ABSOLUTELY!!! I'm fine with Ranger Spin staying where it is (since it's somewhat futuristic and kind of duplicates TSMM), but Laugh Floor doesn't belong and a dedicated Pixar "Land" is desperately needed.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Star Wars Land announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios
- Thread starter CheekBoys
- Start date
ABSOLUTELY!!! I'm fine with Ranger Spin staying where it is (since it's somewhat futuristic and kind of duplicates TSMM), but Laugh Floor doesn't belong and a dedicated Pixar "Land" is desperately needed.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
And you know this how?
Ragetti
Member
Well, he only mentioned the two "signature" rides. I don't think that rules out shows or lesser rides. I'd love to see a large scale show there as well. Maybe a First Order v Resistance type thing.
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
As someone who has said and stand by that, I will try to offer some explanation as to why.
Fundamentally I don't like James Cameron and his films, Avatar in particular. I thought it was entirely dull and derivative and it really didn't do anything for me stylistically; the film itself was complete style over substance and the look of it just really didn't impress me. It definitely didn't make me want to see the place itself at a theme park or experience it for myself so already my interest was at zero.
There are very reasonable arguments why it is a good thematic fit for DAK. I'm not going to argue those points because they do carry a lot of merit but for me it comes down to my belief that there are classic Disney characters and films that could be used to convey the same thematic messages. As for it fulfilling the mythical quota that the park was always intended to have, for me Imagineering came up with a better, original creation that I would have much preferred to see brought to life.
I get to WDW once a year for two weeks, if we're extremely lucky we might squeeze in another trip if we can manage it. So my position is why would I spend any of that time doing something that I just don't care about or have any interest in when I could spend it elsewhere doing things that I do enjoy and care about? I'm can't force myself to try and be interested in Avatarland, I can't pretend that the models and concept art really do anything for me because they don't. Not doing it isn't going to take anything away from my experience at DAK and such is my dislike and lack of enthusiasm for the film that seeing it brought to life really isn't going to add anything to that experience so what am I losing if I give it a miss in favour of doing something that I do enjoy? I'm still paying the same amount of money for my tickets, I have four parks, two water parks and plenty of recreational options that I do enjoy and that's without deciding to venture outside WDW.
I look at it very simply; if there was film I didn't like the look of or an album by a band I didn't like then I wouldn't make an effort to see or listen to them. Why is it any different for a section of a theme park based on a film I dislike and have no interest in by a director I can't stand?
There is a lot about DAK I love and can spend hours enjoying. I could happily spend half a day on Kilimanjaro Safari and walking the various nature trails before I even think about the rest of the park's attractions so, for me, I really don't feel like I'm going to miss out by skipping Avatarland. I've loved poring over the details that have come out of D23 about Star Wars and Toy Story because they're things I'm invested in, they're films I love and they provoke an interest in me. I can honestly say I haven't looked at one article about Avatar amongst all of that, I saw the photo of the model that came out a while ago and since then I've generally avoided everything about it. I don't care about the planet the film was set on (sorry, I've forgotten the name), I don't have any interest in the alien wildlife being brought to life at DAK and I'm not really not fussed about flying over it. Curiosity just isn't enough for me to spend time away from things I do love and enjoy, there is more than enough for me to do at WDW in those two weeks.
I hope I haven't come across as petty or ignorantly close-minded, I'm just trying to convey some reasons why I personally have no interest in Avatar and its land. When I say I won't go there its not to provoke some kind of reaction or be needlessly childish, its a position I took based on my opinion of the film and on my view of whether or not I felt it would enhance my time at WDW and I've seen and heard nothing compelling enough since it was announced to change that position.
I have no issue with anyone who is enthusastic about it, there are plenty who are and I hope its everything you are anticipating and more (Lord knows you've waited long enough for it
). But every minute of those two weeks I get at WDW are precious and I feel that they would be better spent on things I love and am enthused by than on something that I can't force myself to muster an ounce of excitement or anticipation for.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
I'm not doubting you, you wouldnt put something out there unless you had good reason.
Just seems to clash with the impressions my people gave me.
Time will tell...
I'd love to hear that it is indeed staying and that Attraction #2 is completely new.
Has this been confirmed? Because, while it isn't going anywhere per se, there's a lot of gray area as to whether Attraction #2 is just an updated version of Star Tours.
The expansion announcement that I heard (and I may have missed it) didn't mention Star Tours except for the update coming later this year and it was the only thing that I couldn't get a solid answer on.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
They were intensely vague. I'm not going to assume "Thats It" based on a presentation with little-to-no detail in it.
They mentioned two signature attractions, yes. Simply mentioning them doesn't mean thats all we're going to get.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
This could be a very unpopular opinion..... but I am willing to sacrifice Star Tours for something even better.
Baltar
$4 billion for EPCOT
There's just no reason to HAVE to sacrifice Star Tours to get something else good.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
I would agree, but it's definitely a scenario we need to consider.
mm52200
Well-Known Member
I just have a really hard time imagining this just taking up existing buildings, would defeat the point of an expansion. The building housing Hollywood and Vine, and 50s Prime Time are literally connected to/are part of the same building as the stores on Hollywood Boulevard. Echo Lake is more or less an extension of Hollywood Boulevard and I have a hard time seeing any kind of transition happening there that would look good or even make sense. Why would they not replace the empty areas of the park like SoA and the Backlot tour infracstructure, instead of just retheming restaurants and shops that are already successful in their own right. I'm just trying to understand the logic.
Baltar
$4 billion for EPCOT
Yeah I'm not suggesting it's an implausible idea. Just a ridiculous choice if Disney goes that way.
It would be pretty bold/dumb of Disney to try to pull that over on the fans... Not that I would put it past them.
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
It would depend on how much better for me because I love Star Tours and would hate to lose it. I'm very excited already by the scant details we've had about this expansion so far but I really don't know what to hope for and expect from this expansion attraction-wise. I've no doubt it will look spectacular, I'm very keen to hear more about the plans for the attractions we're going to get.
If this land is themed as a gateway planet to space though then Star Tours is a pretty perfect thematic fit.
Yeah, well, as you know, I certainly haven't before and wouldn't waste time on it if I thought the person I was hearing it from didn't have very reliable info.
Of course, I was told EO was dead and wasn't coming back, so there's always that one!
Value engineering at its finest my friend. This is Disney after all.
What if it meant that budget could go towards something like a mini-CarsLand instead?
mm52200
Well-Known Member
I just don't understand the point of "expanding" a park that needs help capacity wise and attraction count wise when all you're doing is replacing existing attractions and shows and not actually gaining any capacity. Heck with the new Toy Story Land, why do have to take out One Man's Dream and Voyage of the Little Mermaid to add a walkway, why not use the giant walkway that already exists between TSMM and the Jack Sparrow complex that literally leads right to where Toy Story Land would be.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
Then I'd be pretty ed. Yes, selfish on my part. I completely admit it. But I want that giant Star Wars land and let the rest of the park burn like its Atlanta in 1865......
Baltar
$4 billion for EPCOT
Hmm.. Well again this is like the Obi Wan/Anakin "you're with me or against me" verbiage about "absolutes" from Revenge of the Sith haha. Either/Or. In reality there isn't an either/or with shutting down Star Tours and bringing mini Cars Land. They don't have to be related...unless Bob Iger sits on the top of his money bin like Caesar giving thumbs up or thumbs down to new attractions...merely for his entertainment haha.
They've already announced a new location to Star Tours coming next year. This is after Star Tours was revamped a few years ago. Seems like a waste of accounting to then trash an attraction that fits in with your new land