SPOILERS: How Episode 9 Affects Star Wars Land and its Attractions

Animaniac93-98

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
Victor Kelly said:
Avatar = beastly kingdom for the most part.
Click to expand...

Speaking of Beastly Kingdom, if Pixar's Onward becomes a hit I could see that being the next IP added to AK with the excuse of "we're finally adding the land we always wanted to! We're giving the fans what they want!"

And then the same year Disney proper is releasing "Raya and the Last Dragon".

"The dragon in the logo means something! I did what Eisner never could!" - Bob
 
Mickeyboof

Mickeyboof

Well-Known Member
Animaniac93-98 said:
Speaking of Beastly Kingdom, if Pixar's Onward becomes a hit I could see that being the next IP added to AK with the excuse of "we're finally adding the land we always wanted to! We're giving the fans what they want!"

And then the same year Disney proper is releasing "Raya and the Last Dragon".

"The dragon in the logo means something! I did what Eisner never could!" - Bob
Click to expand...

Gasp, don’t give them that idea. That movie smells like a pile of rotten outhouse waste.
 
Victor Kelly

Victor Kelly

Well-Known Member
Disneyhead'71 said:
That's like saying...

Stephanie Meyer's Twilight=Homer's Illiad & Odyssey...for the most part.
Click to expand...
Say what you will. But they have flying dragon wannabes. It sits in the spot of beastly kingdom. It has great theming. They did what Eisner refused to do. They lost out when Eisner canned the Imagineers who took their ideas to Uni and built 1/4 Of IOA.

Disney has a habit of shooting themselves in the foot.
 
Disneyhead'71

Disneyhead'71

Well-Known Member
Victor Kelly said:
Say what you will. But they have flying dragon wannabes. It sits in the spot of beastly kingdom. It has great theming. They did what Eisner refused to do. They lost out when Eisner canned the Imagineers who took their ideas to Uni and built 1/4 Of IOA.

Disney has a habit of shooting themselves in the foot.
Click to expand...
But in a park focused on Edutainment. Chinese dragons have about 6,000 years of history and European dragons have over 1,500 years of intellectual weight behind them. James Cameron's space kitties and their pet flying lizards have the intellectual depth of a kiddie pool.
 
Mickeyboof

Mickeyboof

Well-Known Member
Disneyhead'71 said:
But in a park focused on Edutainment. Chinese dragons have about 6,000 years of history and European dragons have over 1,500 years of intellectual weight behind them. James Cameron's space kitties and their pet flying lizards have the intellectual depth of a kiddie pool.
Click to expand...

A 2 billion dollar kiddie pool.

Who care about long term investments when you can cash in on a computer animated movie NO ONE remembers seeing.
 
Disneyhead'71

Disneyhead'71

Well-Known Member
ParkerLoLs said:
I think one of the reasons I love Pandora is its beauty and lushness. How it complements AK perfectly and yet feels "light years" away. Now, ROTR is currently my second favorite attraction at WDW (ToT still has my heart), though I find it more environmental-theater-on-acid than traditional attraction. But I don't feel as awed in Galaxy's Edge proper. I'm a massive Star Wars fan and could care less about Avatar but I think there may just be some kind of aesthetic I'm responding to - floating mountains and foliage?

However, I also LOVE walking into Gringotts (which doesn't have floating mountains or foliage) because I get that same feeling. I can't describe it, though. I feel like game-changer is subjective and I may be looking for a different expression. I feel the same way climbing the lift inside the Seven Dwarfs diamond mine. It's not a thrill ride feeling, it's a sort of childlike wonder. And I've gone off the rails here considerably. :)
Click to expand...
But Pandora doesn't compliment DAK perfectly. Pandora in DAK is the equivalent of Disney Nature putting out Sharknado 4.

Pandora has NOTHING to do with the natural world, science, or history. It doesn't have the sociological or historical depth of actual legends of mythical beasts. Pandora is the Kim Kardashian of theme park lands. Pretty and vacuous.

Pandora fits in DAK like Wakanda fits in World Showcase, or a raccoon with a machine gun fits in Epcot anywhere.
 
Last edited:
Phil12

Phil12

Well-Known Member
Disneyhead'71 said:
Pandora fits in DAK like Wakanda fits in World Showcase, a raccoon with a machine gun fits in Epcot anywhere.
Click to expand...
1576985929190.png
 
Parker in NYC

Parker in NYC

Well-Known Member
Disneyhead'71 said:
But Pandora doesn't compliment DAK perfectly. Pandora in DAK is the equivalent of Disney Nature putting out Sharknado 4.

Pandora has NOTHING to do with the natural world, science, or history. It doesn't have the sociological or historical depth of actual legends of mythical beasts. Pandora is the Kim Kardashian of theme park lands. Pretty and vacuous.

