• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Rumor Pixar's Coco coming to the Mexico Pavilion

dodolitsky

Well-Known Member
Tron is kinda like the princess bride or dirty dancing...it just won't die. How else would a box office flop get a sequel 30 years later?

And ratatouille is a clone...i think the original ride has to be assessed for the "why"? Not the clone.
Your whole case of being able to predict what Disney will or won't do is based on the idea that their behavior strictly follows certain patterns, yet now you are attributing personalized after-the-fact justifications to some of their previous decisions. Do you not see how this undermines your entire point?

I agree that Disney's behavior often conforms to certain guidelines, but that doesn't mean there is a magic deterministic formula that can be applied to tell you with certainty whether a given idea will be implemented. It's easy to look back at each decision Disney has made and then rationalize it, as hindsight is always 20/20. That doesn't make you qualified to say what they will do in the future. In just about every case, there will be pros and cons to any potential project - it's up to the decision makers at Disney what to make of them. If you are not one of them and you don't have information stemming from one of them, you don't know what will be. You are welcome to speculate, but don't pretend to know - the people on these forums will smell that from a mile away
 

Timothy_Q

Well-Known Member
Tron is kinda like the princess bride or dirty dancing...it just won't die. How else would a box office flop get a sequel 30 years later?

And ratatouille is a clone...i think the original ride has to be assessed for the "why"? Not the clone.
And Coco is the last minute surprise that both audiences and critics love and is breaking box office records in the international markets it has already opened in
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
I agree that Disney's behavior often conforms to certain guidelines, but that doesn't mean there is a magic deterministic formula that can be applied to tell you with certainty whether a given idea will be implemented. It's easy to look back at each decision Disney has made and then rationalize it, as hindsight is always 20/20. That doesn't make you qualified to say what they will do in the future. In just about every case, there will be pros and cons to any potential project - it's up to the decision makers at Disney what to make of them. If you are not one of them and you don't have information stemming from one of them, you don't know what will be. You are welcome to speculate, but don't pretend to know - the people on these forums will smell that from a mile away

That is rarely ever disproven...but I'll try not to highlight that and watch from the cheap seats...however.

Boy...they are in short supply. Nobody here reaches that standard...it seems. Youre talking about 3 or so people that actually have power.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
And Coco is the last minute surprise that both audiences and critics love and is breaking box office records in the international markets it has already opened in

I would submit that it needs legs to qualify for Park representation...that's were frozen was an outlier.

Coco is great from what I've heard...haven't seen it. If it resonates longterm...you'd see more park investment. Just a common sense approach.
 

dodolitsky

Well-Known Member
That is rarely ever disproven...but I'll try not to highlight that and watch from the cheap seats...however.

Boy...they are in short supply. Nobody here reaches that standard...it seems. Youre talking about 3 or so people that actually have power.
I'll respond to your second point first, as it's more straight-forward: As I specified, I am not only referring to the people who have the power to make the decisions, but rather, anybody who has learned of those decisions, even if they had zero control over the decision itself. Which brings me to your first point...

How the powers-that-be at Disney decide whether to approve a project will always boil down to the same single question: "Is the investment worth it?" (we know "worth it" basically always means financially in practice, but it could theoretically be any measurement of utility). Any other characteristic of the proposal that is discussed (e.g. for an attraction: which IP it's based on (if any), whether it's a clone, how much it would cost, etc.) is only in the context of trying to answer that one question. In the end of the day, there are way too many inputs for us to be able to determine the output, and even if you believe you have used previous examples to reverse-engineer that formula, it can change at any point in time, due to a myriad of potential causes (e.g. a change in personnel, new research, etc.).

It is always fair to state your case as to whether a given proposal is good or whether it is surprising, as those are matters of opinion. What is not a matter of opinion is whether the proposal will go through. If a decision hasn't been made yet or if you don't have the luxury of knowing the decision, speculation is fair and natural. However, when the facts have been presented to you, speculation no longer makes sense. If you choose to ignore the facts that are shared by insiders on these forums, that is your right. However, it wouldn't make much sense for you to continue to make speculations on these forums regarding something that everybody else on here has already accepted as fact. True debate can only occur when you are dealing with a matter of opinion. I will not continue to call you out on this, as I've made my point, but don't be surprised if you continue to receive negative responses on your posts from others.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
I'll respond to your second point first, as it's more straight-forward: As I specified, I am not only referring to the people who have the power to make the decisions, but rather, anybody who has learned of those decisions, even if they had zero control over the decision itself. Which brings me to your first point...

