Shigg. W. McGee
Well-Known Member
ＹＡＷＮ
Last edited:
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Paradise Pier Becoming Pixar Pier
- Thread starter iHeartDisneylandCats
- Start date
__r.jr
Well-Known Member
When your shift ends a 7 but have to bowl a game at Spilltsville at 7:01.
Last edited:
Ismael Flores
Well-Known Member
went to Knotts Berry Farm on Saturday for the Boysenberry festival. By the way I love the huge portions that Knotts gives for the price of the tasting card. Disney should learn from that.
So I lined up for the Boysenberry pork ribs and then walked over to one of their tables that they had set up nearby.
This man looked over and asked me how I was and then asked where I was from. The conversation quickly turned to Disneyland resort and how much fun they had after spending two days there and where heading back on Sunday after doing Knotts Saturday.
Surprisingly they mentioned Pixar Pier. This family which included a man, his wife, his two children as well as his wives parents had already decided that if they had known the Pixar Pier was in construction they would have waited and pushed back their trip till November. They were actually really excited about seeing the artwork on the walls and thought it was going to be a really fun place and thought it was a better change then what was there 3 years ago when they last came.
This family of 6 had already made their minds on coming back during the Thanksgiving Holiday and the father was with his son were coming back next Summer because they were huge Star Wars fans.
When you have a family from Vancouver that is willing to spend that kind of money to come because they got excited about some artwork and a place fans are angry about then I think it is safe that Disney somehow knows what it is doing.
I think that many of us under estimate the impact that some of these changes make for out of town guests that don't see the parks the way we do.
Of course I couldn't help it and tell them that Anaheim might also get a Marvel land in three to four years. The man wife was fast in saying, well kids guess we know where we will be at in a few years again
Last edited:
Ismael Flores
Well-Known Member
yeah I was excited to see the tubes loose their ugly blue color but didn't realize they had switch the colors and decided to paint the wheel that ugly blue color
Disney Irish
Premium Member
^^^This^^^
For all the discussion back and forth on the merits of the project (or for some the lack there of), its the public that is really going to decide if its a success or not. If it has this impact already without it being completed, the impact of changing a families plans for vacation to come back, I would say that it would likely be a success.
Ismael Flores
Well-Known Member
from their enthusiasm of seeing the artwork it sounded like they know exactly what they are coming back for. we talked about it being mostly a retheme and they were actually excited about the changes of the coaster.
I think that there are people for everything, how many times do we see the crowds increase for simple overlays like
the nightmare before Christmas overlay and the Space Galaxy/space mountain changes. Even the ever growing amount of guests that show up just to see Christmas and Halloween décor.
I think Disney has found that along with major expansions minor changes do attract vacationers along with the hordes of annual passholders
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Agreed, everyone has different preferences. For some it might be the worst thing to come out of Disney, but for others it might be the best thing, and still for some they might be indifferent to it. With attendance still on the rise overall Disney does appear to have the pulse of their guests.
Thank you for sharing your experience on this.
TROR
Well-Known Member
They can know every in and out about it. They're still suckers.
__r.jr
Well-Known Member
I agree. They do know what they're doing; the public will eat it right up. Why? Because all this is is overlaying established intellectual properties over already popular attractions and establishments. This is exactly the formula of what Mission: Breakout! is only on a more expansive level.
However in the long-term, one can't help but denote that these decisions, these directions will ultimately tarnish and weaken the Disney theme park division. Given the direction all these parks are heading it's clear that theme is considered to be irrelevant or an afterthought. Some may argue "the general public doesn't care about theme." The stance holds no grounds when the topic is about theme parks. The public may not actively care about theme, but they still notice when something isn't up to standard. After all that is why California Adventure version 1 didn't work to begin with.
The point is these parks were not designed to be merely dumping grounds for IPs that can be interchanged on the whim.
How will Arendelle next to Galaxy's Edge in Walt Disney Studios help support any underlying theme? How does Pixar Pier next to Cars Land support a coherent theme for California Adventure?
Areas like Toy Story Land or Pixar Pier are just more examples of Disney abandoning the concept of themed entertainment for just creating decoration. Even the existence of just one such place diminishes the Disney "brand" substantially and makes it even harder for the public to understand the purpose/specialness of a "theme park" as opposed to an amusement park.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
These are great point, and time will tell if you are correct that it will "tarnish and weaken the Disney theme park division". But this brings up various questions.
Does a park who's overarching theme was one thing when it opened need to stay that same overarching theme forever? Or can it not change to something else?
Does a park even need an overarching theme in 2018? Or can it not be a collection of various themed areas?
Do the same rules that were written in 1955 still apply in 2018? Or can Disney, who wrote the rules to begin with, not change them to meet the changing times?
