-
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
bluerhythym
Well-Known Member
It's worth it to Disney because the movie's made half a billion dollars. They're going to take the "parks as a giant billboard for the movies" concept and run. It worked for Mission Breakout, and then they cut corners for Incredicoaster and it still worked.
Marketing at the cost of park quality, whether it's worth it from a park guest's perspective is irrelevant.
shortstop
Well-Known Member
There’s hardly any correlation between the two, let alone causation. I can’t imagine either of the lame DCA overlays had a significant impact on their film’s box office numbers. You think Incredibles 2 would’ve made any less money if they hadn’t done Pixar Pier?
Daveeeeed
Well-Known Member
I disagree with people saying that DCA isn’t good. Personally, I found it to be one of the most enjoyable and beautiful parks I have ever been to. You see the best of California (it keeps to the theme well): The deserts/mountains, the redwoods, and the ocean...a pier. Originally Paradise Pier was done on the cheap (especially up close with the details), but Paradise Pier in its final days was standing across the water visually stunning. The combination of the Californian screamin’ & Toy Story made it have a strong ride line-up as well.
There’s something magical about being at the end of Buenavista Street seeing a forrest, mountains, and a pier, and it just feels so right.
The main gripe I’ve had with it was Hollywoodland which was not good at all, but even then, TOT, and while unfortunately not involving California, Mission: Breakout were/are fantastic attractions. The park just felt satisfying. Some detail/upgrades to aesthetics would be great at Paradise Pier (especially on the right side), but Pixar Pier really only made it worse. It’s a real shame from a park standpoint, and even budgetary. Imagine if whatever the budget was was used to fix the aesthetics of the entire park and truly make it flawless. Instead it truly was just burned and made an iconic land less relevant and horrid from a storytelling standpoint. DCA 2.0 fixed the park so well IMO. Even with the misfire of Pixar Pier I think it’s still an awesome park.
There’s something magical about being at the end of Buenavista Street seeing a forrest, mountains, and a pier, and it just feels so right.
The main gripe I’ve had with it was Hollywoodland which was not good at all, but even then, TOT, and while unfortunately not involving California, Mission: Breakout were/are fantastic attractions. The park just felt satisfying. Some detail/upgrades to aesthetics would be great at Paradise Pier (especially on the right side), but Pixar Pier really only made it worse. It’s a real shame from a park standpoint, and even budgetary. Imagine if whatever the budget was was used to fix the aesthetics of the entire park and truly make it flawless. Instead it truly was just burned and made an iconic land less relevant and horrid from a storytelling standpoint. DCA 2.0 fixed the park so well IMO. Even with the misfire of Pixar Pier I think it’s still an awesome park.
FerretAfros
Well-Known Member
Something else to consider is the original cost of Paradise Pier, which was less than $100M in 2001 (for some reason $70M is sticking out in my mind, but I'm not sure if that's correct). That price tag included 8 rides (only 3 rides were located elsewhere in the park), retail, dining, and support facilities, all built from the ground up. Yes, they used off-the-shelf ride mechanisms. Yes, it was (mostly) ugly. But it was one of the most effective uses of a limited budget that Disney's ever done.
Its one saving grace was the constant hope that some day there would be a mythical project that would go back and fix the aesthetic issues. This was that chance. The budget was more than the original build and really only focused on aesthetics, creating a lot of potential to go back and create a unifying, compelling, and detailed atmosphere for the area. But instead of making real improvements, it mostly just swapped out one sub-par look for another. Too bad this one will likely be at least as permanent as the previous version.
In 2001, all of DCA was built for a little over $600M; the GOTG coaster currently under construction at Epcot (reusing a massive existing structure) is in that same ballpark. I'm not even mad about how WDI operates any more. I'm just disappointed. On so many levels.
Its one saving grace was the constant hope that some day there would be a mythical project that would go back and fix the aesthetic issues. This was that chance. The budget was more than the original build and really only focused on aesthetics, creating a lot of potential to go back and create a unifying, compelling, and detailed atmosphere for the area. But instead of making real improvements, it mostly just swapped out one sub-par look for another. Too bad this one will likely be at least as permanent as the previous version.
I don't know about Monsters specifically, but Pooh was $30M in 2003 in a building that required extensive infrastructure changes and an all-new ride system. At the time, it was considered a huge budget for a fairly modest attraction. Monsters opened a year later on an existing ride system, reusing most of the infrastructure and even a few pieces of scenery; I'd be surprised if it somehow cost more than Pooh.
