Star Wars Land announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios

[RSoxNo1]

You're forgetting Buzz and Stitch.

You're right, I did. But Monster's Inc Laugh Floor was still more egregious thematically. It's certainly a better attraction than Stitch, but Buzz and ultimately Stitch were tied into the interplanetary convention center theming of Tomorrowland.

 

[RSoxNo1]

The damage was done years ago. Now it's time to make it as positive as possible.

I see what you all want and understand. But the ride and queue for that ride would fit nicely into that world. It pays respect to the world while adding a positive experience to the park. I don't want Ratatoullie land. I want Paris with a cool ride that immerses and adds to the experience.

I think it could work in a very different manor from frozen

Why can't Pixar rides go into Hollywood Studios. It is a park that has a land called Pixar Place and it has the least amount of Pixar attractions of any Disney park in the world.

 

[odmichael]

Why can't Pixar rides go into Hollywood Studios. It is a park that has a land called Pixar Place and it has the least amount of Pixar attractions of any Disney park in the world.

I'm not saying they can't. Rides absolutely should go there.

I just think Ratatoullie would positively add to the France Pavillion.

The ride if put into hollywood studios I think would need a different queue and style than the Paris version to fit with the style of Pixar Place which is good and bad. Good because it's original. But bad because the version in Paris looks so great as it is.

 

[Mike S]

Why can't Pixar rides go into Hollywood Studios. It is a park that has a land called Pixar Place and it has the least amount of Pixar attractions of any Disney park in the world.

They're dropping Pixar Place in favor of just going with Toy Story

A Pixar type Fantasyland is just what this park needed with more dark rides like TSMM with no height requirement.

 

[Daveeeeed]

Why can't Pixar rides go into Hollywood Studios. It is a park that has a land called Pixar Place and it has the least amount of Pixar attractions of any Disney park in the world.

I see what you're saying, and I wish that was the case, but realistically it's just time to move forward and accept what they're doing. I don't know if you've been to Disneyland Paris, but I was just there and Ratatouille was spectacular from inside to out. IF Disney does in fact greenlight it in the future for Epcot it will be a family ride that the park desperately needs. I would prefer wonders of life to be redone, figment, UoE, and the Seas lose Nemo, but let's be honest, it would be a win to get a new ride in WS.

 

[Daveeeeed]

Disney in general is moving towards IP only attractions because the leaders of the company don't understand the need for a healthy mixture. They think because of the success of Harry Potter and Cars that IP based attractions are now the only option.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the ride and everything to do with thematic fit. Prior to Bob Iger taking over as company CEO I can only think of one example of a bad thematic fit being added to a Walt Disney World and that was Splash Mountain in Frontierland. Even though Splash Mountain in Florida is better (IMO) than it's California or Japanese counterpart, it is still in a more thematically appropriate land in California and Japan.

It's not just about that, it is a way for them to reflect upon the company, and further allow the brand to be unified. If a little kid likes for arguments sake Frozen, and then their parents hear there's a Frozen ride, they have a reason to go. I do think Disney will make non ip based attractions in the future, like Mystic Manor and Grizzly Gulch, but getting an ip for Epcot can only be for the better as long as it is non intrusive.

 

[odmichael]

but getting an ip for Epcot can only be for the better as long as it is non intrusive.

That's the key though. Frozen Has completely infiltrated the Norway Pavillion. I think people would have been less frustrated and even happy if the Pavillion remained unchanged and was expanded to include a new area.

 

[Daveeeeed]

That's the key though. Frozen Has completely infiltrated the Norway Pavillion. I think people would have been less frustrated and even happy if the Pavillion remained unchanged and was expanded to include a new area.

I agree with that. Frozen took away a classic, that while still was not very good was still a classic being Maelstrom. Adding a completely new ride with as little damage as possible is the best way.

 

[HouseHacker97]

Lol sorry to interrupt but has construction started? Does anyone have pictures? It seems like DL is 9999x farther along

 

[Goofyernmost]

I wish Epcot would get the Ratatouille ride so bad. That ride looks amazing. But again, it's a good reason to go Disneyland Paris.

Even though I went to Disneyland Paris last October, I can assure you that the reason had nothing to do with Ratatouille and I suspect that it would take someone with very deep pockets to go to France just to see that. Besides, I got in line 3 times to see it and it broke down each time before I got to ride it. So... it's dead to me! We have enough stuff here already that breaks down all the time, we don't need another.

 

[danlb_2000]

Lol sorry to interrupt but has construction started? Does anyone have pictures? It seems like DL is 9999x farther along

No, no construction yet, but it doesn't appear that actual construction of the land has started at DL either, just site prep.

 

[RSoxNo1]

It's not just about that, it is a way for them to reflect upon the company, and further allow the brand to be unified. If a little kid likes for arguments sake Frozen, and then their parents hear there's a Frozen ride, they have a reason to go. I do think Disney will make non ip based attractions in the future, like Mystic Manor and Grizzly Gulch, but getting an ip for Epcot can only be for the better as long as it is non intrusive.

Synergy and placemaking are not the same thing. I understand synergy, executives at Disney do not understand proper placemaking.

