News New 'Ice Age' sand sculpture being built at Disney's Animal Kingdom celebrating new Disney+ original

Brad Bishop

Brad Bishop

Well-Known Member
JohnD said:
If you bothered to look, it's not "in" a park. It's outside AK. Splitting hairs? Maybe. But not in a park. Second, is Star Wars odd in HS? What about Marvel in Epcot or DCA? Should Pixar be ripped out of the parks too? Seriously, what is "pure" Disney that is good enough for you? Even Snow White, Peter Pan, Mary Poppins, etc. weren't original Disney stories but Disney interpretations of original books. While we may like Mary Poppins, it's no secret that PL Travers was less than thrilled with Walt's version.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand the distinction of whether it's literally in the park or not.

To answer your other questions:
- Yes, even Star Wars feels out of place to me in Tomorrowland (DL). Star Tours always felt like, "Here's Tomorrowland where we can see a vision of the future... and Star Wars is also here! You'll like it because you like Star Wars even though it really doesn't fit..." - even way back in the 1980s I thought it was odd. I think it has a better home in DHS which is all about movies/making movies. Of course, what is Tomorrowland now? Stitch (or it was), Monsters Laugh Factory (is this still open?), Buzz Lightyear... It's not about tomorrow. It should just be IP land and then they can stick whatever into it without any sort of consistency. Why not put a 90210 Dance Party in the middle of Tomorrowland? It'd fit as well as anything else they've put in there in 30 years. At least Tron fits (I question its placement and "warehouse" - it seems like they could have done better than "warehouse" - like they did on Space Mountain). I'm not even a Tron fan.
- Pixar - they feel a bit odd, too. They're probably the closest to feeling "Disney" as they regularly produced top-rated movies for a good number of years (I think Disney ownership has kind of killed them - different topic, however)
- Marvel? Always felt weird to me. It feels like Universal. It feels like Marvel should have their own park or have a "land" like Star Wars in DHS.
- The others which were adapted as Disney films but had their source somewhere else? It always felt "Disney" to me. In fact, I think that's where Disney shines in taking earlier works / stories / fables and animating them.

...but Disney owns everything now so, you know, if they want to have a "Married With Children" stage show in the middle of Fantasyland we just have to/should accept it.
 
HauntedPirate

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
JohnD said:
If you bothered to look, it's not "in" a park. It's outside AK. Splitting hairs? Maybe. But not in a park. Second, is Star Wars odd in HS? What about Marvel in Epcot or DCA? Should Pixar be ripped out of the parks too? Seriously, what is "pure" Disney that is good enough for you? Even Snow White, Peter Pan, Mary Poppins, etc. weren't original Disney stories but Disney interpretations of original books. While we may like Mary Poppins, it's no secret that PL Travers was less than thrilled with Walt's version.
Click to expand...
JohnD said:
They're only allowed to promote movies, not new shows on Disney+? That's news to me.
Click to expand...

Sure they can. In fact, they should promote every single Disney+ show in the parks, no matter how bad it may be! Isn't that what the parks are meant to be these days, vessels to promote the latest and greatest vapid Disney+ creation? 🤦‍♂️

giphy.gif


For the record: No, Marvel should NOT be in Epcot. Star Wars isn't "odd" in DHS. And Walt never promoted the original versions of the stories he animated.
 
JohnD

JohnD

Well-Known Member
HauntedPirate said:
Sure they can. In fact, they should promote every single Disney+ show in the parks, no matter how bad it may be! Isn't that what the parks are meant to be these days, vessels to promote the latest and greatest vapid Disney+ creation? 🤦‍♂️

giphy.gif


For the record: No, Marvel should NOT be in Epcot. Star Wars isn't "odd" in DHS. And Walt never promoted the original versions of the stories he animated.
Click to expand...

Obviously, you're being flippant but neither you nor @Brad Bishop have answered the question. What is valid "Disney" and what isn't? Again, almost everything "Disney" isn't an original creation anyway. You could argue that Mary Poppins is as much an original PL Travers "IP" as much as Star Wars is an original George Lucas IP. Both are licensed to / owned by Disney.
 
JohnD

JohnD

Well-Known Member
HauntedPirate said:
Sure they can. In fact, they should promote every single Disney+ show in the parks, no matter how bad it may be! Isn't that what the parks are meant to be these days, vessels to promote the latest and greatest vapid Disney+ creation? 🤦‍♂️

giphy.gif


For the record: No, Marvel should NOT be in Epcot. Star Wars isn't "odd" in DHS. And Walt never promoted the original versions of the stories he animated.
Click to expand...