How the powers-that-be at Disney decide whether to approve a project will always boil down to the same single question: "Is the investment worth it?" (we know "worth it" basically always means financially in practice, but it could theoretically be any measurement of utility). Any other characteristic of the proposal that is discussed (e.g. for an attraction: which IP it's based on (if any), whether it's a clone, how much it would cost, etc.) is only in the context of trying to answer that one question. In the end of the day, there are way too many inputs for us to be able to determine the output, and even if you believe you have used previous examples to reverse-engineer that formula, it can change at any point in time, due to a myriad of potential causes (e.g. a change in personnel, new research, etc.).

It is always fair to state your case as to whether a given proposal is good or whether it is surprising, as those are matters of opinion. What is not a matter of opinion is whether the proposal will go through. If a decision hasn't been made yet or if you don't have the luxury of knowing the decision, speculation is fair and natural. However, when the facts have been presented to you, speculation no longer makes sense. If you choose to ignore the facts that are shared by insiders on these forums, that is your right. However, it wouldn't make much sense for you to continue to make speculations on these forums regarding something that everybody else on here has already accepted as fact. True debate can only occur when you are dealing with a matter of opinion. I will not continue to call you out on this, as I've made my point, but don't be surprised if you continue to receive negative responses on your posts from others.

I was with you until the bolded part...

What is an "insider determined fact"? That ultimately is still a conjecture/rumor/prediction. Until announcement.

What this started with was "green lit U.K. Attraction"...which got reversed in hours flat. This is what I mean by "screamcape ish". On December 6...the story is a "fact" or greenlit. But on January 6, it could be "plans change" or "financial decision due to x"...plausibly deniability runs wild. Does that make the "insider fact" unfactly?

Only the CEO and his accountants decide...because they have to justify it to the shareholders. How much power does the designer have?...and that's what seems to be alluded to here.

We arent gonna cross the picket line on this...that's ok. There's a place in this debate for both healthy skepticism AND Optimism.

But you can't use "plans change" on believing predictions and then critique the fallacies of my using historical trend/precedent. Either both are ok or both get patronized...they're related...like first cousins.

I'll watch and take it in...as I have stated bout 20 times. I'm not gonna spend time shouting down anyone or trying to play dad: I've been there and it's pointless. But I'm not 4 and haven't just recently discovered the American amusement park. Let's reciprocate...as I'm trying to.
 

Sir_Cliff

Well-Known Member
But you can't use "plans change" on believing predictions and then critique the fallacies of my using historical trend/precedent. Either both are ok or both get patronized...they're related...like first cousins.
I think the point is that other posters here aren't just predicting based on what they see as common sense.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
I think the point is that other posters here aren't just predicting based on what they see as common sense.

Oh I fully concede that...

My contention on this...always...is that you need both. Or predicting the actions with certainty of a stock behemoth is perilous.

The "sniff test". Does coco overlay pass that today? It's debatable.
 

marni1971

WDW History nut
Premium Member
I'm sure it's easy to google...but I couldn't remember if they did the run up months in advance or a full year in advance.
Neither. RoE premiered as a soft opening a week before the official October 1 opening. Amazingly the lagoon was only dark for one night for the changeover from 25B. Technically this was 25C but more commonly was known as B or I98.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Neither. RoE premiered as a soft opening a week before the official October 1 opening. Amazingly the lagoon was only dark for one night for the changeover from 25B. Technically this was 25C but more commonly was known as B or I98.

I meant "run up" to eisnerfest 2000. I was thinking it was all 99...but it was 2000 into 2001. The millennium actually started 1/1/2001.

So it started 9/23/99...I think I saw it on 10/2...that would be a 3 month runup before "celebrating the future hand in hand"

Anyway...it's really old at this point
 

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

Top Bottom