-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Star Wars Galaxy's Edge opening day reports - Disney's Hollywood Studios
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Bleed0range
Well-Known Member
People keep getting it wrong. It isn’t just that the land doesn’t have the old OT characters. It’s that the new movies have effectively watered down the excitement of the IP itself. Harry Potter land is popular because there was no string of material that made fans unhappy.
The specialness of Star Wars has diminished with films being released so often and not impressing the existing fan base enough to get them excited about Star Wars in general.
The idea of seeing the old gang back in the new movies didn’t happen and disappointed thousands and thousands of people. I think they really have hurt the brand/IP.
People will come to Disney whether GE is there or not. Especially WDW. But enthusiasm for it is definitely down because of things like the above.
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
From my observation, that’s not true of the Disney reviews. They tend to be extremely positive.
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
Darth Snips
Well-Known Member
But that's exactly my point. I don't think any IP has that great of an effect on a theme park attraction.
Let me try phrasing this differently. Let's say in the next decade, James Cameron ends up releasing all four of his Avatar sequels. And let's say, for the sake of argument, that all four of them are awful. By the time Avatar 5 is in theaters, everyone is sick and tired of the Avatar franchise. The quality of the films is terrible; the brand has thoroughly oversaturated the market; in short, everyone now hates Avatar as an IP. Now, does the popularity of Flight of Passage significantly decrease in AK?
I don't think it does. I think that guests will always acknowledge FoP as a great ride, regardless of their thoughts on the state of the film franchise. I firmly believe that guests will always pay attention to the quality of an attraction first, and the IP second. To say that the public's feelings on current Star Wars films (be them positive or negative) determines the success or failure of GE is to agree with Iger's philosophy regarding the parks: "IP over all else".
In short, I think my issue is with your point is in rooted in your first paragraph: "Harry Potter land is popular because there was no string of material that made fans unhappy." I think Harry Potter Land is popular because it is an incredibly high quality land. In the alternate reality where the Harry Potter movies were box office bombs that disappointed the fanbase, I think Universal's Wizarding World remains a huge success. A theme park attraction can stand on its own two legs, regardless of its IP tie-in.
RobWDW1971
Well-Known Member
Totally agree. The tepid response on both coasts to SWGE is not because of the reception of the last two films, it is because they built a depressing, abandoned movie set void of humor, whimsy, excitement, and the core elements and characters of the brand.
Last edited:
mikejs78
Premium Member
Tell that to my son and all his friends. Star Wars is hugely popular among kids.
Your assessment of the brand is, I think, completely wrong. There may have been thousands of fans disappointed by the movies, but there are millions and millions who loved them, and a new generation of fans who are learning to love Star Wars. Just because you and a small minority of people on the internet didn't like the new movies, doesn't mean that literally millions of others share your view. The evidence says otherwise.
mikejs78
Premium Member
No, it's because Disney got greedy and thought that they could raise prices by double digits over the course of several years, open half a land earlier than planned, and not do any advertising of the land to the general population.
mikejs78
Premium Member
FWIW- just talked to a friend of mine who just got back from WDW - major SW fan and does Disney about once every couple of years, but not the type of person to spend time on internet forums, so he doesn't know any of the narrative around the land. His review:
Land: blown away, said he felt like he was really on a planet in a Star Wars movie - thought the land was incredibly detailed, beautiful, and well done. He loved thr character and cast member interactions, thought they were fantastic. He kept saying that he forgot he was in DHS while there, and that he felt he only explored a small part of the land - wants to go back for more. He spent time in Oga's and loved that immensely, thought the quick service food was great, and enjoyed the marketplace. He did not do Savi's or Droid Depot.
A+ in his book.
MFSR:. He described it as "tons of fun, but not earth shattering like FoP". He enjoyed it immensely and plans on riding it every time he is at WDW, but he thinks it is more of a FP ride or something where he'd wait if the line was an hour or less.. He gave it an A-, but the way he described it I'd almost say it was a B+.
All in all he loved the land but felt it needed a "wow" attraction like Pandora has. In our entire conversation, not once did he mention the lack of OT characters, entertainment, droids in the land, etc.
Just figured it was worth sharing a review from a normal person who hasn't been tainted by anything on these or other forums....
Land: blown away, said he felt like he was really on a planet in a Star Wars movie - thought the land was incredibly detailed, beautiful, and well done. He loved thr character and cast member interactions, thought they were fantastic. He kept saying that he forgot he was in DHS while there, and that he felt he only explored a small part of the land - wants to go back for more. He spent time in Oga's and loved that immensely, thought the quick service food was great, and enjoyed the marketplace. He did not do Savi's or Droid Depot.
A+ in his book.
MFSR:. He described it as "tons of fun, but not earth shattering like FoP". He enjoyed it immensely and plans on riding it every time he is at WDW, but he thinks it is more of a FP ride or something where he'd wait if the line was an hour or less.. He gave it an A-, but the way he described it I'd almost say it was a B+.
