Popular Movies Don't Make Popular Attractions

[WondersOfLife]

So I always end up having to argue this with several people... And it just really shocks me on how people don't understand this! With examples and everything! It does not matter how popular a film, celebrity, or character is if the attraction that it stars in is completely worthless or not done AMAZINGLY well.

Stitch is the KING of this example! Stitch is very very popular among kids, tweens and teenage girls. However the attraction he stars in does not appeal to any age or anybody! The attraction receives overwhelmingly negative reviews and never ever ever has a wait time......... EVEN THOUGH the character from Lilo & Stitch is possibly in one of Disney's "top 10 popular characters" list.. Ellen hosts Ellen's Energy Adventure... However, since this attraction is in a horribly outdated state that is barely operable, it is by no means popular whatsoever.

Meanwhile over in Frontierland... There exists an attraction that is themed to a film that hardly ANYbody knows about. Splash Mountain's characters are all from the Disney film, Song of the South. Sure, us on the forums know of the film, but the average millions of theme park guests have never heard of the film or the characters... But it doesn't matter. Because the attraction is SO. WELL. DONE.

Another argument people may bring up is the fact that "Attractions based on films with low ratings won't draw in anybody" .... Which is also not true. If the attraction is done really well, then people will come to the attraction regardless. Transformers at Universal Studios is a good example of an attraction based on a film series with low ratings.

Attractions don't even have to be based on films that people remember anymore. Mr. Toad's Wild Ride over at Disneyland is still very popular. Tower of Terror is based on a TV show that hasn't aired since 1989 (excluding the 2nd revival in 02).

The most popular attractions in all of Disney World aren't even movie-based! Thunder Mountain, Space Mountain, Test Track, Soarin', Kilimanjaro Safaris, Spaceship Earth, The Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise...

Imagination is a great example as well... Not for how popular a non-movie based attraction can be done... But how Disney can screw it up and then blame it on the fact that "Oh, there aren't any Disney characters in that ride. No wonder it's not possible! We gotta shove Stitch in there!" Especially since downgrading it from its original version.

Avatarland can be HUGELY popular... If the quality of the land and attractions are done right. It won't matter whether or not people enjoy the films. It doesn't matter if you like Star Wars or not... If the land is done amazingly well, then you're going to enjoy that land and come back. I, myself, hate Harry Potter with a passion. HATE it. I hate films, I hate the books... But I. Freaking. Love. The rides and the lands at Universal Studios. It doesn't matter what my opinion is on the films they are based on... All that matters is the amount of quality that was put into the rides and lands.



So. The popularity of a film has nothing to do with the popularity of the attraction................Except for Frozen. That is the only film that contradicts my statement.... Which I am still trying to comprehend.. As are many other people in this world.

EDIT: So apparently my post is a little confusing by the title? Not sure how. Popular movies do have good attractions.. Like Toy Story Mania, Festival of the Lion King, Ect. They're good because they have very good quality... It does help to read the entire post instead of just the title or a section of the post.

 

[DisneyFans4Life]

You feel better now that you got that out?

 

[Cmdr_Crimson]

Stitch is the KING of this example! Stitch is very very popular among kids, tweens and teenage girls. However the attraction he stars in does not appeal to any age or anybody! The attraction receives overwhelmingly negative reviews and never ever ever has a wait time......... EVEN THOUGH the character from Lilo & Stitch is possibly in one of Disney's "top 10 popular characters" list.

Let's be greatful they didn't take the attempt to retheme Space Mountain to Stitch Mountain that was planned for DL's version..

 

[Schneewittchen]

You're right, good rides have nothing to do with a film or the lack thereof.

Did you ever watch The Haunted Mansion movie with Eddie Murphy? So disappointing. Basically, if you're going to take a popular attraction and make a movie a movie out of it, it must star Johnny Depp.

Imagine Johnny starring in Jungle Cruise: The Curse of the Angry Rhino. It'll be just like Apocalypse Now, only Gore Verbinski will direct, Jerry Bruckheimer will produce, it will gross $1B, it will be funny and the lines for the ride will be ridiculous. The ride will get a refurb too, that guy getting poked in the bum by the rhino will get a Jack Sparrow wig.

 

[Chef Mickey]

I consider them separate.

I was not a huge Avatar movie fan, but I think the land will be great if it's done right (as you said).

Did we REALLY think Cars was a "great" movie? No, but the attraction at DL is amazing, perhaps one of the best Disney ever Built.

Tower of Terror might be THE best attraction ever by Disney and I wasn't even around for that show.

You do a great job and everything else takes care of itself. Avatar was undoubtedly beautiful from a cinematic perspective, so they have a lot to work with environmentally and theming wise.

 

[WondersOfLife]

You feel better now that you got that out?

