Disgruntled Walt
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
It's also not even that different from what's there right now.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Monster Inc Land Coming to Disney's Hollywood Studios
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Alas, poor Miss Piggy. Replaced with...an eyeball
Former employee of Universal Entertainment Base here. This is only half right. Disney can't say no just because either. It has to be in good faith. They don't want Universal being stuck with a bad product because it is bad for their brand being represented as well.
The good faith goes both ways. This is why there have been updates after 2009 when Disney has owned it, such as Spiderman's reanimation of all ride media in 2012.
Last edited:
HoustonHorn
Premium Member
It is wild to think that some people think that Muppets does not qualify in timeless popularity enough to keep a single 3D theater attraction, but Monsters Inc somehow deserves to be fleshed out as an environment into an entire land. We probably need the compromise of Muppet Vision 3D staying and getting a Monsters Inc Ride. A variety in properties would be nice and something DHS really lacks.
Some color tones on citytscapes change, and based on the concept art, not enough to make it look like that world as it should. Still looks more Brookyln than what Monstropolis mostly visibly borrows from.
The other parts of Streets of America that were bulldozed years ago actually suit the change better.
Some color tones on citytscapes change, and based on the concept art, not enough to make it look like that world as it should. Still looks more Brookyln than what Monstropolis mostly visibly borrows from.
The other parts of Streets of America that were bulldozed years ago actually suit the change better.
Hey I like the eyeball! Hopefully miss piggy fountain is relocated though, IM sure they wont just tear it apart
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Marvel has reasonable approval. They are not allowed to just deny. So long as the content matches their style guides and brand identity then they have to approve.
threvester
Well-Known Member
get a horse
danlb_2000
Premium Member
The one big limitation is that they must stay consistent with the comic book style, they can not introduce MCU versions of the characters.
Imagine consistently doing things that the general fans and guests dislike while running a theme park reliant on happy fans and guests.
I'd imagine repeatedly doing stupid things like that would cause less people to want to go there...
Thank goodness. I was worried then we wouldn't be getting the good MCU IP in the parks. Shang-Chi, Eternals, and Dr. Strange are all deserving of their own E-Tickets at the Magic Kingdom.
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
I think most probably agree with the sentiment that the trend of everything being a unified IP land is tired, but I’m not really bothered by the appearance of this area. It looks like a nicely refreshed version of what is already there, and it blends well with whatever will remain of the original cityscape corridor just outside of it. It obviously begs the question of why it needs to be a Monsters land in the first place, but I don’t think it looks uninteresting. I suppose what you mean is that Monsters is not a fanciful enough IP to warrant converting this entire area when it could’ve just been placed into a more unassuming facade in the area and still worked seamlessly alongside Muppets, but that’s a bit different from the area looking uninteresting; if it is so now, then it always has been.
Disney has released a high-res version of the Monsters, Inc. land concept rendering:
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
That’s not actually stated in the contract and is undermined by the use of the television design and art direction. The contract says it has to follow certain style guides, if those guides have adopted anything from the movies then it would be available. The contract was written with the intent that Universal would be the global forever home of Marvel, it makes no sense that it would have stuck everything in 1994.
Gringrinngghost
Well-Known Member
Universal's moving away for budget cuts.
Right. It's mostly just a city. Literally no one has wanted to visit that city; why is it getting an entire land?
Marc Davis Fan
Well-Known Member
I do think having fully-finished building facades - rather than "sets" that randomly end to reveal warehouse-style buildings - will be a great improvement upon the existing design/aesthetics of the area.
I am confused by one thing, though: to what extent is Grand Avenue itself (i.e., to the right of the gate/archway) also being converted into part of Monstropolis? It would be nice to have Grand Avenue be a "cross fade" that remains "Los Angeles" but meshes with the aesthetic of the bordering land, a la classic Imagineering design principles. But if Grand Avenue is being subsumed, then where the heck does Monstropolis start - immediately past Star Tours and Sci-Fi Dine-In?!
I am confused by one thing, though: to what extent is Grand Avenue itself (i.e., to the right of the gate/archway) also being converted into part of Monstropolis? It would be nice to have Grand Avenue be a "cross fade" that remains "Los Angeles" but meshes with the aesthetic of the bordering land, a la classic Imagineering design principles. But if Grand Avenue is being subsumed, then where the heck does Monstropolis start - immediately past Star Tours and Sci-Fi Dine-In?!
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
We spent 20 years begging for this coaster and got buyer’s remorse when it was finally announced? Then we said, “I hope it’s not just a ride replacing a 20-minute show,” and they said, “fine, you can have a new show AND the coaster,” and we said, “no, thanks.”
smh