CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
Never, IMO.At what point does a collection of robot animals become "art" deserving of preservation?
Never, IMO.At what point does a collection of robot animals become "art" deserving of preservation?
At what point does a collection of robot animals become "art" deserving of preservation?
The Mona Lisa could use some botox and and tube top, in my opinion.Not sure if you are being sarcastic but thats a really interesting way to look at it. Is the Mona Lisa anymore of a masterpiece then the fully realized 3D environments and artistry of The Jungle Cruise, POTC or HM? I don't think so. Why is it that all of these attractions entertained people for 50 years and all of a sudden they need a Johnny Depp or The Rock AA to be interesting?
Feels so weird to be on this side of a discussion. Like my life got flipped turned upside down.
I appear to be the only one on the other side.Feels so weird to be on this side of a discussion. Like my life got flipped turned upside down.
lol I'm about to go all mickEblu on the Jungle Cruise.It's like I stepped into...The Twilight Zone.
Or maybe an image of The Rock photo bombing behind her.The Mona Lisa could use some botox and and tube top, in my opinion.
I appear to be the only one on the other side.
This doesn't feel like advertising to me, it feels like exactly why I love Disney. I like that I get to visit movies "in real life." That's makes it more magical to me, not less. It's a very Walt-ish idea, IMO.
I couldn't agree more. That's probably exactly the reason why the Johnny Depp AA doesn't bother me in Pirates. It's been there since I became a DL fan in 2006.Not a huge fan of IP tie ins but then again I don't mind all of the Disney characters in IASW. I have a theory that the moment we become analytical Super fans is the very moment that we re probably unwilling to accept most change at the parks as we know them from that time forward. It's as if we accept what we ve "inherited" as the status quo and then proceed to look at every future change under a microscope that was obviously not done when we were younger just enjoying the parks for what they were.
Does it matter to you how good the movie is? When I think "Pirates of the Caribbean," I think of Captain Jack Sparrow more than The Wicked Wench or whatever. So of course I want to see him on the ride.I can live with a lot of things, and in general, IP attractions don't bother me. But if this is in fact going to produce an AA of Dwayne Johnson, I've reached my tipping point.
lol I'm about to go all mickEblu on the Jungle Cruise.
And this is the fundamental rift. Themed entertainment is not a medium that is inherently subservient to film. The Little Mermaid would not be made more magical or more Disney with "Moana" added into the film.I appear to be the only one on the other side.
This doesn't feel like advertising to me, it feels like exactly why I love Disney. I like that I get to visit movies "in real life." That's makes it more magical to me, not less. It's a very Walt-ish idea, IMO.
Has anyone thought that given the limited space in DL, this might be a way to get Moana additions to the park? Maybe they add a Polynesian aspect and we get a Maui AA.
Just throwing that out there.
I don't view it as subservience, I view it as symbiotic. Dumbo the movie became Dumbo the ride. Pirates of the Caribbean the ride became a movie, from which characters were put in the ride. It's not that film is primary and the attractions seconday, but I like when they're integrated.And this is the fundamental rift. Themed entertainment is not a medium that is inherently subservient to film. The Little Mermaid would not be made more magical or more Disney with "Moana" added into the film.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.