Star Wars Land announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios

[danlb_2000]

Here's what I took from it.

View attachment 145561

The picture from DL is shot at an angle but Google is from directly above, so they won't match up very well. We know Star Wars Land is supposed to be around 14 acres and both the plot at DL and the open space at the back for DHS are consistent with this. The two lands might have slightly different layouts to accommodate each location.

 

[Pam Hates Penguins]

While I am on Disneyland these pictures I uploaded are sickening aren't they? Destroying 1955 construction.

Walt's not happy. There could be consequences.

 

[Goofyernmost]

While I am on Disneyland these pictures I uploaded are sickening aren't they? Destroying 1955 construction.

Walt's not happy. There could be consequences.
View attachment 145563

Anyone that has ever read about Walt or knows what his ideas for the park would know that he would have changed all that by now anyway. I believe his words were... the park will never be finished it will change to fit the needs of the times (or close to that). We are the ones that have made a shrine or museum out of the place, he would have torn down most of that stuff ages ago.

 

[marni1971]

"Disneyland will never be completed. It will continue to grow as long as there is imagination left in the world."

It doesn't mention dedicated an un proportionatly large area of land to one IP that Bob is determined to force in.

The most recent light just went out for Anaheim's third gate.

 

[Goofyernmost]

"Disneyland will never be completed. It will continue to grow as long as there is imagination left in the world."

It doesn't mention dedicated an un proportionatly large area of land to one IP that Bob is determined to force in.

The most recent light just went out for Anaheim's third gate.

I respect your knowledge of the parks, in general, but, even you do not know how Walt would have dealt with those situations if presented to him. I'm basing that on, in the case of Disneyland, had almost no choice but to eliminated some to gain something new... there was just so much land available and it isn't easily stretchable or financially feasible either.

 

[marni1971]

I respect your knowledge of the parks, in general, but, even you do not know how Walt would have dealt with those situations if presented to him..

I don't. I'm just reacting to how Iger is dealing with it.

And talking to SoCal friends and DL CMs I'm not alone. It's great there's two huge attractions coming. But dedicating such a large area of the worlds premiere theme park to one IP is questionable. Especially given the issues of the parks Tomorrowland.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I don't. I'm just reacting to how Iger is dealing with it.

And talking to SoCal friends and DL CMs I'm not alone.

I'm sure it is upsetting to a lot of people, Martin, however, we are the ones that transformed the parks from an ever changing experience to a museum. I just want everyone to stop thinking they know how Walt would have reacted. And if they did, at least they can do it for something like Epcot which was not Walt's EPCOT, by any stretch of the imagination. That one even I would think would cause a raised eyebrow and a few choice words, even when it was at it's best.

 

[marni1971]

Selfishly it's Anaheim that will have to deal with it. Whilst their Tomorrowland continues to stagnate as a "museum".

 

[veritas55]

I don't. I'm just reacting to how Iger is dealing with it.

And talking to SoCal friends and DL CMs I'm not alone. It's great there's two huge attractions coming. But dedicating such a large area of the worlds premiere theme park to one IP is questionable. Especially given the issues of the parks Tomorrowland.

God, I am so sick of the "legacy" hand-wringers and the notion that ANY of this development is inconsistent with Walt's "vision" of Disneyland. First, as many have vainly pointed out over decades, Walt's purported vision was of a constantly changing, evolving land, some with strong connections to existing IPs and some simply connected to iconic American experiences. Even he recognized that his vision was shaped solely by his times, but, to his credit, he attempted to break beyond those parameters with Epcot (and, yes, we can all now begin the re-lamentation on how far the corporate suits deviated from Walt's "vision" on Epcot) -- wish more of his fans were as forward-thinking as he really was. Moreover, attempting to divine what someone who died 45+ years ago "would have wanted today" is absurd, given all the intervening changes and events in the parks (and the company): it's an exercise in fantastical, revisionist thinking.

