News New Theater to be built at the Magic Kingdom - now cancelled?

jaxonp

Well-Known Member
SWGE is approximately 2 acres larger than Pandora. You are correct that the show building eat up quite a bit of the acreage. Pandora has quite a bit of interactive features, but you need to know where to find them-pretty random. SWGE will be loaded with interactive features!


Which really scare me because it seems like they have a lot more planned for SWGE than Pandora. Two giant show buildings and a shopping village with a TS and QS restaurant. 2 Acres doesn't sound like a whole lot more land when considering how much more they're building.
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
fair enough, but why go the pandora route on this one?
for that, you needed to, especially as time wore on and you realized it wasn't quite sticking.

but for this, really? i mean, not that it won't work, but it's hard to believe it couldnt't have worked better.

uni adheres directly to the books/movies with creative input/direction from the creator herself, as it's owed - and it's what people love... it's what they show up for.
the sw that many people loved has been replaced with star wars: the next generation, and it just doesn't have the same resonance.

the first order is not the empire
Praying on familiarity creates bland attractions. It leads to decent style, but book report type rides. In some cases recreating specific scenes works in the context of an attraction (like Gringotts for example), but the real objective should be to reproduce the feel of a story. Adapting one medium (movie based IP) to another medium (theme park attraction) is rarely cut and dry, and it's why having a good take on something really helps. In the case of Pandora, the treatment of that land is brilliant. They used the movie as an inspiration. There are obvious visual cues that showcase that inspiration, but the land itself doesn't call to a specific point in the movie. It extends that universe.

With Star Wars: Galaxy's Edge, they're doing exactly that. Star Tours is already the best of/book report-ish attraction. It doesn't really suffer the same blandness issues because of the built in variability, but if the two new attractions fail to exceed Star Tours than it will be a gross misstep. I love the approach they're taking because it's a bit of a risk. The unambitious version of the land was rejected by the Board of Directors in a rare sign of understanding the needs and significance of this land.
 

JediMasterMatt

Well-Known Member
True, but DHS does and will need double that.

Keeping GMR would have gone a long way to help.

There is a part of the loss of the GMR that a lot of people aren't factoring into the equation - not only it was a ride of outstanding capacity, it also held that captive audience for an extended period of time (20+ minutes).

Even when Mickey comes online to replace some of that capacity - it's going to release that audience back out into the malnourished park in less than half the time as GMR. The majority of those people are then going to have to find somewhere else to go.

It's kind of like the 3rd track for TSMM when you accelerate guests getting the ride checked off their list; but, all you've done is sped up the time it takes to move on to something else - when there isn't much else to do unfortunately.

The unambitious version of the land was rejected by the Board of Directors in a rare sign of understanding the needs and significance of this land.

It's important to note that the "back to the drawing boards" rejection was from a time period when Imagineering was planning a "Star Wars Greatest Hits" overlay for Disneyland's Tomorrowland. WDW wasn't the focus at that time. Nor was it when it was then focused on a Potter-esque overlay for Toontown. It wasn't until that plan got far along that the scope increased again for it's final RoA overlay that serious consideration of DHS was brought into the mix.

I can't blame Imagineering for the swing and a miss on the first attempt with the overlay as they've had years of getting beaten down by rejected budgets when they get really ambitious.
 

bcoachable

Well-Known Member
There is a part of the loss of the GMR that a lot of people aren't factoring into the equation - not only it was a ride of outstanding capacity, it also held that captive audience for an extended period of time (20+ minutes).

Even when Mickey comes online to replace some of that capacity - it's going to release that audience back out into the malnourished park in less than half the time as GMR. The majority of those people are then going to have to find somewhere else to go.

It's kind of like the 3rd track for TSMM when you accelerate guests getting the ride checked off their list; but, all you've done is sped up the time it takes to move on to something else - when there isn't much else to do unfortunately.



It's important to note that the "back to the drawing boards" rejection was from a time period when Imagineering was planning a "Star Wars Greatest Hits" overlay for Disneyland's Tomorrowland. WDW wasn't the focus at that time. Nor was it when it was then focused on a Potter-esque overlay for Toontown. It wasn't until that plan got far along that the scope increased again for it's final RoA overlay that serious consideration of DHS was brought into the mix.

