Putting the same property in multiple parks?

[ChrisFL]

Does anyone else think WDW has a bad habit of putting the same IP in different parks? As if there isn't enough to go around with their massive catalog?

Examples:

Lion King in DAK and (was) at Epcot
Finding Nemo in DAK and at Epcot
Little Mermaid at MK and DHS
Frozen at DHS and Epcot
Toy Story in MK and DHS

...and I'm sure there's others I'm missing.

I'm sure for tourists it can also be confusing!

 

[Cmdr_Crimson]

Lion King was also at MK for Legend of The Lion King where Philharmagic is now...
Plus Frozen Summer Games at Blizzard Beach

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Beauty & Beast represented in 3 of the 4 parks.

Another problem is when parades and night time shows push the same IP’s from park to park. It was great when we had MK fireworks, Illuminations, and Star Wars Fireworks (not a Star Wars projection show....).

Of course... Living Seas as a whole sorta belongs in DAK now doesn’t it?

I agree it’s a problem.

 

[ChrisFL]

Yes, Fantasmic, MK fireworks and parades, PhilharMagic, probably the new Harmonious show, all share the same IP's.

Regarding the Living Seas....that's a topic for another thread....re-locating attractions to other WDW parks...I'll go ahead and make one

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Regarding the Living Seas....that's a topic for another thread....re-locating attractions to other WDW parks...I'll go ahead and make one

Well living seas should be living seas and Nemo should have a little mini-land at dak

 

[MisterPenguin]

Does anyone else think WDW has a bad habit of putting the same IP in different parks? As if there isn't enough to go around with their massive catalog?

Examples:

Lion King in DAK and (was) at Epcot
Finding Nemo in DAK and at Epcot
Little Mermaid at MK and DHS
Frozen at DHS and Epcot
Toy Story in MK and DHS

...and I'm sure there's others I'm missing.

I'm sure for tourists it can also be confusing!

Before Potter, Cars, and Avatar, it wasn't the practice at any of the parks world wide to create a separate "land" to put multiple attractions based on a single movie franchise. The parks that aren't WDW tended to put rides from the same franchise in the same park because they only had one or two parks.

WDW, OTOH, has four parks. And before the practice of creating one-franchise-lands, there was no reason to group franchise rides together. In fact, there is incentive to spread a franchise into as many parks as possible. Do your kids love princesses, and Toy Story, and Beauty and the Beast, and Lion King, and Frozen, and Mickey Mouse (and friends)? Good news! No matter which park you go to, you'll meet at least a handful of those top franchises!!

But yeah, now that we have single-franchise-lands, there's an OCD itch to move all the same franchise attractions into their own isolated lands. But remember... that practice is pretty brand new in the history of theme parks.

 

[ChrisFL]

Before Potter, Cars, and Avatar, it wasn't the practice at any of the parks world wide to create a separate "land" to put multiple attractions based on a single movie franchise. The parks that aren't WDW tended to put rides from the same franchise in the same park because they only had one or two parks.

WDW, OTOH, has four parks. And before the practice of creating one-franchise-lands, there was no reason to group franchise rides together. In fact, there is incentive to spread a franchise into as many parks as possible. Do your kids love princesses, and Toy Story, and Beauty and the Beast, and Lion King, and Frozen, and Mickey Mouse (and friends)? Good news! No matter which park you go to, you'll meet at least a handful of those top franchises!!

But yeah, now that we have single-franchise-lands, there's an OCD itch to move all the same franchise attractions into their own isolated lands. But remember... that practice is pretty brand new in the history of theme parks.

I think my point is though, that they often overlook their vast catalog to make attractions based on the same few IP's over and over

 

[wdrive]

I think my point is though, that they often overlook their vast catalog to make attractions based on the same few IP's over and over

They do but I wouldn’t expect that to change anytime soon. Not that you have to like it but they’re always going to use their most popular IPs.

From a bean counters perspective it’s a no brainer.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I don't necessarily mind an infinite IP presence in itself, in principle. Mickey is everywhere too. I care more about the cohesiveness and theme of a park area itself. If an IP furthers the story of that, then great. But the recent IP vomit seldom does.

'Africa' is present in the MK, EPCOT and DAK too. And it is not a TWDC media IP. Jungle Cruise, Adventureland, Small World; Africa at World Showcase; Africa in DAK. By extention Lion King in Philharmagic, Fantasmic, Circle of Light, Rivers of Light - four parks. Africa is the setting of the Animal Kingdom Lodge too. One does not feel that Africa is overused because in all instances 'Africa' is used organically, it naturally is part of, and forms, the themes and setting.