Rant aside, the notion that this SW land somehow "destroys" or materially impedes Disneyland is silly and backwards thinking. As an initial matter, to the great credit of the imagineers (and the "bad guy suits"), they, somehow, hope beyond beyond hope, found a way to create the land without taking away any significant pre-existing park attractions or locations (the revisions to the river are relatively minor and are likely to visually enhance certain components of that area, and no mentally stable person should be drawing defensive barriers around Big Thunder ranch). And in a park where there really was no land thought to be found, certainly not of these dimensions. Beyond that feat, they appear to have achieved a visually immersive land that, design-wise, was intelligent and appealed to the large majority (not easily done -- they could have tried to do something very movie-specific or a jumble of scenes (i.e., Endor Forest abuts the Death Star abuts Mos Eisley or whatever)), and appear to have devoted considerable resources to ground-breaking and quality rides. AND the IP they chose (Star Wars) is a beloved property, a generation's modern (space) fairy tale, with values and themes consistent with traditional Disney tales.

Walt must be rolling in his cryogenic chamber.

(And the Tomorrowland issues are not caused by Star Wars Land, nor are they the root of the failure to find a cure . . . . unless you take a zero sum approach and believe that the budget for Star Wars should have -- more importantly, would have -- been rolled over to Tomorrowland)
(By the way, none of this is intended to be disrespectful to Marni, whose contributions have always been great -- as long-term lurker, I love the scoops and thoughts.)

 

[twebber55]

Does Star Wars land take away anything at DL?

 

[Atomicmickey]

Does Star Wars land take away anything at DL?

Yup, about a third of the Rivers of America, and re-routes the original train track.
I can see where 'originalists' would find that appalling. I have just a bit of that feeling as well.
However, the new riverbank art that they released is quite nice, and seems to be a bit of 'plussing' of
the route. The original will no longer be available, certainly, and the original footprint of Disneyland
as envisioned by Walt will no longer be there. One could say that with the construction of Toontown that
has already been breached, though.
It's one of those debates that will never be over, people will change their minds over time, others won't,
and 15 years from now we'll still be discussing it.

Maybe more in a conceptual vein, the idea of a land dedicated to one IP "takes away" some of the feel
of the park. This is a new trend in theme parks, and this is Disneyland's first jump into the deep end of the
pool. Perhaps there will be more. But it's hard to knock the success of CarsLand and Harry Potter, so I'm
sure this isn't the only thing that will happen, going forward.

The original Disneyland 'lands' are each a conglomerate of attractions and architecture organized around
an idea . . . Fantasy, Adventure, Tomorrow, the Frontier. It's easy to see that those concepts
are much more flexible and adaptable. SWL is a monolithic idea--I am reasonably sure that Star Wars will
have enduring popularity, so it's not a bad bet. It's just, well, different.

And so the debates will continue . . .

 

[twebber55]

Yup, about a third of the Rivers of America, and re-routes the original train track.
I can see where 'originalists' would find that appalling. I have just a bit of that feeling as well.
However, the new riverbank art that they released is quite nice, and seems to be a bit of 'plussing' of
the route. The original will no longer be available, certainly, and the original footprint of Disneyland
as envisioned by Walt will no longer be there. One could say that with the construction of Toontown that
has already been breached, though.
It's one of those debates that will never be over, people will change their minds over time, others won't,
and 15 years from now we'll still be discussing it.

Maybe more in a conceptual vein, the idea of a land dedicated to one IP "takes away" some of the feel
of the park. This is a new trend in theme parks, and this is Disneyland's first jump into the deep end of the
pool. Perhaps there will be more. But it's hard to knock the success of CarsLand and Harry Potter, so I'm
sure this isn't the only thing that will happen, going forward.

The original Disneyland 'lands' are each a conglomerate of attractions and architecture organized around
an idea . . . Fantasy, Adventure, Tomorrow, the Frontier. It's easy to see that those concepts
are much more flexible and adaptable. SWL is a monolithic idea--I am reasonably sure that Star Wars will
have enduring popularity, so it's not a bad bet. It's just, well, different.

And so the debates will continue . . .

well said
this sounds like the old baseball argument the purists dont like the DH and inter-league play and the new guys want and like change

 

[Herbie]

Fantasy
Adventure
Frontier
Tomorrow
Toontown
...Star Wars

It's weird. Next the Frontierland expansion will be redirected to Epcot.
Theming aside (which is a huge issue), I'm also disappointed the IP wasn't saved for a third gate. And that DHS gets the seconds, and won't have much original going for it.

 

[odmichael]

I think we are a collective that does care about the themes of the lands and making them consistent. However, the average guest may realize the inconsistency and shrug it off. It feels wierd. But is it the wrong thing to do?