Ratatouille in France is lazy executive thinking...

I keep calling back to this article I wrote because it continues to be relevant: http://micechat.com/101023-tim-grassey-addicted-easy-money/

 

[odmichael]

Synergy and placemaking are not the same thing. I understand synergy, executives at Disney do not understand proper placemaking.

Ratatouille in France is lazy executive thinking...

I keep calling back to this article I wrote because it continues to be relevant: http://micechat.com/101023-tim-grassey-addicted-easy-money/

Your opinion on the concept of IP-based attractions is very strong in this article. But you do not account for or something: there is a correlation between park attendance and the new immersive experiences based off of IP's at theme parks. It's not lazy thinking at all. It's ingenious thinking to bring IP's to the theme park industry. Why would a company think differently after seeing the results of WWOHP? It's what people want.

While the WWOHP is based off of one IP in 2 different theme parks, it also has led to a creative spark in ride design and came up with some very original rides. Even Escape form Gringotts is highly original, despite being a "screen ride". I believe that basing rides around IP's has added to creativity in different ways - not taken away from it. The whole world of Harry Potter is immersive - not just a ride. Even the Simpson's world I find immersive. The only difference is less people take advantage of that experience than Harry Potter because the IP is so much more popular. In your article, you even admit you are all for Star Wars land. It seems like using IP's to you is only lazy or not creative if it's an IP you don't like or want to see. However, it might be very appealing to other folks.

I'm all for new and original IP's as well as new rides. The industry needs to be creative. But there is a time and place for it.

Take a look at Epcot. What has originality left us with? I am 100% in agreement that just changing existing rides is poor and lazy. Captain EO is playing for crying out loud! They didn't change the ride! They actually went backwards! Frozen changed the theme but not the ride design. Epcot needs originality. But at the end of the day, it also needs new stuff!

I think after Star Wars land, Disney will have to focus on more original attractions with some of its other parks. But I actually would like Hollywood Studios to become in immersive IP Park. Is that a bad way to give spark back to a dead park? It gives the park a theme of themed lands and allows for cool ride designs.

 

[FigmentForver96]

Your opinion on the concept of IP-based attractions is very strong in this article. But you do not account for or something: there is a correlation between park attendance and the new immersive experiences based off of IP's at theme parks. It's not lazy thinking at all. It's ingenious thinking to bring IP's to the theme park industry. Why would a company think differently after seeing the results of WWOHP? It's what people want.

While the WWOHP is based off of one IP in 2 different theme parks, it also has led to a creative spark in ride design and came up with some very original rides. Even Escape form Gringotts is highly original, despite being a "screen ride". I believe that basing rides around IP's has added to creativity in different ways - not taken away from it. The whole world of Harry Potter is immersive - not just a ride. Even the Simpson's world I find immersive. The only difference is less people take advantage of that experience than Harry Potter because the IP is so much more popular. In your article, you even admit you are all for Star Wars land. It seems like using IP's to you is only lazy or not creative if it's an IP you don't like or want to see. However, it might be very appealing to other folks.

I'm all for new and original IP's as well as new rides. The industry needs to be creative. But there is a time and place for it.

Take a look at Epcot. What has originality left us with? I am 100% in agreement that just changing existing rides is poor and lazy. Captain EO is playing for crying out loud! They didn't change the ride! They actually went backwards! Frozen changed the theme but not the ride design. Epcot needs originality. But at the end of the day, it also needs new stuff!

I think after Star Wars land, Disney will have to focus on more original attractions with some of its other parks. But I actually would like Hollywood Studios to become in immersive IP Park. Is that a bad way to give spark back to a dead park? It gives the park a theme of themed lands and allows for cool ride designs.

What did originality leave Epcot with? Where do we begin? Hmmm originality started when a company that made a TOTAL of 1 billion dollars in revenue invested 1.5 billion in the EPCOT Center project. Originality brought us a large geosphere with a ride inside with amazing looks at communication old and new. Originality brought us Horizons and the glimpse of the future with the wonders of energy and motion nearby. It brought the whimsy world of the imagination and the beauty of the land. We marveled at the human body and learned of the wonders of the seas. We saw amazing technology like touch screen computers and robots long before they went public. And we saw the grace and dignity of amazing countries. Thats what originality got us.

Today originality could update and bring those ideas into the future and yes they can do it. Sadly originality is dead at Epcot. We shove cartoons into places where we could learn of the sea and birds in rides about Mexico. We completly disgrace the country of Norway by taking a cartoon that was INSPIRED by the country and shoving it where it does not belong. Then we convince ourselves IPS are the only future and kids will only care about that so let's throw Ratatoullie in France and ruin that country and hmm maybe Mulan in China or a Brother Bear in Canada? When does it end. The idea of IPS being the only way to please people is false. It was said you build it they will come...Epcot once inspired without IPS they can do it again

 

[odmichael]

What did originality leave Epcot with? Where do we begin? Hmmm originality started when a company that made a TOTAL of 1 billion dollars in revenue invested 1.5 billion in the EPCOT Center project. Originality brought us a large geosphere with a ride inside with amazing looks at communication old and new. Originality brought us Horizons and the glimpse of the future with the wonders of energy and motion nearby. It brought the whimsy world of the imagination and the beauty of the land. We marveled at the human body and learned of the wonders of the seas. We saw amazing technology like touch screen computers and robots long before they went public. And we saw the grace and dignity of amazing countries. Thats what originality got us.

