I think you hit it on the head. It all boils down to personal preference. My personal preference might be different from yours and that is ok. It would suck to have a forum where every one agrees on everything. We are here to debate it's merits but in the end, it really doesn't matter since we are not the ones making the decisions.
If Robert *Middle Name* Iger was actually behind the decision to creatively harken back to something from Disney's heyday and not the result of clever Imagineering...I'll eat my own shoe.
You make valid points here. You also ignore a fundemental truth.
Disneyland wasn't invented day 1, it was an iterative process that led to the Disneyland we know and love.
He invented the theme park genre, and out of that comes all modern design evolution. He took disparate themes and ideas and merged them together. There's some European Amusement/theme park DNA in Disneyland. There's a little bit of American Amusment park thinking. There's strong inspiration from living history parks like that of the Henry Ford. In the end he created something distinctly different. Something that had never been done before.
He still wasn't finished though. Over the next couple years they innovated, tested, and built a huge number of concepts. If something didn't work he'd move on, and if they did he doubled down. The classic Pirates of the Carribean and New Orleans Square prove just how far they'd come from the beginning. They built an all inclusive land with themed shopping, dining, and attractions integrated in. Walt and his team had cracked the basic model Harry Potter and Cars Land would follow decades later.
He was somewhat burdened by the fact that he didn't know what it would become, but he navigated it beautifully. In the end, Disneyland has a number of quirks which you pointed out. Those are just testaments to the will of an innovative founder who constantly pushed boundaries and tried new things. It also gives it a charm that is uniquely Disneyland. No other park can ever be quite like Disneyland. It's special. It's by far the best domestic park, and probably the best park in the world (though I'll see what Sea brings to the table soon).
All without Rey, Finn, and BB-8.
I will fight you on Matterhorn though, I think its placement is a perfect complement to Sleeping Beauty's Castle.Just like a page from a storybook.
The question of whether Star Wars fits into Disneyland doesn't mean I never want things to change or be added. I never want people to ask, "what would Walt do?" That's not what any creative should ever ask. I do want creatives to ask, "what can I do that will complement what Walt did?" "How can I celebrate Disneyland's history while looking forward?" "How can I make the spirit that Disney created better?" Instead they seem to be cramming something in. That's a red flag for me. Cool transitions are nice, but that doesn't mean they justify changing the makeup of the park.
I say Splash Mountain, Big Thunder, Haunted Mansion, Space Mountain, etc. all complement the incredible achievements and are rides that are clearly in the Disney tradition.
Star Wars is different.
Jungle Cruise and Tomorrowland Subs/Monorail/Autopia are the next targets for IP locations in my view. There's only so much classic Disneyland, and when it's gone, it's gone forever.
Yeah, you're so right. Disneyland isn't relevant. It's soooo old fashioned. Does anyone even go there anymore?!?
If your "dreams, ideals, and hard facts" include BB-8 and Rey, more power to you.
I do somewhat dislike that Walt quote-and I know that may sound hypocritical-because it's become synonymous with forcing things that don't fit into theme parks. It's like "see see we have this quote, so you better like it!" I also think that ignores that fact that many of the contemporary creations of his day have become cultural institutions today. I'm not against adding things, just adding things that make Disneyland less special.
I fail to see how SWE is anything but a stroke of his ego.
Do you mean Disneyland Resort or Disneyland the park?
Indeed, I know of the Toy Story lot and its berry interesting past
Don't misinterpret me. I feel very strongly that this Land will be beyond awesome, but that doesn't mean it's well located.
Indeed, I know of the Toy Story lot and its berry interesting past
I also know that WDW had very suitable areas for expansion to look at when building Frozen. Magic Kingdom, Disney's Hollywood Studios, and even a large expansion pad next to Norway.*
But they didn't utilize any of that space.
They went for the cheapest path of least resistance. Much like Star Wars land could have ended up in a 3rd gate, they instead went for the cheapest path of least resistance.
Not that the land will be cheap, it won't, but they did go the easiest route. Classic Disneyland's days are numbered at the rate we're going.
Don't misinterpret me. I feel very strongly that this Land will be beyond awesome, but that doesn't mean it's well located.
And if you really pushed me, I'd even say that beyond Rey and BB-8 that I'm expecting R2D2 and C3PO to be there too!
*Well sort of... Meet and greet anyone?
But then the only question becomes...why couldn't they just wait and use SW for that third gate instead of rushing out a truncated 2-ride land that's forced into a literal corner?
So then it was addition for the sake of addition? Again, that seems shortsighted especially if they knew a third gate was coming which would have potentially resulted in a larger, grander SWL.
Maybe the third gate will have nothing to do with that IP. Maybe SWL is a great fit for DL and would be completely wrong and out of theme for a third gate. Maybe they have better things in mind for a third gate. Disney always surprises us with what they build.
I would assume they wouldn't make a grand gesture to SW in the third park...since it seems they're putting all their literal money into DL's SWL. Again, if they had plans to include SW in a third gate, why not just go ALL in?
If by surprises, you mean frustrates...haha then yeah. I have no clue what this *still* hypothetical third gate would include. It could be one giant IP land. It could be not. It COULD be the Dark Kingdom which I desperately want them to go back into making...
Personal preference, but I enjoy Buzz Lightyear Astroblasters, added in 98. And I guess they figured adding DCA in 01 was enough of a boost to the resorts "substance".
Definitely frustrating but I can't see it being IP land. I could see them building a high admission priced exclusive park with a limited number of guests with some big expensive experiences. Think West World, Future World or Jurassic Park movies.
