News Paradise Pier Becoming Pixar Pier

Curious Constance

Curious Constance

Well-Known Member
nevol said:
There are still too many industrial elements and spots that aren't themed architecturally or through landscaping etc. And while goofy sky school might provide cute kinetics to paradise garden grill, it is nothing that should be preserved. DCA has a few strong E-tickets that are worth seeing but nothing down-ticket, historically significant, or with any soul. Disneyland has beautiful places to eat and drink, novelty items often, pretty places to sit, vehicles on main street and along the river that really make it special. There is nothing like that at dca. Everything is either an E ticket or a corny IP flat ride. I think something like the golden zephyr is actually really beautiful, but what is missing are the tiki rooms, canal boats, show-driven C, D, and E-tickets rather than just thrill ones. I think maybe it opened with more, but all the eggs went in the 3d show basket and when those grew tired we just got stuck with a bunch of empty theaters. Not worth rehashing the old GOTG discussion; clearly something is coming next to make it make sense, but the loss of placemaking it reciprocated to its tragic land, now coupled with the removal of the overhead wires for the trolley through hollywoodland and Buena vista street, means less texture and richness in those places (for now). Enhancements are obviously necessary but things like the trolley wires disappearing feels like a step backward. Pixar Pier could be a step forward definitely, but a lot of confusion and uncertainty regarding the direction of the park pertains to how much is unknown, and again, these continued replacements,reskins, and removals, rather than additions. Obviously marvel is on the way and probably at least one new dark ride for the pier. Maybe everything will be incredible, in which case the mishandling of these announcements and the PR decisionmaking before d23 will be the things deserving of some criticism.

I am actually starting to speculate that Pixar FEST (not pier) is an excuse to trojan horse into disneyland a ton of storytelling experiments ahead of the opening of star wars land. They've done a few small things with groups of a couple dozen, and it would be really risky business for them to open this highly interactive and responsive land, with costumed characters and soft robots interacting with guests, without first working out the kinks and trying to scale these techniques upwards toward the massive crowds that will be descending in 2019. So if I'm correct in that prediction, that all this Pixar stuff (at disneyland at least) is a way of practicing for star wars land, then I can more than life with it. That has nothing to do, however, with the Pier, though if there is to be a collection of Pixar neighborhoods, maybe we can expect some next-gen toontown meet n greet equivalents for pixar IP.
Click to expand...
Good post, although I think we've confirmed that the wires are staying, right? They're just replacing the Frozen float?
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
The_Bellringer said:
I've never liked Paradise Pier. It's exactly what Walt didn't want in a theme park: generic, off the shelf rides that looked like every other amusement park. Baffling that Eisner thought this was a good idea. I mean come on!

I think Pixar Pier might at least make it a bit more differentiated than say, the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk. The Victorian theming never really did it for me, and it still looks very similar to opening day PP.
Click to expand...
What makes Six Flags different? The character decorations. Making Paradise Pier less of a themed experience will never make it more, much less more “themed.”
 
nevol

nevol

Well-Known Member
Disney's differentiating factor is that they can/and have, created compelling beautiful environments, places, spaces that people want to spend time in. New Orleans Square is not littered with puns and gift shops with giant cutouts of characters adorning the entrances. They create space first, and the character stuff is so lightly used that it isn't aggressive. It is there for the people who want it. Or dark ride experiences and character experiences are hidden in show buildings. You are correct.

Six Flags gives no consideration to land design once their parks are in operation. At the park I grew up near in Chicago, each new attraction actually had a detrimental effect on the park; they just added one of those ridiculous "4D" green lantern coasters (jk; the Joker, but if you are familiar with the Green Lantern at magic mountain, its a similar ride system and footprint) and cut across a. a stream that used to be crossed over via a covered bridge that divided one land from another (mardi gras/orleans place from some new england thing that they'd already littered with DC) and b. green space that extruded into a walkway parallel the bridge. It used to be that as you approached the bridge, a vast park plaza with two midways on either side, sprawing 150-200 feet wide that would enclose a park/gazebo and midway games with retail and dining locations would then choke up again to enclose that space into a recognizable park, and give a 20 foot wide or so path a 50 feet or so approach to the bridge where you'd enter the next land. Now, that whole thing is screwed up and without the planters, and instead a giant concrete block on which this green lantern coaster was built, the two lands fade together and the sprawling, hot, unshaded midway that once surrounded a gazebo never ends and just fades straight into the next land. It isn't abysmal, but confusing, and the plaza/approach to the original batman: the ride (the world's first inverted coaster that was custom-built for this chicago park location) is messed with now. Similarly the dips below grade in all the cloned versions (think the cement cutouts here in california in what is otherwise a bed of rocks) go toward those streams and around weeping willow trees. Now, there are still some/most, but they did cut through much of that. Out front, they put a disgusting red and white striped gazebo that doesn't fit the new england or gotham architectural styles. So now, there is a giant green and purple coaster, 10 feet from a red and white striped gazebo, its nauseating.