I do. c:

 

[WondersOfLife]

Let's be greatful they didn't take the attempt to retheme Space Mountain to Stitch Mountain that was planned for DL's version..

That... That actually looks really epic.. But I'm sure Disney would have screwed it up, though. No matter how awesome that concept art looks to me.

Edit: not saying I'd prefer it over the current space mountain, though. It just looks like the only somewhat-worthy stitch attraction.

 

[thomas998]

So I always end up having to argue this with several people... And it just really shocks me on how people don't understand this! With examples and everything! It does not matter how popular a film, celebrity, or character is if the attraction that it stars in is completely worthless or not done AMAZINGLY well.

Stitch is the KING of this example! Stitch is very very popular among kids, tweens and teenage girls. However the attraction he stars in does not appeal to any age or anybody! The attraction receives overwhelmingly negative reviews and never ever ever has a wait time......... EVEN THOUGH the character from Lilo & Stitch is possibly in one of Disney's "top 10 popular characters" list.. Ellen hosts Ellen's Energy Adventure... However, since this attraction is in a horribly outdated state that is barely operable, it is by no means popular whatsoever.

Meanwhile over in Frontierland... There exists an attraction that is themed to a film that hardly ANYbody knows about. Splash Mountain's characters are all from the Disney film, Song of the South. Sure, us on the forums know of the film, but the average millions of theme park guests have never heard of the film or the characters... But it doesn't matter. Because the attraction is SO. WELL. DONE.

Another argument people may bring up is the fact that "Attractions based on films with low ratings won't draw in anybody" .... Which is also not true. If the attraction is done really well, then people will come to the attraction regardless. Transformers at Universal Studios is a good example of an attraction based on a film series with low ratings.

Attractions don't even have to be based on films that people remember anymore. Mr. Toad's Wild Ride over at Disneyland is still very popular. Tower of Terror is based on a TV show that hasn't aired since 1989 (excluding the 2nd revival in 02).

The most popular attractions in all of Disney World aren't even movie-based! Thunder Mountain, Space Mountain, Test Track, Soarin', Kilimanjaro Safaris, Spaceship Earth, The Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise...

Imagination is a great example as well... Not for how popular a non-movie based attraction can be done... But how Disney can screw it up and then blame it on the fact that "Oh, there aren't any Disney characters in that ride. No wonder it's not possible! We gotta shove Stitch in there!" Especially since downgrading it from its original version.

Avatarland can be HUGELY popular... If the quality of the land and attractions are done right. It won't matter whether or not people enjoy the films. It doesn't matter if you like Star Wars or not... If the land is done amazingly well, then you're going to enjoy that land and come back. I, myself, hate Harry Potter with a passion. HATE it. I hate films, I hate the books... But I. Freaking. Love. The rides and the lands at Universal Studios. It doesn't matter what my opinion is on the films they are based on... All that matters is the amount of quality that was put into the rides and lands.



So. The popularity of a film has nothing to do with the popularity of the attraction................Except for Frozen. That is the only film that contradicts my statement.... Which I am still trying to comprehend.. As are many other people in this world.

I think in the end it is simply a random thing... has nothing to do with movie popularity or lack of it. You seem to have picked a side and then tried to find rides/films to prove your point. What you failed to do was look at rides popular today that were based on films that were very popular when they were actually released... I suspect that's the reason you left out 7 dwarves mine train... and didn't mention Winnie the Pooh or Peter Pan... They also contradict your theory.... and if you want to really think about it, Song of the South is only banned in the US, Disney didn't remove it from circulation from other parts of the world, which is why the copy I have came from Europe, the Europeans were so uptight about the movie and it was available there...And sense lots of WDW visitors are from points outside the US I don't know if you can say people haven't seen the movie that ride the ride because they might have.... But hey keep throwing spaghetti against the wall something might stick.

 

[MickeyMomV]

Let's be greatful they didn't take the attempt to retheme Space Mountain to Stitch Mountain that was planned for DL's version..

Kind of looks like Expedition Everest! Instead of a silhouette of Stich we get a silhouette of a Yeti.

 

[DisneyChik17]

I think in the end it is simply a random thing... has nothing to do with movie popularity or lack of it. You seem to have picked a side and then tried to find rides/films to prove your point. What you failed to do was look at rides popular today that were based on films that were very popular when they were actually released... I suspect that's the reason you left out 7 dwarves mine train... and didn't mention Winnie the Pooh or Peter Pan... They also contradict your theory.... and if you want to really think about it, Song of the South is only banned in the US, Disney didn't remove it from circulation from other parts of the world, which is why the copy I have came from Europe, the Europeans were so uptight about the movie and it was available there...And sense lots of WDW visitors are from points outside the US I don't know if you can say people haven't seen the movie that ride the ride because they might have.... But hey keep throwing spaghetti against the wall something might stick.