At the end of the day, this is going to make the park larger and funner. So I really can't complain about that.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Fantasy
Adventure
Frontier
Tomorrow
Toontown
...Star Wars

It's weird. Next the Frontierland expansion will be redirected to Epcot.
Theming aside (which is a huge issue), I'm also disappointed the IP wasn't saved for a third gate. And that DHS gets the seconds, and won't have much original going for it.

Help me out here. I have asked this dozens of times and have yet to hear a sensible response. Why is it necessary that DHS have anything original in it. In the sense that it is talked about it's looked at as similar to putting a Starbucks across the road from a Starbucks. That matters... 3000 miles doesn't. To a person that hasn't been to DL, TDL or the multiple editions of DL, it is as original as anything placed someplace else. People don't have to be traveling from coast to coast, continent to continent to get a Disney experience. It is simply unexplainable to me, why this would or should matter to anyone.

 

[Herbie]

Why don't we have a Beauty and the Beast ride? Why don't we have a Pinocchio ride?
Why is most of Shanghai completely distinct from any other Disney park?

For the sake of being original... which most of the other parks are entitled to, and for the sake of being a draw.

I haven't been to Disneyland (yet. soon enough), so naturally, what excites me the most (other than walking on the same ground as Walt in a historic, 60-year-old park) is the prospect of Cars Land, World of Color, the Matterhorn, and all of the other original & differently-composed (i.e. Peter Pan, Snow White) attractions that I've never had the enjoyment of experiencing. Now, I'm sure that is your exact feeling when wanting it more local, but I'm personally okay with not having it all right now.

There are certain international things that I wish would come over to the U.S. In fact, I'd prefer clones to be more of the stateside/international variety, as opposed to coast-to-coast. But any original attractions there are leads me to feel more obligated to visit (it's smart business for the company and quite frankly there are times when it is damn okay to be swayed by the supposed pixie dust)

It wouldn't matter to someone who lives closer Orlando, but for someone living in Michigan or Kansas, it's something to think about. Would they rather be going to a dying resort in Orlando or its original, smaller Anaheim companion?

People don't HAVE to travel far to get A Disney experience, of course. But that particular perspective sounds like it's coming from someone who isn't likely to be planning a Disneyland trip or may never travel abroad ever. Some people don't have the luxury, I know (I'm but a so-unlucky-to-be-lucky young bum... and abroad would be really pushing it for me myself). But the fact that you CAN get a
different experience makes it worth it. And as evidenced by the new Disney Springs additions, Disney is known to cater to the well-off crowd, who would be of the mind to compare and contrast the differences/interest/worth of traveling to their international resorts. Say you were going to Tokyo... would TDL even be a priority if it weren't for Tokyo DisneySea and the few attractions/shops/restaurant that are different? I'd probably say enjoy your trip abroad in more cultural pastures, if it was just a carbon copy of Magic Kingdom.
The fact that you CAN get a different experience makes it worth more.

If someone were traveling to Orlando from Anaheim, the only originality for DHS would be a slightly longer Tower of Terror (hardly counts), the Rock 'n' Roller Coaster, The Great Movie Ride, a smaller Carthay Circle that isn't even a restaurant, an
Indiana Jones stage show that isn't as extravagant as their attraction, and a small stage show based on The Little Mermaid. Hardly any draw whatsoever. Unfortunately, like circa 2005 DCA, DHS is in such dire needs that it would be only so lucky to receive an Indiana Jones ride, Cars Land, or a Star Wars Land. And instead of capitalizing on that fact by doing something extravagantly unique like Cars Land, it'll be something people already saw five months before. We'll definitely see the interest, no doubt about it, but the media hype will be going straight to Disneyland.

I know it's beside the point, because we are getting different Toy Story attractions... but coupled with the fact we are getting another copy in the form of the negatively received Toy Story Land, it does sour my excitement for DHS' future in general. I'm excited, but not as much as I expected to be.

And this is only from the perspective of DHS, ignoring how it stands in Disneyland.

 

[Siren]

OMG. What happened to The Toy Story Land thread? It has become a total cluster, I mean hot mess -- the thread is like totally dead. LOL. That's so strange because when I last posted it was *so* busy. Now, no one wants to discuss anything over there. That's too bad. Hopefully it will pick up again.

Anyway, just look at this! This little droid is *so* adorable & cute!