Disney has the ability to spend money on land design. That's what makes Disney feel like "disney." Without that, you can have all the characters you want, but it'll still feel like a cash grab. I'm not sure how wdi works in-house, or how parks are managed. Is there institutional knowledge? is there a team that has been working on and managing each park for a decade that knows how all the elements and lands speak to and compliment one another and create a cumulative effect of a park experience? Because with more and more project-hire contractors, design teams thrown together with no previous experience with said parks, hired by P+R and WDI to deliver something fast, there are no doubt going to be decisions that are made that don't fully make sense on both sides of that equation. I think the advent of Pixar Pier is happening because pixar is leaving the rest of the park; that shows some strategic, holistic thinking actually. But the focus in all of these cases, marvel included/especially, should be on creating compelling convincing WORLDS to explore. If they just throw a spiderman dark ride show building where a bugs land is and throw an avengers show building next to guardians and none of these things do anything to speak to one another or create a believable cityscape, then it doesn't matter how much money goes into the shows/rides, the place will be a complete dud. You won't see people hanging out there, sitting on a bench, taking pictures of the environments, etc. Think again about New Orleans Square/ROA or adventureland (since sadly, TL is a mess of an example despite having some popular rides, and fantasyland has flat rides but it is diegetically appropriate since the ride aesthetic is a contributing component to "fantasy). Splash mountain, Haunted Mansion, Pirates of the Caribbean, Big Thunder Mountain, all in the round, soon to be joined by two star wars E-tickets on the other side. Tons of foliage and the show buildings are either seamless extensions of the landscape or of the city/townscape (Pirates and Mansion). You don't just stand there in the hot sun and think, okay what do you want to go on now? This ride or that ride? how long are their waits? Well I'm already melting I can't imagine standing in a ride line, etc. etc. It is made so easy, comfortable by comparison. The beauty of the landscape, whether its the shaded bamboo queue at Indy or the plaza in front of mansion, and how those aesthetics or environmental conditions appeal to you and what you desire in any given moment (more sun, more shade, indoor, outdoor, old west, french quarter) ensure that even the queue and the surrounding environment can be a contributing factor in determining where it is you want to be and what rides to go on.
 
Last edited:
Phroobar

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
nevol said:
Disney's differentiating factor is that they can/and have, created compelling beautiful environments, places, spaces that people want to spend time in. New Orleans Square is not littered with puns and gift shops with giant cutouts of characters adorning the entrances. They create space first, and the character stuff is so lightly used that it isn't aggressive. It is there for the people who want it. Or dark ride experiences and character experiences are hidden in show buildings. You are correct.

Six Flags gives no consideration to land design once their parks are in operation. At the park I grew up near in Chicago, each new attraction actually had a detrimental effect on the park; they just added one of those ridiculous "4D" green lantern coasters (jk; the Joker, but if you are familiar with the Green Lantern at magic mountain, its a similar ride system and footprint) and cut across a. a stream that used to be crossed over via a covered bridge that divided one land from another (mardi gras/orleans place from some new england thing that they'd already littered with DC) and b. green space that extruded into a walkway parallel the bridge. It used to be that as you approached the bridge, a vast park plaza with two midways on either side, sprawing 150-200 feet wide that would enclose a park/gazebo and midway games with retail and dining locations would then choke up again to enclose that space into a recognizable park, and give a 20 foot wide or so path a 50 feet or so approach to the bridge where you'd enter the next land. Now, that whole thing is screwed up and without the planters, and instead a giant concrete block on which this green lantern coaster was built, the two lands fade together and the sprawling, hot, unshaded midway that once surrounded a gazebo never ends and just fades straight into the next land. It isn't abysmal, but confusing, and the plaza/approach to the original batman: the ride (the world's first inverted coaster that was custom-built for this chicago park location) is messed with now. Similarly the dips below grade in all the cloned versions (think the cement cutouts here in california in what is otherwise a bed of rocks) go toward those streams and around weeping willow trees. Now, there are still some/most, but they did cut through much of that. Out front, they put a disgusting red and white striped gazebo that doesn't fit the new england or gotham architectural styles. So now, there is a giant green and purple coaster, 10 feet from a red and white striped gazebo, its nauseating.