Today originality could update and bring those ideas into the future and yes they can do it. Sadly originality is dead at Epcot. We shove cartoons into places where we could learn of the sea and birds in rides about Mexico. We completly disgrace the country of Norway by taking a cartoon that was INSPIRED by the country and shoving it where it does not belong. Then we convince ourselves IPS are the only future and kids will only care about that so let's throw Ratatoullie in France and ruin that country and hmm maybe Mulan in China or a Brother Bear in Canada? When does it end. The idea of IPS being the only way to please people is false. It was said you build it they will come...Epcot once inspired without IPS they can do it again

And that was in a different time. I completely agree with you. Epcot was a unique spectacle like no other. But that future is now the past and it has withered. To sit and wait and hope for the future is admirable yet foolish. Times have changed beyond what Walt even visioned and that is spectacular. So embracing it is not bad.

Also I'm not defending Ratatoullie in Epcot like it's my passion and I need it there. I'm just saying that people should be open-minded to the idea of IP's in the parks.

You are suggesting waiting for a developmental overhaul of Epcot that likely won't see the light of day for at least 10 years. Should we keep everything else stagnant for 10 years? Quick fixes aren't THE answer. But they are AN answer and can at least buy Disney some time until something you request is possible.

And again, my request isn't to change things but add new things in. Hypothetically, I don't see how adding an attraction to a Pavillion without changing the rest of it brings something negative.

 

[FigmentForver96]

And that was in a different time. I completely agree with you. Epcot was a unique spectacle like no other. But that future is now the past and it has withered. To sit and wait and hope for the future is admirable yet foolish. Times have changed beyond what Walt even visioned and that is spectacular. So embracing it is not bad.

Also I'm not defending Ratatoullie in Epcot like it's my passion and I need it there. I'm just saying that people should be open-minded to the idea of IP's in the parks.

You are suggesting waiting for a developmental overhaul of Epcot that likely won't see the light of day for at least 10 years. Should we keep everything else stagnant for 10 years? Quick fixes aren't THE answer. But they are AN answer and can at least buy Disney some time until something you request is possible.

And again, my request isn't to change things but add new things in. Hypothetically, I don't see how adding an attraction to a Pavillion without changing the rest of it brings something negative.

The good changes could happen just as soon as the IP changes. A company like Disney definitely has plans for all kinds of stuff not just IP related. Also yea I would rather them get something right rather than do it wrong and fix it later. Why waste money on a quick fix when you can just do it right the first time? Epcot Center could have continued to be updated and today continue to be a spectacle. It isn't because they haven't made it that way.

 

[odmichael]

The good changes could happen just as soon as the IP changes. A company like Disney definitely has plans for all kinds of stuff not just IP related.

I could only hope so. But this department seems rather dry at the moment. With the exception of the Soarin update, we may not see anything new for a while. Hopefully that changes.

Also yea I would rather them get something right rather than do it wrong and fix it later. Why waste money on a quick fix when you can just do it right the first time?

Can a quick fix not be the right fix? I agree that the quick fixes at Epcot have been poor. But if the right opportunity comes along, is that a bad thing?

Epcot Center could have continued to be updated and today continue to be a spectacle. It isn't because they haven't made it that way.

Your right. It could have. But it hasn't. You mentioned Epcot being built on a 1.5 billion dollar budget. But unfortunately Walt's not in charge. You're not wrong for dreaming big. I truly respect it. However, I also wouldn't get your hopes up.

 

[FigmentForver96]

I could only hope so. But this department seems rather dry at the moment. With the exception of the Soarin update, we may not see anything new for a while. Hopefully that changes.

Can a quick fix not be the right fix? I agree that the quick fixes at Epcot have been poor. But if the right opportunity comes along, is that a bad thing?


Your right. It could have. But it hasn't. You mentioned Epcot being built on a 1.5 billion dollar budget. But unfortunately Walt's not in charge. You're not wrong for dreaming big. I truly respect it. However, I also wouldn't get your hopes up.

A quick fix can be the right fix but quick and IP are not related. Quick can also be right.

They are dry because Iger and those under him don't allow anything else to be done.

Walt had nothing to do with that 1.5 budget. Walt may be dead but the idea of EPCOT is partl of him. EPCOT Center paid tribute to the man and his dream. The Epcot today just craps all over it

 

[Mike S]

IPs don't need to be used to bring in the modern guest, I think Soarin' and Expedition Everest have proved that many times over.

 

[marni1971]

I see what you're saying, and I wish that was the case, but realistically it's just time to move forward and accept what they're doing. I don't know if you've been to Disneyland Paris, but I was just there and Ratatouille was spectacular from inside to out.

It is. And so is the price tag. Both for construction and after care. And therein lies the problem.

Even with R&D already done and minus some of the Parisian embellishments the price tag would be in the region of $230-250 million.