News Paradise Pier Becoming Pixar Pier

[DanielBB8]

Because ownership of production company is not what makes for a good story.

All of which is completely irrelevant. Coco being great doesn’t make a flat ride better. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull does not make the Indiana Jones Adventure worse.

These are your arguments.

 

[DanielBB8]

I was never talking about the movies. This does though explain why you don’t understand the issue. You don’t see themed entertainment as it’s own unique form of storytelling, but as a vehicle for remembering movies you’ve already seen.

More changing of your argument. Lame. Gibberish.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Each one is YOUR argument. Go back to the posts and verify. I rebutted your lame arguments each time. That’s why I’m describing it a gibberish since you’re trying to foist it as if I said it originally.

Everything has been a reply to your claims.

I’m surprised Indiana Jones Adventure is on this list. Pixar was owned by Disney much longer than it owned Lucas. So how did Lucas get Disney fan approval much quicker while Pixar is still in the doghouse?

Please clarify how Disney owning Pixar longer than Lucasfilm has anything to do with the quality of the Indiana Jones Adventure.

Indiana Jones 5 is when they jumped the shark. Star Wars 8 was roundly derided by fans.

Many love Coco, Pixar’s newest animated movie.

Please clarify how the quality of these movies has anything to do with rides.

 

[DanielBB8]

Everything has been a reply to your claims.

Please clarify how Disney owning Pixar longer than Lucasfilm has anything to do with the quality of the Indiana Jones Adventure.

Please clarify how the quality of these movies has anything to do with rides.

Not a claim, a response to a reply from another poster that you find yourself willing to reply to. A legitimate question of why Disney fans don’t accept Disney. I was asking why. The claim about ownership not making for a good story is how you choose to frame the discussion and it’s misdirection. Hilarious that you say an attraction must have good story. Many Disney attractions don’t have stories, just scenes.

The basis to do attractions are obviously whether the movies are a hit and good reviews. Pixar’s track record from Rotten Tomatoes exceeds that of Indiana Jones and especially the last movie.

Asking me to clarify means you aren’t following.

Cars Land. Pixar. Monsters Inc. Pixar.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Not a claim, a response to a reply from another poster that you find yourself willing to reply to. A legitimate question of why Disney fans don’t accept Disney. I was asking why. The claim about ownership not making for a good story is how you choose to frame the discussion and it’s misdirection. Hilarious that you say an attraction must have good story. Many Disney attractions don’t have stories, just scenes.

The basis to do attractions are obviously whether the movies are a hit and good reviews. Pixar’s track record from Rotten Tomatoes exceeds that of Indiana Jones and especially the last movie.

Asking me to clarify means you aren’t following.

Cars Land. Pixar. Monsters Inc. Pixar.

Ownership is what you brought up, as though it impacts this notion of “acceptance” you keep trying to make relevant. Indiana Jones Adventure is accepted because it is a great attraction, and that is not changed by who owns Lucasfilm or the Rotten Tomatoes scores of any of the movies. Pixar Pier is not accepted because it is a weak idea, not because of who owns Pixar or some odd rejection of Pixar’s highly regarded output.

Story is not just linear narrative.

Pixar’s track record with movies is about just that, movies and not rides. Nobody is unaware of why Disney would be build Pixar rides. What is questioned is the rides themselves, not the movies.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

@DanielBB8 You're wasting your time arguing with lazyboy97o. Just move on.

 

[Curious Constance]

Not a claim, a response to a reply from another poster that you find yourself willing to reply to. A legitimate question of why Disney fans don’t accept Disney. I was asking why. The claim about ownership not making for a good story is how you choose to frame the discussion and it’s misdirection. Hilarious that you say an attraction must have good story. Many Disney attractions don’t have stories, just scenes.

The basis to do attractions are obviously whether the movies are a hit and good reviews. Pixar’s track record from Rotten Tomatoes exceeds that of Indiana Jones and especially the last movie.

Asking me to clarify means you aren’t following.

Cars Land. Pixar. Monsters Inc. Pixar.

But the most successful Pixar iteration in any park is Carsland, even though the Cars movies are the worst rated movies Pixar has ever made.

Its success is due to the quality of the land and attractions not because of the average score critics gave the movie.

And despite the quality, it's still a take it or leave it area for my entire family. I enjoy the beauty of the rock work, but that's about it. I could care less about the Cars franchise, and I don't think any of the attractions are good enough on their own if you're not a fan of the movies and characters. That's another set back to IP, in my opinion. If you hate the movies, you automatically have a luke warm feeling towards the land.

 

[Disney Irish]

If you hate the movies, you automatically have a luke warm feeling towards the land.

That maybe true for you, but I don't believe that is a true statement for all. While I don't want to get into the IP vs Non-IP discussion overall as its a tired discussion. But I will say that a good attraction and well executed land will succeed despite an IP that is disliked.

 

[Darkbeer1]

That maybe true for you, but I don't believe that is a true statement for all. While I don't want to get into the IP vs Non-IP discussion overall as its a tired discussion. But I will say that a good attraction and well executed land will succeed despite an IP that is disliked.