Not to mention TSM, which is WILDLY popular ride that accompanies a WILDLY popular franchise of movies and also featured in the OP's profile picture.

And please, don't waste the spaghetti.

 

[thomas998]

Let's be greatful they didn't take the attempt to retheme Space Mountain to Stitch Mountain that was planned for DL's version..

Sadly DL didn't escape completely, every Halloween they ruin space mountain with their horrible space ghost overlay... After having endured it I'm not so sure stitch wouldn't be an improvement on that thing.

 

[WondersOfLife]

I think in the end it is simply a random thing... has nothing to do with movie popularity or lack of it. You seem to have picked a side and then tried to find rides/films to prove your point. What you failed to do was look at rides popular today that were based on films that were very popular when they were actually released... I suspect that's the reason you left out 7 dwarves mine train... and didn't mention Winnie the Pooh or Peter Pan... They also contradict your theory.... and if you want to really think about it, Song of the South is only banned in the US, Disney didn't remove it from circulation from other parts of the world, which is why the copy I have came from Europe, the Europeans were so uptight about the movie and it was available there...And sense lots of WDW visitors are from points outside the US I don't know if you can say people haven't seen the movie that ride the ride because they might have.... But hey keep throwing spaghetti against the wall something might stick.

Not to mention TSM, which is WILDLY popular ride that accompanies a WILDLY popular franchise of movies and also featured in the OP's profile picture.

And please, don't waste the spaghetti.

Those attractions do not contradict my theory because they are good quality attractions.

I'm pretty sure that the "WILD" popularity of TSMM is due to the fact that there is hardly anything else to do in the tiny park of Hollywood Studios. Toy Story Mania did not have wait times in Disneyland nearly as long as they do in Disney World, and I think that has a lot to do with it. Also, its "WILD" popularity is seen as popular because of the very long wait times... But the main problem with that is a VERY poor attraction capacity problem, not because the ride is "WILDLY" popular. Same issue for Soarin over at EPCOT, TBH.

But on top of that... Toy Story Mania is a great ride! Snow White's Mine Train Coaster is also a great ride! Winnie the Pooh is a good ride as well as Peter Pan's Flight... All of these attractions are made perfectly for families, and they deliver a nice, charming quality attraction.

I didn't bring up these attractions because they don't have anything to do with the topic I am trying to get across. They are high quality attractions that happen to be associated with highly praised films... However if you put these popular films, like the original version of Snow White's Scary Adventures, where there is no Snow White in the attraction and it is too scary for kids, then the popularity of the attraction is going to dwindle down due to complaints from parents saying it is too scary for their kids.

Since you wanted to bring up the topic, I'll continue. Finding Nemo is a very popular film. The stage show and Turtle Talk with Crush are both very popular attractions, because they are high quality. However, the seas with Nemo & Friends attraction is not very great, and thus never has any wait time or popularity. The Lion King has a SUPERB show at Animal Kingdom, which is the most popular show on Disney World property... Yet nobody gives a poop about the Circle of Life film over at EPCOT.

By all means, movies sometimes will have an impact on an attraction.. Such as Frozen. But most of the time, it is the quality of the experience that matters, like two examples above... Not the name.

Family attractions like Peter Pan's Flight, Winnie the Pooh, 7 Dwarves Mine Train... Those are all better experiences than attractions like Stitch's Great Escape, The 3 Caballeros, and The Seas With Nemo & Friends... If you're having a hard time seeing this after these examples, then I cannot help you.

 

[DisneyChik17]

So basically, well done attractions, regardless of movie affiliation, will be popular, and poorly executed attractions, regardless of movie affiliation will not be. Got it.

 

[WondersOfLife]

So basically, well done attractions, regardless of movie affiliation, will be popular, and poorly executed attractions, regardless of movie affiliation will not be. Got it.

There we go!

 

[thomas998]

Those attractions do not contradict my theory because they are good quality attractions.

I'm pretty sure that the "WILD" popularity of TSMM is due to the fact that there is hardly anything else to do in the tiny park of Hollywood Studios. Toy Story Mania did not have wait times in Disneyland nearly as long as they do in Disney World, and I think that has a lot to do with it. Also, its "WILD" popularity is seen as popular because of the very long wait times... But the main problem with that is a VERY poor attraction capacity problem, not because the ride is "WILDLY" popular. Same issue for Soarin over at EPCOT, TBH.

But on top of that... Toy Story Mania is a great ride! Snow White's Mine Train Coaster is also a great ride! Winnie the Pooh is a good ride as well as Peter Pan's Flight... All of these attractions are made perfectly for families, and they deliver a nice, charming quality attraction.

I didn't bring up these attractions because they don't have anything to do with the topic I am trying to get across. They are high quality attractions that happen to be associated with highly praised films... However if you put these popular films, like the original version of Snow White's Scary Adventures, where there is no Snow White in the attraction and it is too scary for kids, then the popularity of the attraction is going to dwindle down due to complaints from parents saying it is too scary for their kids.