So Marvel isn't okay. Star Wars is. Ice Age isn't. Got it. Glad you cleared that up.
 
TalkingHead

TalkingHead

Well-Known Member
JohnD said:
Obviously, you're being flippant but neither you nor @Brad Bishop have answered the question. What is valid "Disney" and what isn't? Again, almost everything "Disney" isn't an original creation anyway. You could argue that Mary Poppins is as much an original PL Travers "IP" as much as Star Wars is an original George Lucas IP. Both are licensed to / owned by Disney.
Click to expand...
There’s a difference between a property that Disney developed and adapted for the screen and a property made and released by another studio that Disney purchased years after the fact. It’s really not that hard to understand, and certainly doesn’t need to be litigated for the millionth time.
 
JohnD

JohnD

Well-Known Member
TalkingHead said:
There’s a difference between a property that Disney developed and adapted for the screen and a property made and released by another studio that Disney purchased years after the fact. It’s really not that hard to understand, and certainly doesn’t need to be litigated for the millionth time.
Click to expand...

Don't look at me. I'm not the one whining and moaning about it. It's a freaking sand sculpture outside AK.
 
Fox&Hound

Fox&Hound

Well-Known Member
I think the problem is that Ice Age movies are popcorn fun at best and not to the artistic standard to which Disney usually holds themselves. Is this a balloon height test for bringing Ice Age into the park? Probably not, but I see why some are concerned. It is a slippery slope. I really would hate the day when Family Guy is referenced anywhere in a Disney park.
 
Karakasa

Karakasa

Well-Known Member
In fairness to the quality of the Ice Age franchise, there was quite the ah... dud period for Disney. I mean Meet the Robinsons, Home on the Range, Chicken Little, and Bolt, anyone? Distinctly remember the last three, of all possible Disney movies, being the movies of choice they played on the pool deck during my graduation gift Disney Cruise. Of course given which Ice Age it's "celebrating", maybe that's a bit of an insult to those movies. I mean, don't recall any cross-promotion in the parks of the Hunchback of Notre Dame II... But, nevertheless!!

Ultimately harmless, it's a temporary sand sculpture.
 
cookiee_munster

cookiee_munster

Well-Known Member
Brad Bishop said:
It's so incredibly weird to me.

Disney being homogenized into all of these different parts. It'd be like walking into the Magic Kingdom and seeing Bug Bunny and Daffy Duck walk around. "Hey, Bugs... You're in the wrong part of town!"

Still, Disney now owns all of these properties so I guess we can all expect to see them show up in the parks.

It sort of feels like "low grade" stuff is being allowed into the parks with this, however.

What if they bought Hanna Barbera and then you started seeing Fred and Wilma walk around? It's just odd.

There's no stopping it. In my brain it doesn't fit...and it's odd.

That, plus, they're making another Ice Age movie because what's one good (not great) movie + 3-4 really bad sequels need? Another sequel.
Click to expand...
This. 100%.
 
Casper Gutman

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
At some level it boils down to the fact that Star Wars, Marvel, and Pixar are VERY culturally significant and have produced a lot of critically and popularly acclaimed content. Ice Age is not and has not. And the content this sculpture is promoting seems to have been absolutely blasted by critics (and is so low-rent it doesn’t feature the original voice cast).

It’s one step up from Disney creating a sculpture in one of thier parks to promote those awful Disney rip-off DVDs they sell at the check-out line at supermarkets, the ones with names like Ratatooing or Car Story.
 
Brer Panther

Brer Panther

Well-Known Member
Say what you will about the sequels, but I'll defend the first Ice Age. It's always been one of my favorite animated movies.
TikibirdLand said:
They're ALL DISNEY MOVIES NOW. It's Dreamworks.
Click to expand...
The Ice Age films were made by Blue Sky Studios, actually. Y'know, that studio that Disney shut down because they "didn't have the money to keep it open" or whatever their excuse was but is still milking their IPs?
 
Rambozo

Rambozo

Well-Known Member
I'd be actually up for an Ice Age Land. They can use the plans they never used for the ice section at one of the Asian parks. I think it was Tokyo Disneysea.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom