Star Wars Land announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios

Daveeeeed

Daveeeeed

Well-Known Member
marni1971 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Yeah it is expensive, but that is also why it is so so so good. I am currently in The House Cup and we're designing a non-ip futureworld pavilion. Brand new, It is really cool, of course I want Disney to do something like that to Epcot except with an old FW pavilion, but I think adding any good ride is a good idea. Someday 10+ years if, and when Disney decides to overhaul pavilions I hope it is Future World non ip related. I would rather have an ip ride go in WS, than have an entire pavilion in FW be like The Seas.
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
odmichael said:
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.
Click to expand...
IP based lands are certainly easy to market, but the sustained attendance boost is linked to quality not familiarity. The reason why The Wizarding World of Harry Potter was wildly successful is because it was great execution of a familiar IP.

The goal is sustained success and quality should be the primary focus here. The quality argument surfaces when things are shoehorned into existing areas. When a dedicated area is built from scratch quality is rarely in question.
 
O

odmichael

Well-Known Member
RSoxNo1 said:
The goal is sustained success and quality should be the primary focus here. The quality argument surfaces when things are shoehorned into existing areas. When a dedicated area is built from scratch quality is rarely in question.
Click to expand...
My response was never indicative of shoehorning. I even said that a Frozen reskin is a terrible idea. But were Frozen a separate entity that was an extension of the current Norway that included all new stuff, I don't think people's views about it would be different.
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
odmichael said:
My response was never indicative of shoehorning. I even said that a Frozen reskin is a terrible idea. But were Frozen a separate entity that was an extension of the current Norway that included all new stuff, I don't think people's views about it would be different.
Click to expand...
Well, that's a thematic break as well. I think a greater argument would be Frozen in DHS or Fantasyland. People would groan because they were sick of Frozen but they would also understand.
 
marni1971

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
I had a dream last night.

So I took the publically released art and fiddled around with it.

image.jpeg


For no particular reason...
 
Last edited:

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

Back
Top Bottom