I think the 'same IP everywhere' fatigue sets in when an IP is used inorganically. It grates. It feels pushed, shoved in your face.

 

[Mickey5150]

I don't mind IPs in multiple parks but I think Disney needs to do a better job naming some attractions. The Voyage of the Little Mermaid and Under the Sea Journey of the Little Mermaid, one is a show the other a ride and it's not obvious which is which. Someone new to the parks may not like finding out they picked the wrong one.

 

[Pepper's Ghost]

I also don't mind IPs in multiple parks, but I do have an issue with when they build something in a park that doesn't make sense. For instance Turtle Talk with Crush, and the Seas with Nemo... I don't understand the tie-in with "Future World". Any link is weak at best. It'd be like putting Frozen in the China pavilion. Those kinds of forced or completely nonsensical additions to a park don't work for me. You'll never see Cars at AK... I hope. I don't have an issue with an IP being adapted to additional parks as long as it makes sense.

DHS is a tough park to keep organized though because all of these IPs were movies. They all technically can tie in. I just wish they hadn't gotten rid of the Great Movie Ride because it was a natural in the park and made it make sense. M&MRR is a Fantasyland ride replacing a ride that made the most sense in the park and pulled it together in IMO. Same thing when the Backlot Tour was removed. They've removed the anchor movie making rides. That didn't make sense to me.

 

[SteamboatJoe]

I also don't mind IPs in multiple parks, but I do have an issue with when they build something in a park that doesn't make sense. For instance Turtle Talk with Crush, and the Seas with Nemo... I don't understand the tie-in with "Future World". Any link is weak at best. It'd be like putting Frozen in the China pavilion. Those kinds of forced or completely nonsensical additions to a park don't work for me. You'll never see Cars at AK... I hope. I don't have an issue with an IP being adapted to additional parks as long as it makes sense.

DHS is a tough park to keep organized though because all of these IPs were movies. They all technically can tie in. I just wish they hadn't gotten rid of the Great Movie Ride because it was a natural in the park and made it make sense. M&MRR is a Fantasyland ride replacing a ride that made the most sense in the park and pulled it together in IMO. Same thing when the Backlot Tour was removed. They've removed the anchor movie making rides. That didn't make sense to me.

Nemo in Seas is not comparable to putting Frozen in China. Nemo at least lives in the sea. The problem with Nemo was not necessarily the inclusion, but the implementation and execution. Like the old Lion King film in Land, Nemo could've been used to teach us about the sea, albeit in a less preachy manner. Nemo and friends could've easily co-existed with the seacabs. I don't know what the pavilion's current condition is but I remember back in 2017 thinking it was in desperate need of TLC if not a complete overhaul. If it has to be Nemo, they need to go all in and make it a real Marine Life Institute. Probably not a popular opinion but I just don't think its realistic to think they would ever just restore the pavilion back to its original concept so I have to ask myself what is the next best thing?

GMR definitely should've stayed but it would've needed to be significantly changed to fit the current corporate model which I think could've been done. Someone here, perhaps Martin, mentioned a better place for MMRR was probably the Launch Bay site in Animation Courtyard. I agree with that. It could've anchored a completely re-imagined Animation Courtyard. Studio parks and movie making rides in general lost their luster because the magic behind movie making has largely faded. A ride featuring a bunch of green screens, motion capture devices, and people sitting at computers is just not romantic or compelling to the average theme park attendee. The park's theme has evolved into a showcase of each of the studio's flagship properties which really isn't a terrible concept. From what I can tell from afar and by second-hand accounts, it has resulted in more rides, better experiences, and better utilization of property.

 

[Lou Filerman]

Makes great business sense, so I like it. The point is to please the masses, not 100 people on the internet. If the stock price increases, I’m happy.

 

[Pepper's Ghost]

Nemo in Seas is not comparable to putting Frozen in China. Nemo at least lives the sea. The problem with Nemo was not necessarily the inclusion, but the implementation and execution. Like the old Lion King film in Land, Nemo could've been used to teach us about the sea, albeit in a less preachy manner.

Sorry for my ignorance, Joe. Sincerely, what do the seas in general have to do with "Future World"? I realize Nemo ties to the seas. How do the seas tie to Future World at all? I sincerely don't understand.