Like, I was totally disappointed when we lost Push and the Palm Tree before that. But, this little Droid kind of makes of for it. I hope he makes his way to DHS soon.

 

[Mike S]

Why don't we have a Beauty and the Beast ride? Why don't we have a Pinocchio ride?
Why is most of Shanghai completely distinct from any other Disney park?

For the sake of being original... which most of the other parks are entitled to, and for the sake of being a draw.

I haven't been to Disneyland (yet. soon enough), so naturally, what excites me the most (other than walking on the same ground as Walt in a historic, 60-year-old park) is the prospect of Cars Land, World of Color, the Matterhorn, and all of the other original & differently-composed (i.e. Peter Pan, Snow White) attractions that I've never had the enjoyment of experiencing. Now, I'm sure that is your exact feeling when wanting it more local, but I'm personally okay with not having it all right now.

There are certain international things that I wish would come over to the U.S. In fact, I'd prefer clones to be more of the stateside/international variety, as opposed to coast-to-coast. But any original attractions there are leads me to feel more obligated to visit (it's smart business for the company and quite frankly there are times when it is damn okay to be swayed by the supposed pixie dust)

It wouldn't matter to someone who lives closer Orlando, but for someone living in Michigan or Kansas, it's something to think about. Would they rather be going to a dying resort in Orlando or its original, smaller Anaheim companion?

People don't HAVE to travel far to get A Disney experience, of course. But that particular perspective sounds like it's coming from someone who isn't likely to be planning a Disneyland trip or may never travel abroad ever. Some people don't have the luxury, I know (I'm but a so-unlucky-to-be-lucky young bum... and abroad would be really pushing it for me myself). But the fact that you CAN get a
different experience makes it worth it. And as evidenced by the new Disney Springs additions, Disney is known to cater to the well-off crowd, who would be of the mind to compare and contrast the differences/interest/worth of traveling to their international resorts. Say you were going to Tokyo... would TDL even be a priority if it weren't for Tokyo DisneySea and the few attractions/shops/restaurant that are different? I'd probably say enjoy your trip abroad in more cultural pastures, if it was just a carbon copy of Magic Kingdom.
The fact that you CAN get a different experience makes it worth more.

If someone were traveling to Orlando from Anaheim, the only originality for DHS would be a slightly longer Tower of Terror (hardly counts), the Rock 'n' Roller Coaster, The Great Movie Ride, a smaller Carthay Circle that isn't even a restaurant, an
Indiana Jones stage show that isn't as extravagant as their attraction, and a small stage show based on The Little Mermaid. Hardly any draw whatsoever. Unfortunately, like circa 2005 DCA, DHS is in such dire needs that it would be only so lucky to receive an Indiana Jones ride, Cars Land, or a Star Wars Land. And instead of capitalizing on that fact by doing something extravagantly unique like Cars Land, it'll be something people already saw five months before. We'll definitely see the interest, no doubt about it, but the media hype will be going straight to Disneyland.

I know it's beside the point, because we are getting different Toy Story attractions... but coupled with the fact we are getting another copy in the form of the negatively received Toy Story Land, it does sour my excitement for DHS' future in general. I'm excited, but not as much as I expected to be.

And this is only from the perspective of DHS, ignoring how it stands in Disneyland.

It may not be DHS but Avatar will be extravagantly unique. Something like Star Wars I have no problem being shared. It's absolutely huge.

 

[Kate F]

OMG. What happened to The Toy Story Land thread? It has become a total cluster, I mean hot mess -- the thread is like totally dead. LOL. That's so strange because when I last posted it was *so* busy. Now, no one wants to discuss anything over there. That's too bad. Hopefully it will pick up again.

Anyway, just look at this! This little droid is *so* adorable & cute!



Like, I was totally disappointed when we lost Push and the Palm Tree before that. But, this little Droid kind of makes of for it. I hope he makes his way to DHS soon.

What are you talking about? Nothing happened to it. The thread doesn't need to be active 24/7.

 

[danlb_2000]

It may not be DHS but Avatar will be extravagantly unique. Something like Star Wars I have no problem being shared. It's absolutely huge.

The original announcement of the Avatar deal implied that it would go into multiple resorts. I don't know if it was ever planned to copy all of Avatarland or if there are even plans anymore to go beyond AK.