Since you wanted to bring up the topic, I'll continue. Finding Nemo is a very popular film. The stage show and Turtle Talk with Crush are both very popular attractions, because they are high quality. However, the seas with Nemo & Friends attraction is not very great, and thus never has any wait time or popularity. The Lion King has a SUPERB show at Animal Kingdom, which is the most popular show on Disney World property... Yet nobody gives a poop about the Circle of Life film over at EPCOT.

By all means, movies sometimes will have an impact on an attraction.. Such as Frozen. But most of the time, it is the quality of the experience that matters, like two examples above... Not the name.

Family attractions like Peter Pan's Flight, Winnie the Pooh, 7 Dwarves Mine Train... Those are all better experiences than attractions like Stitch's Great Escape, The 3 Caballeros, and The Seas With Nemo & Friends... If you're having a hard time seeing this after these examples, then I cannot help you.

The disconnect people have is created by the fact that you can't make up your mind what you are trying to say.... Original post started by stating:" Popular Movies Don't Make Popular Attractions " You then seem to be trying to actually say, " The popularity of a film has nothing to do with the popularity of the attraction. " Trouble is two statements are not compatible and that's the reason no one really knows what you are trying to say. Take a deep breath before you go typing Gone with the Wind, figure out what your trying to say and then say it... But I think your original post was pretty much a rambling mess that didn't make sense.... And remember when you types something if you realize you changed your point by the time you finish typing, its fine to go back and replace the subject or first paragraphs so the whole thing makes sense.

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

Another argument people may bring up is the fact that "Attractions based on films with low ratings won't draw in anybody" .... Which is also not true. If the attraction is done really well, then people will come to the attraction regardless. Transformers at Universal Studios is a good example of an attraction based on a film series with low ratings.

For what it's worth, the Transformers franchise has some of the highest grossing movies of all time.

 

[WondersOfLife]

The disconnect people have is created by the fact that you can't make up your mind what you are trying to say.... Original post started by stating:" Popular Movies Don't Make Popular Attractions " You then seem to be trying to actually say, " The popularity of a film has nothing to do with the popularity of the attraction. " Trouble is two statements are not compatible and that's the reason no one really knows what you are trying to say. Take a deep breath before you go typing Gone with the Wind, figure out what your trying to say and then say it... But I think your original post was pretty much a rambling mess that didn't make sense.... And remember when you types something if you realize you changed your point by the time you finish typing, its fine to go back and replace the subject or first paragraphs so the whole thing makes sense.

Nah, I'm pretty sure I made myself clear. "Popular movies don't make popular attractions." If you read my entire post you can understand what I'm saying... As in, just BECAUSE a film is popular, doesn't mean the attraction is going to be popular as well. You can't just read a title and then respond. Because if you read the whole post, you can easily see that I'm not saying "popular movies make awful attractions." Because where do I say that anywhere? I state multiple times that the quality of an attraction makes it popular.

Same situation as a "don't judge a book by its cover" type of thing. Read the post and you can understand it perfectly well.

 

[Goofyernmost]

The disconnect people have is created by the fact that you can't make up your mind what you are trying to say.... Original post started by stating:" Popular Movies Don't Make Popular Attractions " You then seem to be trying to actually say, " The popularity of a film has nothing to do with the popularity of the attraction. " Trouble is two statements are not compatible and that's the reason no one really knows what you are trying to say. Take a deep breath before you go typing Gone with the Wind, figure out what your trying to say and then say it... But I think your original post was pretty much a rambling mess that didn't make sense.... And remember when you types something if you realize you changed your point by the time you finish typing, its fine to go back and replace the subject or first paragraphs so the whole thing makes sense.

There was nothing wrong with the way it was stated. I understood that what she was saying, to clarify it for you was...Popular Movies Don't necessarily make Popular attractions. That was reinforced by the post. Language is complex but, it isn't difficult to decipher when logic is applied.

 

[mergatroid]

Nah, I'm pretty sure I made myself clear. "Popular movies don't make popular attractions." If you read my entire post you can understand what I'm saying... As in, just BECAUSE a film is popular, doesn't mean the attraction is going to be popular as well. You can't just read a title and then respond. Because if you read the whole post, you can easily see that I'm not saying "popular movies make awful attractions." Because where do I say that anywhere? I state multiple times that the quality of an attraction makes it popular.

Same situation as a "don't judge a book by its cover" type of thing. Read the post and you can understand it perfectly well.

In the title?

 

[WondersOfLife]

In the title?

I'm pretty sure you know what I meant. Within the post. Nobody's that dumb to just say "Well the title says it seeeeeee?" The title reflects my post. If anybody just reads the title without reading the post, then they shouldn't bother being members on a forum for discussions...