Isn't it up to the public, and ultimately individual families, to determine what is or isn't special about a Disney themed experience? If those themed experiences are Toy Story Land or Pixar Pier and a family finds it special why is that any less valid?
nevol
Well-Known Member
Pixar Pier hasn't opened yet. It very well could not be worth the aggravation for them.
__r.jr
Well-Known Member
If it works why not? The original Magic Kingdom's theme hadn't changed or been drastically altered in its first 50 years. Which connects to your next question...
It can if it is poorly received, executed or maintained then yes it may change i.e. California Adventure 1.0, EPCOT Center, MGM Studios/Hollywood Studios, Walt Disney Studios.
It does because that's what made Disney Disney. They pioneered the term "theme park." It's been one of their thriving divisions. It's what sets them apart in the industry and also garners praise as the best.
It cannot because that isn't what brought Disney the recognition, acclaim and reputation is has to this day. Without a theme to connect, the park become nothing more than a collection of enriched attractions and environments that have nothing to do with with one another other than to present cinematic worlds into reality. Doesn't that sound like a certain park just up north in Hollywood?
Trick question. Yes because Disney pioneered in creating settings that not only could hold residence for their films, shows and characters but expand upon them in means of genres that could hold more than established media aforementioned. At the same time no, because compare (in its inception) Disneyland in Anaheim to Disneyland Paris. Look how much has been learned about themed design over the decades because the park in France is considered to be the best Magic Kingdom styled park ever conceived in terms of thematic cohesion and execution.
Why change that of which they've become so revered for? Why, because suddenly Disney thinks the general public is incapable of having a connection to something without an established IP attached to it?
It is up to the public and it will be the public that will deliver the final verdict however if Disney had stuck to its founding principles and highly enriched experience gained to begin with we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Of course not. Contrary to popular belief, many if not most are not against Disney leveraging IPs in their parks. IPs are part of the DNA that make up the parks. However it's just the manner in which they choose to do it that tends to be the problem. Everything should strive to deliver a quality product with consistent design ethos. Regardless if it's a new build, remodel or overlay.
In fact let me guide you to, another, great article by Blooloop.com that could perhaps better explain what I'm attempting to convey:
Disneyland and Universal Studios: genres or single IPs, forest or trees?
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Again great points, however I counter with this. You bring up the castle parks, isn't that really just a collection of themed areas with no real overarching theme? Now some, and I'll venture to guess you will be in this group, will say that its Walt that is the overarching theme. However I say that is not so, it was Walt who brought different themes into one location yes, but he didn't really tie them all together to be one larger cohesive theme. Its different areas of the park that guests can move around that have no theme that ties one to another. Or to say it a different way, the only overarching theme is imagination. Which can be said about any Disney park no matter the theme. Its the imagination that allows us the guest to disconnect from reality and believe we are on an adventure in the jungle, or flying in a pirate ship around London and into Neverland, or now walking into a land filled with your favorite characters from Pixar or soon to be Marvel. But there is no overarching theme that says what I just experienced while riding Jungle Cruise is somehow tied to me riding a flying pirate ship over the streets of London other than imagination.
All Disney parks are really is just an extension of our childhood imagination. There is no overarching theme needed more than just that. Now that is not to say that you can't have parks with different focuses. For example animals or technology with Animal Kingdom and Epcot respectively. However the idea that a park based on California located in California was a good focus for a park was flawed to begin with. And the fact that Disney changed directions is pretty clear they have decided it was a focus of the park that couldn't be maintained. So the focus of DCA will now be similar to Hollywood Studios, with the focus on the imagination of bringing characters and their worlds to life.
I will agree that its the execution of the themed experiences that set Disney apart from the competition. But it is ultimately the public that will determine if the execution is a success or not.
Nice essay, but DCA like Epcot was meant to be a departure from Disneyland or MK. It wasn’t supposed to have Disney characters, which was why they weren’t there to begin with. The theming was California generic. That this should be saved based on an already bad design decision is awfully sad.
__r.jr
Well-Known Member
Disneyland does have an overarching theme. It's cultural genres of Americana (by fascination and the mindset of the time). Through means of the original four carnal realms that subsequently would be extended and expanded through sub-lands i.e. New Orleans Square (19th century Gay Paree port city) being an extension Frontierland (19th century American Old West) as Bear/Critter Country (formally an extension of Frontierland themed to the Pacific Northwest [central bear capital] to later be re-themed as an antebellum wilderness when Splash Mountain opened to coincide with the Dixieland inspired Country Bears Jamboree) is an extension of New Orleans Square. The point, everything is tied together. Sometimes broadly while most times seamlessly.
Each park has an over arching theme though. Disney has gone through the painstaking process of giving each of them a mission statement and a concrete identity to evoke and reaffirm it. That's why you don't see Disney building single park destinations and filling them with every single thing imaginable. They are separated for pacing, to serve independent conceptualized interests and ideals and, of course. to encourage the public to further extend their time on property.