In 2001, all of DCA was built for a little over $600M; the GOTG coaster currently under construction at Epcot (reusing a massive existing structure) is in that same ballpark. I'm not even mad about how WDI operates any more. I'm just disappointed. On so many levels.
bluerhythym
Well-Known Member
No I don't, but I don't think it matters. It's pretty clear that they're laying the groundwork for more of these overlays in the future. I'm not saying I want it to happen, I'm just saying its going to.
S Y N E R G Y
shortstop
Well-Known Member
There’s a lot of good in DCA (less so than in 2015, but alas) but IMO the park lacks heart and character. There are too many spaces that just feel dead - HWL, the area around Goofy’s, the pathway near the wine restaurant - and part of that is just a problem with the park’s layout and infrastructure.
shortstop
Well-Known Member
I’m not convinced it will continue to happen if Disney isn’t seeing them bring in the results they want/expect. I think it’s an unsustainable model in either case.
nevol
Well-Known Member
Apparently reusing existing infrastructure is more costly because they have to work around existing structures and be minimally invasive, causing no structural damage in the process.
TROR
Well-Known Member
If you didn't like Mission Breakout, would you still feel it's an awesome park? Because for me, Hollywood Land is now bad, Paradise Pier is now bad, and half of Grizzly Peak is now not as good as it once was. The only things I personally really enjoy at DCA are Radiator Springs Racers, the area surrounding Grizzly River Run, and Buena Vista Street. That's it, though.
I view DCA's roster this way. There are six E-Tickets: Tower of Terror, Soarin' Over California, California Screamin', Toy Story Midway Mania, Radiator Springs Racers, and Grizzly River Run. Now of these six, only two are Disney quality, those two being Tower of Terror and Radiator Springs Racers. The other four are all very basic (Screamin' is a bare bones coaster, Soarin' is a movie, GRR is a rapids ride, and TSMM is a video game) and removing them wouldn't do huge damage to the park so long as their replacement was ok. For example, while Soarin' Around the World isn't as good as Soarin' over California, it's not terrible. So long as Tower of Terror and Radiator Springs Racers exist, changing up Screamin', Soarin', TSMM, or GRR isn't going to be a big deal. Now Incredicoaster is terrible but if Tower of Terror was still around, it wouldn't be a big deal because you still have Tower of Terror and RSR plus the other three. But now you don't have Tower of Terror, just Radiator Springs Racers because Mission Breakout is also terrible. So now we have an inferior version of Soarin', an ugly overlay of Screamin', a bad replacement for Tower of Terror, two basic rides, and a really good attraction in Radiator Springs Racers. That's simply not enough to really hold the park for me.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
I agree with most everything here... with an asterisk for GRR and Soarin. They re not Disney quality rides in the typical sense yet I think they are Disney quality in other ways. GRR is the best themed river raft ride I’ve been on and Soarin (especially California) was really beautifully done. Ideally GRR would have a few AAs / indoor cave show scene and Soarin would have a better Q and themed load area. I think those changes would give them the “Disney touch.”
TROR
Well-Known Member
Yeah those things are really the difference for me. I will say I'd much prefer the original idea for Soarin', however, which was a Peter Pan style dark ride over the Golden State. Would be better than a movie.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
Never heard of this. That would have been awesome... in a different way. Not sure it could capture the spirit of Soarin over California unless they were gigantic show scenes in a much bigger show building.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
I’m still trying to understand how they haven’t built a new ride at DLR with a new and improved Peter Pan ride system. The ride system alone gives you a 90% chance at a hit. My pick would be Aladdin but Coco would would work too.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Am I the only one who think Grizzly Peak is in the wrong spot? You have this great mountain set piece and its hard to see from most places within or just outside the park. It might have been better where that big Sun fountain was facing the park entrance.
TROR
Well-Known Member
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
This is what I remember from all the commercials, thinking this is what the park looked like.
Then I saw amateur photos online and was like "oh...I guess not."
George Lucas on a Bench
Well-Known Member
It's like expecting E.T. and getting Mac and Me instead.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
Hahah wow. That’s a blast from the past. I loved renting that movie at this mom and pop movie rental shop when I was a kid. Return to Oz was my go to at the Wherehouse.