Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
Keeping the area a dead-end is more proof this is a hasty, relatively cheap overlay with no planning for the parks larger needs.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
DHS Monster Inc Land Coming to Disney's Hollywood Studios
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
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.
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.
Last edited:
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
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
Well-Known Member
It’s better described as a franchise mandate.
JackCH
Well-Known Member
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.
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
Well-Known Member
Actually $20 million is not bad for a 40-odd year old film thats been reissued many times
aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
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.
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."
Last edited:
This is the Monsters Inc new ride thread.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
To be precise it’s the Monsters Inc Land thread, not just the new ride, but point taken
Jrb1979
Well-Known Member
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?
Jrb1979
Well-Known Member
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
Well-Known Member
Coco is getting a ride at Disneyland.
SpectreJordan
Well-Known Member
I imagine EPCOT would be next up on their to-do list in some fashion. I don't think they'll let it sit for too long especially when the reaction to EPCOT's recent additions has been 50/50.So reading between the lines and jumping to conclusions it sounds like Disney buys rights to Sesame Street, takes over Sesame Place and then moves MV3D to the park in PA. I then become the creepy middle aged guy with no young kids who has a season pass to Sesame Place
Getting back on topic….it could be a little sooner. If we assume that Villians land opens somewhere around 2030 or 2031 then the “next thing” to open could be whatever goes to AC. There is no guarantee they plan it to open the very next year but if they plan to spend the money they announced and spend it in a decade it would have to open sooner than a decade from now (the decade would end in 2034). If you add up all of the spend announced for all the parks and cruise ships there’s still plenty left over for more stuff before 2034. Also no guarantee it goes to WDW but they will likely get some allocation of funds.
I personally would prioritize a new land in AK to expand capacity there but AC would be plan 1b for me with EPCOT a close 3rd (WoL, imagination redo, new country, etc…).
SpectreJordan
Well-Known Member
If Disney is dead-set on getting Simpsons in the parks, I honestly hope they wait until the current cast retires. Every character sounds ROUGH nowadays; Marge has become infamous for this in recent years, but I saw a recent clip of Flanders & he doesn't even sound like Flanders anymore. It's sad that these amazing VAs are aging, but it's time for them to retire and relax finally.
I'd hate for there to be a land in the parks where all of the characters are stuck with rough voice acting.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
That makes sense. What we know of that’s been announced is (1) new land in AK, (2) new land at DHS and (3&4) 2 new lands at MK (don’t bother telling me that Cars is not a land….i reject the concept that it is part of Frontierland). EPCOT would make sense to be next in line, but I would personally prioritize additional capacity for AK and DHS first since Monsters and Encanto are really only a +1 for attractions at each park with some rethemed existing attractions. IMHO those 2 parks still are more in need of additional capacity over EPCOT. Maybe EPCOT gets by better because of the booze and dining in the countries. Probably just as much of a need.
In any case I don’t want the thread police to have to chime in again so I will leave it at that and let people get back to talking about the Monsters Ride or the Monsters Land or I guess how many years between theatrical release of movies other than Monsters and their theme park rides
