lesser Marvel characters not covered under the Universal contract as well. I don’t want a Dr Strange land but a ride based on the franchise existing in a gereric Super hero land I would be good with. You could layer in flat rides, play areas, meet and greets, gift shops, stage shows or entertainment and unique dining as well. Maybe even the return of a parade.

I know that’s not how they build anymore but new lands based on a single IP with 1 main ride don’t move the needle on capacity the way a land with multiple smaller rides can.

They are going to have to make a variety of quality cinema if that is the case.

It is funny how they can't produce non Marvel/Star Wars live action hits anymore.

 

[celluloid]

I think they have enough material to choose from now it’s just a matter of deciding which to use and then most importantly executing on it. Splash Mountain was one of the best rides of all time based on a very average movie most people have never seen.

Splash was based on a movie many in comparison had never seen because of its ban by the time 30 years of it hit. But older definitely know it as famous. It re-released in theaters not long before the ride opened. It made a healthy box office and was popular as a reissue. It actually had more success than Lady and the Tramp at the box office that same year.
But even though controversial, Song of the South was very popular. The bans came after. To the point where it was easy to replace for many reasons including the fact it was no longer widely published by company. So it is a poor example.


Current leadership would never reach that deep again with the IP edict. They would more often than not rather exploit and have multiple attractions of the same 5 or 6 properties.

Nothing outside of Star Wars, Indy, Marvel Pixar, and Mickey itself is anything they have showed wanting to peruse. When a random post frozen hit happens they have already used it. Zootopia, and Moana. Inside out still not at WDW. Which means currently, the live action well in the parks is exploited well and kind of dried up.

They need some successful live action if we are going to get much beyond animated lands, attractions and Star Wars at DHS under their last decade of goals.

The point self stands.

 

[UNCgolf]

Song of the South was re-released and didn’t crack $20M or the top 50 in movies in 1986. Top Gun hit $175M as reference to the box office number range for that year. It was an average movie not wildly popular but the subject of a great theme park attraction. I am not suggesting Disney will make a ride based off of an “average” film again, but my point is the IP does not make or break the ride. There are more than enough animated IPs they haven’t fully utilized at WDW even if they ignore live action films. There’s no lack of material to pick from.

This an issue with the IP mandate that I think gets overlooked -- it's very unlikely management would be on board with a ride based on something like the Rescuers, even though it's a Disney IP (and one that was a pretty big hit at the time).

It almost certainly needs to be a recent IP (or one that is still moving a lot of merch and/or Disney+ streams), and one that they think will drive merchandise sales. Imagineers don't really have the freedom to design using ANY Disney IP.

 

[lazyboy97o]

This an issue with the IP mandate that I think gets overlooked -- it's very unlikely management would be on board with a ride based on something like the Rescuers, even though it's a Disney IP (and one that was a pretty big hit at the time).

It almost certainly needs to be a recent IP (or one that is still moving a lot of merch and/or Disney+ streams), and one that they think will drive merchandise sales. Imagineers don't really have the freedom to design using ANY Disney IP.

It’s better described as a franchise mandate.

 

[JackCH]

I agree 100%. I only brought up Splash to make the point that even if you view the IP as meh it’s still possible to build a great and entertaining ride based on it. Some people are just as luke warm on Zootopia or Incredibles or Moana or Frozen or Inside Out or any other IP which is relevant today with the prospect of sequels and merchandise sales. Any of those franchises could easily end up with a great ride (like Splash Mountain was).

Honestly don’t like Guardians of the Galaxy, but Cosmic Rewind is one of my favorite rides now. And I know many people who feel similar.

 

[Nickm2022]

If we're talking IP's my main issue is how disney favors certain IP's over others. It is beyond me Wall-E, Moana, Mary Poppins, and other big films don't have rides. Big IP's like Toy Story and Starwars are everywhere, even in areas that don't make sense. And IP's that would honestly translate amazing to theme park rides that aren't major (like Tron already) or Atlantis, Treasure Planet, Raya, and Luca are largely ignored. I don't care about IP's in a Disney park. I care about IP selection, and how they are used and where.

 

[Rich Brownn]

Song of the South was re-released and didn’t crack $20M or the top 50 in movies in 1986. Top Gun hit $175M as reference to the box office number range for that year. It was an average movie not wildly popular but the subject of a great theme park attraction. I am not suggesting Disney will make a ride based off of an “average” film again, but my point is the IP does not make or break the ride. There are more than enough animated IPs they haven’t fully utilized at WDW even if they ignore live action films. There’s no lack of material to pick from.

Actually $20 million is not bad for a 40-odd year old film thats been reissued many times

 

[aladdin2007]

Keeping the area a dead-end is more proof this is a hasty, relatively cheap overlay with no planning for the parks larger needs.

they seem to like this style now no doubt for the reasons stated ( look for this to be like the ratatouille area I would guess) and its just too many people trying to get in one congested area and out the same way...Disney has lost their park management design skills. This will fare even worse at the studios, the place is almost unbearable now. Imagine when this opens.

 

[celluloid]

Song of the South was re-released and didn’t crack $20M or the top 50 in movies in 1986. Top Gun hit $175M as reference to the box office number range for that year. It was an average movie not wildly popular but the subject of a great theme park attraction. I am not suggesting Disney will make a ride based off of an “average” film again, but my point is the IP does not make or break the ride. There are more than enough animated IPs they haven’t fully utilized at WDW even if they ignore live action films. There’s no lack of material to pick from.

You are comparing the the time a movie from the 1940s a movie was released to one of the most famous films of the year it was re-released the third time in. Plenty still popular in 1986.

For reference. If a movie was re-released in theaters today that came out in the 80s and made 60 million, which is about what the 1986 film did with inflation we would say still very popular.

All of it aside, it was not quite adjacent to any of the conversation
on point.

Disney needs more material for their four parks to gain more variety if they are only sticking to beyond 300-400 box office chasing for theme park attractions.

They are not doing what they did for
theme parks in 1986 either.

They are not gong to take a property that made under 100 million domestic and go! "But we can make a great theme park ride out of it."

 

[MisterPenguin]

This is the Monsters Inc new ride thread.

 

[GoofGoof]

This is the Monsters Inc new ride thread.

To be precise it’s the Monsters Inc Land thread, not just the new ride, but point taken

 

[Jrb1979]

This is the Monsters Inc new ride thread.

A land for a movie 2 decades old at this point. Same can be said for cars. A 19 year old movie.

 

[MisterPenguin]

A land for a movie 2 decades old at this point. Same can be said for cars. A 19 year old movie.

Cars 3 was 2017. So, 7 years to get a ride if you go by the most recent movie.

14 years before Dumbo got a ride.

18 years before Snow White got a ride.

43 years before Song of the South got a ride.

How many years before Mickey got a ride?

 

[Gusey]

And Monsters at Work's latest season, starring John Goodman and Billy Crystal, came out in 2024

 

[Jrb1979]

Cars 3 was 2017. So, 7 years to get a ride if you go by the most recent movie.

14 years before Dumbo got a ride.

18 years before Snow White got a ride.

43 years before Song of the South got a ride.

How many years before Mickey got a ride?

Yeah and IMO those IPs were dated by the time they got an attraction. Why not use more recent IPs, like Soul or Coco?

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Yeah and IMO those IPs were dated by the time they got an attraction. Why not use more recent IPs, like Soul or Coco?

Coco is getting a ride at Disneyland.