Disney has the ability to spend money on land design. That's what makes Disney feel like "disney." Without that, you can have all the characters you want, but it'll still feel like a cash grab. I'm not sure how wdi works in-house, or how parks are managed. Is there institutional knowledge? is there a team that has been working on and managing each park for a decade that knows how all the elements and lands speak to and compliment one another and create a cumulative effect of a park experience? Because with more and more project-hire contractors, design teams thrown together with no previous experience with said parks, hired by P+R and WDI to deliver something fast, there are no doubt going to be decisions that are made that don't fully make sense on both sides of that equation. I think the advent of Pixar Pier is happening because pixar is leaving the rest of the park; that shows some strategic, holistic thinking actually. But the focus in all of these cases, marvel included/especially, should be on creating compelling convincing WORLDS to explore. If they just throw a spiderman dark ride show building where a bugs land is and throw an avengers show building next to guardians and none of these things do anything to speak to one another or create a believable cityscape, then it doesn't matter how much money goes into the shows/rides, the place will be a complete dud. You won't see people hanging out there, sitting on a bench, taking pictures of the environments, etc. Think again about New Orleans Square/ROA or adventureland (since sadly, TL is a mess of an example despite having some popular rides, and fantasyland has flat rides but it is diegetically appropriate since the ride aesthetic is a contributing component to "fantasy). Splash mountain, Haunted Mansion, Pirates of the Caribbean, Big Thunder Mountain, all in the round, soon to be joined by two star wars E-tickets on the other side. Tons of foliage and the show buildings are either seamless extensions of the landscape or of the city/townscape (Pirates and Mansion). You don't just stand there in the hot sun and think, okay what do you want to go on now? This ride or that ride? how long are their waits? Well I'm already melting I can't imagine standing in a ride line, etc. etc. It is made so easy, comfortable by comparison. The beauty of the landscape, whether its the shaded bamboo queue at Indy or the plaza in front of mansion, and how those aesthetics or environmental conditions appeal to you and what you desire in any given moment (more sun, more shade, indoor, outdoor, old west, french quarter) ensure that even the queue and the surrounding environment can be a contributing factor in determining where it is you want to be and what rides to go on.
Click to expand...

Great post. I can definitely see how they screwed up DCA 1.0 and now Pixar Pier with this logic. I think Magic Mountain does a better job at keeping with the thin themes they do have for a land like Rapid Camp Crossing, DC Universe, Bugs Bunny World and the Screampunk District. However they did screw up by removing a theme appropriate log ride with a temporary looking rock concert in their forest area and having the coaster pop over Samurai Summit just so they could use the defunked monorail tunnel.
 
TP2000

TP2000

Well-Known Member
The_Bellringer said:
Both the "Victorian" theming and the Pixar Pier ideas are both band aids for the weakest land at DLR. I just prefer the Pixar theming.
Click to expand...

That's about where I'm at with this too.

The shock has worn off now, so I say bring on Pixar Pier since it will probably help fix up California Screamin' and remove the last bits of Paul Pressler's stucco and cement.
 
Antaundra

Antaundra

Well-Known Member
Paradise Pier needs to be fixed. There was a time when Disney would have gotten corporate sponsers to pay for the project. Then we would be stuck with brand names plastered all over everything. A Bing Bong candy store is preferable to an M&M store. I'd rather Disney promote their own properties rather than other companies brands.
 
TP2000

TP2000

Well-Known Member
Antaundra said:
Paradise Pier needs to be fixed. There was a time when Disney would have gotten corporate sponsers to pay for the project. Then we would be stuck with brand names plastered all over everything. A Bing Bong candy store is preferable to an M&M store. I'd rather Disney promote their own properties rather than other companies brands.
Click to expand...

What a great point!
 

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

Back
Top Bottom