I can't blame Imagineering for the swing and a miss on the first attempt with the overlay as they've had years of getting beaten down by rejected budgets when they get really ambitious.

So, your telling me that "Roller Coaster Tycoon" makes running a theme park look easier than it really is?
;)
 

larryz

I'm Just A Tourist!
Premium Member
SWGE is approximately 2 acres larger than Pandora. You are correct that the show building eat up quite a bit of the acreage. Pandora has quite a bit of interactive features, but you need to know where to find them-pretty random. SWGE will be loaded with interactive features!
Do stores and food venues count as "interactive features"?
 

smile

Well-Known Member
In the case of Pandora, the treatment of that land is brilliant. They used the movie as an inspiration. There are obvious visual cues that showcase that inspiration, but the land itself doesn't call to a specific point in the movie. It extends that universe.

With Star Wars: Galaxy's Edge, they're doing exactly that. Star Tours is already the best of/book report-ish attraction. It doesn't really suffer the same blandness issues because of the built in variability, but if the two new attractions fail to exceed Star Tours than it will be a gross misstep. I love the approach they're taking because it's a bit of a risk.

there's really no way to have done pandora differently because no one gives a flippin fig who sully is -
familiarity? imagine a wizarding world, but instead of harry, they focused on the new fantastic beasts...... yeah, exactly

a job well done is a job well done and using mcquarrie as scripture is golden -
it'll just be interesting to gauge the resonance, mainly for long-term fans when, instead of dv, it's kr
 

matt9112

Well-Known Member
We're talking about a theatre which puts up broadway shows... Broadway is not restricted to New York... Many of the biggest shows tour around the world. I have seen Wicked several times outside of New York, Lion King, Book of Mormon, Beauty and the Beast, Phantom etc.

If Disney built a broadway theatre at DS, they could not only do a multi month sit-down production of Aladdin or some other Broadway production they are working on/have already produced, they could book it for other tours, use it for Pre-Broadway tryouts etc.

you know that doctor Philips exsists right......
 

Disney Analyst

Well-Known Member
you know that doctor Philips exsists right......

Yes, but why wouldn’t Disney try to cash in on it? They’d have their own space for their tours or sit downs... and could try to host others. It just brings more people to Disney Springs and would diversify entertainment on property, and in all honesty with little investment outside building and staffing the theatre. That’s how you make a world class shopping and entertainment district.
 

matt9112

Well-Known Member
Yes, but why wouldn’t Disney try to cash in on it? They’d have their own space for their tours or sit downs... and could try to host others. It just brings more people to Disney Springs and would diversify entertainment on property, and in all honesty with little investment outside building and staffing the theatre. That’s how you make a world class shopping and entertainment district.

as a local I would rather ORLANDO as a whole grow and prosper....not just the RCID. Disney even funded the new Disney hall over there at doctor Philips. if Disney had some sort of set up from the get go I would agree but I don't think they want something else to manage besides you can't cut costs on a weekly basis to a Broadway class show.
 

jrhwdw

Well-Known Member
It would be nice if TDO decided to go with a Tomorrowland theater-like space so we can get Park shows back like Twas, Disney Mania, etc, and use the rest of the theatre budget on something else
 

TrojanUSC

Well-Known Member
Yes, but why wouldn’t Disney try to cash in on it? They’d have their own space for their tours or sit downs... and could try to host others. It just brings more people to Disney Springs and would diversify entertainment on property, and in all honesty with little investment outside building and staffing the theatre. That’s how you make a world class shopping and entertainment district.

The answer is clear. They have a deal with Cirque du Soliel, who they are partnering with on a new Disney-focused show, to not cannibalize that business with another paid theatrical experience. Few tourists are going to choose Cirque over Frozen! Live on Stage or whatever is playing at this proposed theater and few locals will go when they have Doctor Phillips just down the road and Cirque knows this all too well, which is why they have an exclusivity for that area.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom