EPCOT New Play Pavilion to replace Epcot's Wonders of Life

The Aracuan Bird

The Aracuan Bird

Well-Known Member
Also, on the topic of Inside Out in the parks, I think part of the problem is that it isn’t a film that’s filled with iconic set pieces, so it would be difficult to directly translate it to a theme park environment. The film is much more thought and emotion provoking, and it needs that 90 minute run time to convey its message properly.

I think if it did translate better, that rumoured Imagination overlay would have been planned for the big Epcot update. However, they more than likely would have had to create a ton of new content and areas for a ride, with the characters as the only thing transferring from the film. The only benefit they would be getting is character merch, but I guess it’s easier to sell a purple dragon than a couple of colored blobs. So it really makes perfect sense to put the characters in Play! instead. Best of both worlds in terms of merch profits.
 
FigmentFan82

FigmentFan82

Well-Known Member
MisterPenguin said:
I acknowledged it was your opinion.

The context of the conversation is that you don't think Inside Out should be in the parks, no? Based on your opinion of it, no?

I'm pointing out why it will be included, because it's very popular and very well thought of.
Click to expand...
My opinion is that there are much better IP to choose from for potential inclusion in the parks than Inside Out. Nothing will change how I feel
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
The Aracuan Bird said:
Just taking a look at the Top 100 films on Rotten Tomatoes. Inside Out is ranked 25. Toy Story 4 is actually ranked as the best animated movie (anyone that’s seen it can tell you it isn’t) at “only” a 97, but has more reviews which is probably what puts it above Inside Out. Interestingly “It Happened One Night”, a movie I recently watched, is at number 1. Pinocchio, which has a critic score of 100, isn’t in the list.

Critic scores are a ballpark. Movies in the 90%-100% range are usually well respected. Disney movies in the 2010s have gotten an abundance of praise for some reason. I suspect it’s because of the lacklustre offerings from the other studios.

I recently rewatched Inside Out. It’s good. It’s not really one of Pixar’s best, but I realize that opinion is subjective. At the time of it’s release, we kept getting hit with mediocre Pixar films and sequels, so it felt like a breath of fresh air. But the dust has settled.
Click to expand...

I think using Rotten Tomatoes as a way to rank anything is essentially a statistical fallacy because of the way it works.

Even if you ignore the subjectivity of whether Rotten Tomatoes decides to assign a middling review a thumbs up or thumbs down (a 3/5 nominally counts the same as a 5/5 as they're both positive reviews), as well as determining which reviews are included in the score period (on some movies they're including random blog reviews), the system itself doesn't work well for rankings. A movie that received ten 3/5 "yeah, it's a competently made, entertaining enough film" reviews out of 10 would be at 100% whereas a movie that received 9 5/5 masterpiece reviews and 1/5 hated it reviews would only get 90%.

That's why you see stuff like Avengers: Endgame super high on the list. It's an incredibly well-made film that's a lot of fun; it would be hard to give it a negative review in the context of what it is. But I don't think many critics would actually consider it one of the 100 best films they'd ever seen, much less top 10. Those types of films have an inherent advantage over other types in the Rotten Tomatoes scheme.
 
The Aracuan Bird

The Aracuan Bird

Well-Known Member
marni1971 said:
It was indeed. But like Epcot it’s another mish mash of a park that’s lost its way.
Click to expand...
Unlike Epcot though, a lot of the content required licensing deals that the modern company would be too stingy to pay. Sure, Epcot had sponsors, but they own Figment and every original park character that came out of it. There’s no reason they can’t restore dignity to that park. The only thing to blame is their cluelessness.
 
MisterPenguin

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
UNCgolf said:
I think using Rotten Tomatoes as a way to rank anything is essentially a statistical fallacy because of the way it works.

Even if you ignore the subjectivity of whether Rotten Tomatoes decides to assign a middling review a thumbs up or thumbs down
Click to expand...
That's why I never quote the RT Tomatometer by itself. It is indeed just a thumbs up or down.

I also include the average of the *score* that critics gave it combined with the *score* of the critics at Metacritic.

I also include average *score* of the audience combining RT users and IMDB users which wind up being in the hundreds of thousands (and thus, less prone to bombing or bumping).

Then I also include the CineScore, which is the opening weekend score of a random sampling of the audience.

Then I include the Box Office Gross.

They all add up together for a fairly good reading of the movie as to where it stands with critics and audience.

People are prone to opining what IP should or shouldn't be in the park based on their own personal opinion. Then they often project their opinion onto the whole of the general population or Disney fanbase. These metrics tell whether that projection has any foundation. It also explains why Disney seems to promoting a particular IP that a person personally dislikes... Because Disney knows what the population at large really likes or dislikes.