In regards to California Adventure, yes its initial execution was flawed but the concept itself was not. That's why Disney decided 11 yeas ago to model it after Disneyland. To make it reverent and timeless. To recreate idealized places and time periods that people desired to see i.e. 1920's Los Angeles, 1960's national state parks, 1920's seaside pier.
Indeed.
__r.jr
Well-Known Member
Yet EPCOT Center was deemed a success despite not having established Disney characters because it made up for it by containing innovative, crucially produced attractions and environments based on the park's core values and ideologies. (I'm sure @marni1971 could explain further on this with better detail.)
In regards to California Adventure circa 2001, non-existent characters was not the only primary complaint why the park suffered.
A California themed park it its inception failed because of its execution not because of its concept.
And please I don't mean to repeat myself (as many have already endured me doing so) but I just want to emphasize the point...
Disney does best when they create places for their guests to step into reverent, historical, cinematic worlds put through a filter of romance and idealization. 2001's California Adventure did precisely the opposite. It recreated modern California: here, now, today. The park reeked of its 1990's conception and was starved of funds to such an extent that its interpretation of California read as a spoof; cheap; a joke.
Instead of exploring the reverent history of their storied state in the same vein as Disneyland did for Americana, California Adventure 1.0 made a mockery of it. Modern music, comic-book architecture, puns left and right.
Then Creative Lead Imagineer Barry Braverman might have put it best:
“There’s a kind of brash California attitude that we wanted to capture.
Much more pop culture and MTV with a little tongue-in-cheek thrown in.”
Of course Disney’s California Adventure needed new rides. It needed well-themed rides and family rides and rides for kids. It needed shows. It needed more Disney characters. But even if Disney only invested heavily in adding those new experiences to the park, it would never be enough. It would be like putting band-aids on a broken bone.
The problem with Disney’s California Adventure was foundational. It was in its identity. The park was too modern. It tried too hard to be “hip” and “edgy” and “irreverent.” It reached too far to be “MTV” and “young.” People didn’t want a Disney park modeled after a Six Flags. They didn’t want modern music and rock concerts and puns and irreverent mockery of California.
They wanted a park modeled after Disneyland: reverent, thoughtful, historic, idealized recreations of places and time frames far gone.
They were able to do it successfully before in Florida a la Sunset Boulevard. They could have... would have done it in California Adventure if not better, at the least on the same caliber.
Epcot’s original attractions are whittled down to just a few. Attendance is flat for years. The transition to characters started with Nemo in Living Seas. It will continue with the rumored makeover to Marine Life Institute. Norway’s Maelstrom switchover to Frozen continues that trend with the Guardians replacement of Universe of Energy. Sadly, Future World’s generic corporate business park look isn’t a theme, but you can continue to think so. Those are much drastic changes compared with DCA’s change of Pixar Pier. Yet DCA has changed a lot.
Pixar Pier coincides with DHS’ Toy Story Land. Sunset Boulevard is a mere one street and they just added Grand Avenue. We’re getting our own version of the Grand Avenue pub and DCA had Buena Vista Street for many years. So what else do you want that DHS is getting?
These all go hand in hand from the exact same company. There’s no new angle here and you’re re-summarized what I already know. It doesn’t add anything to the discussion because this is a disagreement. Pixar Pier works in this corner of the park.
“But even if Disney only invested heavily in adding those new experiences to the park, it would never be enough. It would be like putting band-aids on a broken bone.”
Not true if you include Cars Land that manages to incorporate California into a Disney IP and Characters, but this is an once in a lifetime change. Pixar Pier is not what you want, but this is exactly what the company and the guests want.
Last edited:
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Except not only did you forget one land, it was a land not based on Americana and was there from opening day, Fantasy Land. It is a land based on European tails.
Additionally the four original realms, Fantasy Land, Frontier Land, Adventure Land, and Tomorrow Land can be said to be straight from a child's imagination. Playing knights and princess, playing cowboy and indians, going on a jungle adventure, playing as an astronaut. The extension of NOS and Critter Country only expanded upon this further, with playing pirates, telling ghost stories, and playing with talking animals.
Except as has been pointed out not only by you but others, Disney is going away from those overarching themes. This indicates that, as I have stated, an overarching theme is not really needed at this point for the parks. And that Disney has decided, for good or bad, to rewrite the rules for themed entertainment.
It execution was flawed because it lacked what guests felt was Disney about its parks, the characters. However that doesn't mean the concept wasn't flawed as well. The move away from that should be taken as the indication that Disney agrees.
Disneylover152
Well-Known Member
And Galaxy's Edge fits because children today imagine themselves fighting with Darth Vador or flying the Millenium Falcon, or getting caught in a Star Wars battle with Storm Troopers.