Like the Water World Stunt Show at USH... Still amazed on how well the film did internationally. It was the most expensive film ever made when it was released in 1995.

But the show still packs them in at 3 Universal Parks. USH, USJ and USS.

 

[Antaundra]

But the most successful Pixar iteration in any park is Carsland, even though the Cars movies are the worst rated movies Pixar has ever made.

Its success is due to the quality of the land and attractions not because of the average score critics gave the movie.

And despite the quality, it's still a take it or leave it area for my entire family. I enjoy the beauty of the rock work, but that's about it. I could care less about the Cars franchise, and I don't think any of the attractions are good enough on their own if you're not a fan of the movies and characters. That's another set back to IP, in my opinion. If you hate the movies, you automatically have a luke warm feeling towards the land.

Carsland actually drove my interest in the third Cars movie. I liked the first movie, hated the second movie, then fell in love with the land so when the third movie came out I wanted to see a new movie in the land that I love. I think if a land is well executed it can rise above the feelings you have for the IP.

 

[Curious Constance]

Carsland actually drove my interest in the third Cars movie. I liked the first movie, hated the second movie, then fell in love with the land so when the third movie came out I wanted to see a new movie in the land that I love. I think if a land is well executed it can rise above the feelings you have for the IP.

Yes, I agree with that. And in some ways, the land does this for me. But my point is, some people will have such a dislike or aloofness regarding a certain IP that you're starting out with a negative before they even step foot in the land. Obviously not everyone will feel this way, but it exists. I think the general consensus regarding non Disney regulars is , "Why would I go check out Carsland when I hated the movies?" It's not the defining reason why I'm disliking IP more and more, but it's one more negative in a long list.

 

[Darkbeer1]

USH has used IP's since it opened in the 60's. It is interesting to see the list of extinct attractions. And showing my age, I remember most of them. I wish I still had my Airplane (Screen Test) and Star Trek videos.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_former_Universal_Studios_Hollywood_attractions

 

[Curious Constance]

That's my biggest fear. Someday Disney theme parks will seem as tired and boring as Universal is to me.

 

[DanielBB8]

Yes, I agree with that. And in some ways, the land does this for me. But my point is, some people will have such a dislike or aloofness regarding a certain IP that you're starting out with a negative before they even step foot in the land. Obviously not everyone will feel this way, but it exists. I think the general consensus regarding non Disney regulars is , "Why would I go check out Carsland when I hated the movies?" It's not the defining reason why I'm disliking IP more and more, but it's one more negative in a long list.

Is all that negativity from Pixar’s most successfully realized land yet worst rated movie? Cars 2 is a definite turkey, but Pixar redeemed itself with Cars 3. But adults are not the true audience for Cars. People like Cars regardless and every layer in Cars Land caters to adult sensibilities with references to Route 66, the 60s culture, and car culture. It’s a well rounded and well executed land.

So to somewhat pull it into the Pixar Pier discussion, no matter how much they actually succeed, it is quite clear that strong feelings about Pixar will take precedence.

 

[Disney Irish]

So to somewhat pull it into the Pixar Pier discussion, no matter how much they actually succeed, it is quite clear that strong feelings about Pixar will take precedence.

I don't think you're going to get a good consensus here on a Disney fan forum. You are going to get strong feelings about everything Disney, from the smallest to the largest detail and everything in-between.

 

[Curious Constance]

Is all that negativity from Pixar’s most successfully realized land yet worst rated movie? Cars 2 is a definite turkey, but Pixar redeemed itself with Cars 3. But adults are not the true audience for Cars. People like Cars regardless and every layer in Cars Land caters to adult sensibilities with references to Route 66, the 60s culture, and car culture. It’s a well rounded and well executed land.

So to somewhat pull it into the Pixar Pier discussion, no matter how much they actually succeed, it is quite clear that strong feelings about Pixar will take precedence.

You keep talking about Pixar hate but I love Pixar, and I still hate Pixar Pier. Sooooooo.....

 

[Phroobar]

That's my biggest fear. Someday Disney theme parks will seem as tired and boring as Universal is to me.

Well there are other things in the world to do besides Disney theme parks.

 

[Antaundra]

That's my biggest fear. Someday Disney theme parks will seem as tired and boring as Universal is to me.

I'm not worried about that at all. Disneyland has seen better/worse days before and will see better/worse days again. Trends change, right now they want to brand everything with the latest IP. In 10 years some executive will likely come along and say "we're wasting all this money branding everything with the latest IP we could save money by creating timeless original attractions."

 

[Phroobar]

I'm not worried about that at all. Disneyland has seen better/worse days before and will see better/worse days again. Trends change, right now they want to brand everything with the latest IP. In 10 years some executive will likely come along and say "we're wasting all this money branding everything with the latest IP we could save money by creating timeless original attractions."

Don't hold you breath.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

But my point is, some people will have such a dislike or aloofness regarding a certain IP that you're starting out with a negative before they even step foot in the land.

This basically describes me with Harry Potter and WWoHP. I don't care for HP and had little interest in going to Florida to see the land. There's been one in my home state for a couple of years now and I've made zero effort to go.