An example: I seen people wonder why so much Moana since it was just a one-off IP that didn't seem to be the multi-billion dollar category that other IPs are in. Well, according to Nielsen, Moana is in the top ten most streamed movies week after week for the past four months. It's popular.

Disney also has the metrics of merch sales and their own internal polling. Disney isn't going to double down on a IP in the park that people -- in general -- don't care about.
 
The Aracuan Bird

The Aracuan Bird

Well-Known Member
Timing is also key to reception. Opinions on media change over time. Had Inside Out followed up the original Incredibles or Toy Story, would it have had as high of a review score as it did following up Brave and Monster’s University?
 
CastAStone

CastAStone

5th gate? Just build a new resort Bob.
The Aracuan Bird said:
Disney movies in the 2010s have gotten an abundance of praise for some reason. I suspect it’s because of the lacklustre offerings from the other studios.
Click to expand...
I think Frozen and to a lesser extent Moana get a bad rap here because people don’t want the IPs in the parks, but Moana is probably the funniest Walt Disney Animated feature and Frozen had perhaps the best Disney song (yes I’m sick of it too but that doesn’t change how good of a song it is), the best visual sequence (let it go castle building scene) and frankly an incredible and inspiring twist at the end. It’s just an incredible picture that everyone got very sick of (and isn’t for the middle aged men that mostly populate the forums here)
 
The Aracuan Bird

The Aracuan Bird

Well-Known Member
CastAStone said:
I think Frozen and to a lesser extent Moana get a bad rap here because people don’t want the IPs in the parks, but Moana is probably the funniest Walt Disney Animated feature and Frozen had perhaps the best Disney song (yes I’m sick of it too but that doesn’t change how good of a song it is), the best visual sequence (let it go castle building scene) and frankly an incredible and inspiring twist at the end. It’s just an incredible picture that everyone got very sick of (and isn’t for the middle aged men that mostly populate the forums here)
Click to expand...
I think they’re mediocre kids flicks as far as films go, but to say that they aren’t popular with said kids is pretty crazy. They are. They sell well.

The company milks them to franchise fatigue, which is absolutely awful for the long term, but they still deserve park presence (in places they fit).
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
CastAStone said:
I think Frozen and to a lesser extent Moana get a bad rap here because people don’t want the IPs in the parks, but Moana is probably the funniest Walt Disney Animated feature and Frozen had perhaps the best Disney song (yes I’m sick of it too but that doesn’t change how good of a song it is), the best visual sequence (let it go castle building scene) and frankly an incredible and inspiring twist at the end. It’s just an incredible picture that everyone got very sick of (and isn’t for the middle aged men that mostly populate the forums here)
Click to expand...

I don't think Let It Go is even a top 20 Disney song. That doesn't make it a bad song, though -- Disney has just had a lot of great songs over 80 years.

Regardless, I don't have any problem with Frozen or Moana in the parks (they're both solid movies). I have a problem with them in EPCOT (and I think FEA is a bad ride, but that has nothing to do with the IP). Put them in the Magic Kingdom or DHS where they belong.
 
The Aracuan Bird

The Aracuan Bird

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
I don't think Let It Go is even a top 20 Disney song. That doesn't make it a bad song, though -- Disney has just had a lot of great songs over 80 years.

Regardless, I don't have any problem with Frozen or Moana in the parks (they're both solid movies). I have a problem with them in EPCOT (and I think FEA is a bad ride, but that has nothing to do with the IP). Put them in the Magic Kingdom or DHS where they belong.
Click to expand...
They’re shoe ins for Magic Kingdom. Moana is based on Polynesian Culture, and there was a Snow Queen boat ride planned for Disneyland Fantasyland. Make new attractions on expansion plots and it would be a slam dunk.
 
CastAStone

CastAStone

5th gate? Just build a new resort Bob.
UNCgolf said:
Regardless, I don't have any problem with Frozen or Moana in the parks (they're both solid movies). I have a problem with them in EPCOT (and I think FEA is a bad ride, but that has nothing to do with the IP). Put them in the Magic Kingdom or DHS where they belong.
Click to expand...
Totally understandable
 
DisneyDean97

DisneyDean97

Well-Known Member
marni1971 said:
It was indeed. But like Epcot it’s another mish mash of a park that’s lost its way.
Click to expand...
Say what you will about Eisner (and there's a lot to say) but he at least appreciated the fact that not every park needed to be a Magic Kingdom, MGM and Animal Kingdom were different and didn't try to be a Magic Kingdom 2.0... something Iger and Chepak can't seem to understand
 

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

Back
Top Bottom