Of course the seas will exist in the future and need to be taken care of, but they exist right now. Future World is about exploring the future that we're not familiar with. Nemo and the seas belongs in AK.

 

[FettFan]

What bugs me is when they come up with one name for an attraction and then whip out a thesaurus so that all the other attractions have the exact same name, only slightly different....

Voyage of the Little Mermaid
Journey of the Little Mermaid
Sojourn of the Little Mermaid
Excursion of the Little Mermaid
Cruise of the Little Mermaid
Passage of the Little Mermaid
Trip of the Little Mermaid

Festival of the Lion King
Celebration of the Lion King
Carnival of the Lion King
Fiesta of the Lion King
Party of the Lion King
Shindig of the Lion King
Hullabalooza of the Lion King

 

[SteamboatJoe]

Sorry for my ignorance, Joe. Sincerely, what do the seas in general have to do with "Future World"? I realize Nemo ties to the seas. How do the seas tie to Future World at all? I sincerely don't understand.

Of course the seas will exist in the future and need to be taken care of, but they exist right now. Future World is about exploring the future that we're not familiar with. Nemo and the seas belongs in AK.

That's why I think it is an implementation problem. The story and concepts Nemo and his friends express need not be limited to those explicitly found in the films. They could be expanded upon and taken into new directions. I don't think the future of the seas necessarily would have to be the direction you go. Just spitballing here off the top of my head, but what if Nemo is your guide on the sea cabs to Sea Base Alpha which has been set up as an interactive, underwater lab and your help is needed to complete a crucial experiment? Along the way you also encounter some of his friends and learn about the ocean and life within it?

 

[FettFan]

Sorry for my ignorance, Joe. Sincerely, what do the seas in general have to do with "Future World"? I realize Nemo ties to the seas. How do the seas tie to Future World at all? I sincerely don't understand.

Of course the seas will exist in the future and need to be taken care of, but they exist right now. Future World is about exploring the future that we're not familiar with. Nemo and the seas belongs in AK.

It made sense in the 1980s when the theme was the aquatic sciences and you were traveling to the deep research station of SeaBase Alpha.

Not so much when you’re just touring a generic aquarium.

 

[MisterPenguin]

What bugs me is when they come up with one name for an attraction and then whip out a thesaurus so that all the other attractions have the exact same name, only slightly different....

Voyage of the Little Mermaid
Journey of the Little Mermaid
Sojourn of the Little Mermaid
Excursion of the Little Mermaid
Cruise of the Little Mermaid
Passage of the Little Mermaid
Trip of the Little Mermaid

Festival of the Lion King
Celebration of the Lion King
Carnival of the Lion King
Fiesta of the Lion King
Party of the Lion King
Shindig of the Lion King
Hullabalooza of the Lion King

These naming conventions don't hold a candle to Christmas offerings:

• Celebrate the Magic
• Celebrate the Season
• Holiday Wishes: Celebrate the Spirit of the Season
• A Frozen Holiday Wish
• Once Upon a Christmas Time Parade
• A Totally Tomorrowland Christmas
• Mickey's Very Merry Christmas Party
• Mickey's Most Merriest Celebration

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I don't necessarily mind an infinite IP presence in itself, in principle. Mickey is everywhere too. I care more about the cohesiveness and theme of a park area itself. If an IP furthers the story of that, then great. But the recent IP vomit seldom does.

'Africa' is present in the MK, EPCOT and DAK too. And it is not a TWDC media IP. Jungle Cruise, Adventureland, Small World; Africa at World Showcase; Africa in DAK. By extention Lion King in Philharmagic, Fantasmic, Circle of Light, Rivers of Light - four parks. Africa is the setting of the Animal Kingdom Lodge too. One does not feel that Africa is overused because in all instances 'Africa' is used organically, it naturally is part of, and forms, the themes and setting.

I think the 'same IP everywhere' fatigue sets in when an IP is used inorganically. It grates. It feels pushed, shoved in your face.

Also "Africa" is a concept is more diverse and open for interpretation than just retelling the Disney animated BatB in 3 different ways.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Also "Africa" is a concept is more diverse and open for interpretation than just retelling the Disney animated BatB in 3 different ways.

That's true actually.

Most movies have a quite specific mood and atmosphere. You inevitably have to use that, which risks a uniform mood across all areas where it is incorporated. Or not use it, in which case the IP is not done justice and feels slapped on, superficial, just touting around some characters.