All in all he loved the land but felt it needed a "wow" attraction like Pandora has. In our entire conversation, not once did he mention the lack of OT characters, entertainment, droids in the land, etc.
Just figured it was worth sharing a review from a normal person who hasn't been tainted by anything on these or other forums....
Mickeyboof
Well-Known Member
Each ride, land, attraction warrants its own evaluation.
There should be a fabulous balance of original AND Intellectual Property AND Collective IP (cultural story concepts and values such as haunted mansions, pirates, or the American Wild West).
Each case is too different to be polarizing and say NO IP or YES IP.
Iger and Chapek seem to like oversatuation of film IPs in places that are perhaps inappropriate (such as a Moana water garden in Epcot or Disney dolls in Small World).
Mickeyboof
Well-Known Member
Cool!
erasure fan1
Well-Known Member
I totally agree but at the same time I don't. With most any franchise I agree, if the ride is great, the lands a success. I was saying that with Avatar when it was announced. Star wars is a completely different beast. It's not just another IP. It has some of the most iconic characters, music, visuals, dialog... EVER. So all of that needs to be there. If rise is fantastic, and ep9 is a dumpster fire, that will still have a negative impact on the land. People will come to GE to ride rise weather ep9 stinks or not if it's a great ride. But there will always be this contention with the land because of the movies. It's not people agreeing with Iger, it's people wanting great star wars.
Dan Deesnee
Well-Known Member
I don't think it's a small minority at all. Last Jedi made over 300 million dollars less domestically than Force Awakens. That is a staggering drop.
I personally believe that this reception to SWGE has shaken Disney executives, severely. Combine all of this with the upcoming Star Wars Hotel (which I would wager they had the same feeling of not needing to advertise and could just tweet "it's open", but not anymore), and the question marks around episode 9, idk how any of them are getting any sleep.
I really hope the Star Wars hotel is a huge success and more people start showing up to SWGE to move the needle because it's competition for Universal and I want them to expand Harry Potter and to eventually open the no doubt being planned Harry Potter Hotel.
mikejs78
Premium Member
It's a drop that is in line with every other middle part of a Star Wars trilogy. Empire and Attack of the Clones saw similar % drops. The third film in the trilogy is usually a bump over the middle one but less than the first. We will see if that pattern holds.
Dan Deesnee
Well-Known Member
The movie market has changed drastically over the last 30 years. Marvel has shown us that sequels can and often do make more. So long as the movies are received well.
I actually really like force awakens but clearly many fans had issues with it and or had issues with the sequel. Thus a staggeringly large 300 million + dollar drop.
We may just have to agree to disagree here. Which is fine
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
The movie market has changed drastically over the last 30 years. Marvel has shown us that sequels can and often do make more. So long as the movies are received well.
I actually really like force awakens but clearly many fans had issues with it and or had issues with the sequel. Thus a staggeringly large 300 million + dollar drop.
We may just have to agree to disagree here. Which is fine
The bigger problem with Episode 9 is the previous one didn’t end on a dramatic cliffhanger.
Episode 8 made some bank because people wanted to see Luke Skywalker again.
I don’t think Episode 9 is going to have the same appeal for some of the casual fans who were mainly interested in the old cast. That may not be significant when it comes to box office numbers, but it could be.
mikejs78
Premium Member
Avengers to Age of Ultron lost 150M domestically and even more internationally. Yet the franchise was fine. It happens. TLJ still did extremely well.
THE 1HAPPY HAUNT
Well-Known Member
You obviously did not understand the point the poster was making. They were NOT saying they never visited the land. They WERE saying why have them at the dedication when the land has NOTHING to do with their characthers nor are their characthers represented in any way in the acutal land. But in your quickness to be a wise guy you didn't take the time to comprehend what they were actually saying, you were too much of a rush to post a pic of the actors in the land to prove the poster wrong.
justintheharris
Well-Known Member
I agree. I think the answer is as simple as "there isn't half as many Star Wars mega fans in the theme park market as Disney thought there was and building a land based on a planet they've never heard of isn't going to get the other half into the gate." Yes, Dorian played a role in the low crowds. But even if Dorian wasn't a factor, the land would still be underperforming.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
I'm saying the motivation of the IP based attraction is familiarity, so why not use the version of the IP that people are more familiar with? Instead they based creative decisions on The Last Jedi and Solo which are amongst the more divisive Star Wars stories. Don't get me wrong, it is not the only issue with the land, but it is an issue with the land.
Had they done the multitude of other things I'll list below, the choice of Sequel Trilogy vs Original Trilogy would become far less critical, but when something has faults, we hit on all of them. Some items that are more important are as follows:
- Inability to open both attractions at once
- Not opening the full Cantina/Table Service
- Removing equity actors from entertainment positions
- Cutting entertainment in general (walk around characters, droids, drones)
- Cutting the not-a-bantha attraction