Pandora fits in DAK like Wakanda fits in World Showcase, or a raccoon with a machine gun fits in Epcot anywhere.
Click to expand...

I meant in terms of topography. But of course I agree with you. I would like more of these similes, though, because I am dying. The Kardashian one, especially!
 
Disneyhead'71

Disneyhead'71

Well-Known Member
ParkerLoLs said:
I meant in terms of topography. But of course I agree with you. I would like more of these similes, though, because I am dying. The Kardashian one, especially!
Click to expand...
Haha, I don't really have anymore similes...yet. But I do agree that Pandora is a beautiful land with a great attraction. I just wish it was not in DAK.

Unfortunately, I get really annoyed with the dumbing down of anything that holds itself up as something with educational or scientific principles. My concern is whether WDI honestly believes that Jimmy Cameron's space kitties are interchangeable with Chinese/European mythology from an sociological standpoint, or if they just don't care. It's the old ignorance vs apathy conundrum.
 
Victor Kelly

Victor Kelly

Well-Known Member
Disneyhead'71 said:
But in a park focused on Edutainment. Chinese dragons have about 6,000 years of history and European dragons have over 1,500 years of intellectual weight behind them. James Cameron's space kitties and their pet flying lizards have the intellectual depth of a kiddie pool.
Click to expand...
Uh you do know that the parks are really kiddie parks by your reasoning. AK is a zoo by your definition. If Disney thought chinese or European dragons would sell, they would have put that in instead. Look how well Splendid China did.......its gone. The time of edutainment is long past. That is why Epcot is being redone. It doesn't sell, period. Disney knows this. It's a thing called market research. Like it or not it is the truth.
 
Tom Morrow

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
Disneyhead'71 said:
When in actuality, neither are "game changers" both are evolutionary not revolutionary. Both are an impressive collection of previously seen tricks. Both are great, but also have their faults.

There are very few actual game changers in this industry. Disneyland was a game changer by inventing the modern concept of a "theme park". WDW was a game changer by inventing the concept of a "Destination Theme Park Resort". FP was a game changer. Hogsmeade at IOA was a game changer by inventing the concept of the single IP land and by pulling the merch and F&B into to the theme. By definition, "game changer" has to change how the game is played.

Very few modern single attractions are "game changers". Pirates and Haunted Mansion were...60 years ago. Spider-man is truly the last "game changer" attraction that I can think of. I wish ToT was a game changer, but alas, no one seems to want to play that game. Which is sad because I love that ride. I don't even consider FJ a "game changer". It's a little bit Haunted Mansion and a little bit Spider-man with a cool new RV.

And I wasn't trying to single you out as a pixie duster. I think of you more as an experienced and observant theme park fan with a clear Disney bias. We all have our own biases. I, personally, am no longer a fan of slow moving RVs showing me repetitive robots that look like they are conducting an orchestra. It's like riding through an animated wax museum. Oooooo, exciting. Y'all seem to LOVE that, but meh. I am also over the simulator fall/catch gag. And I swear, if Universal spritzes me with water one more time...

All that said, I have ridden both RotR and Hagrid's 2 times each. And if you said I could hop on either right now, I would choose Hagrid's. It is just soooo much fun. I grin like the village idiot while riding it. The first time I rode RotR, I was jaw dropped twice. Once when the transport shuttle opened into the hanger, and in the At-At room. Unfortunately, that kind of "OMG" moment only works the first time. For that kind of "wow" moment I still prefer Gringott's Bank Lobby. It is just so beautiful, with the crystal chandeliers and inlaid floor. I don't even mind the vinyl wrapped columns.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree with your definition of a game changer, but your rules are more strict than mine. In 2010 Hogsmeade itself was a game changer for the reasons you mentioned. I also felt that Forbidden Journey was a game changer itself in just how detailed and in-depth an IP-based attraction could be, not to mention the astounding technical prowess of the ride system. Admittedly I haven't traveled outside the US in the last 15 years so I can't compare attractions like at TDS and Shanghai, but for me Rise of the Resistance was the first attraction since Forbidden Journey to really make me think, "wow, this is at a higher level to a degree that feels like it shouldn't exist." I feel that it truly challenges what a theme park attraction can be and is the first one to really break the mold that's been in place for a few decades now, where either the queue is a passive experience that gives you bits of the story or you're presented with a pre show that sets up everything, followed by the remaining queue to the ride vehicles.

Rise of the Resistance asks, "what if the pre-show was also a ride?" "What if the way you are corralled through the queue and grouped was a thematic part of the experience that actively places the riders into the story instead of passive observers?" The entire experience constantly subverts your expectations of what you've come to know and expect from theme park attractions. It's true that if the attraction were just the hologram room followed by the main ride, it would be much more difficult to call it a game changer.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom