Star Wars Land announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios

danlb_2000

danlb_2000

Premium Member
lazyboy97o said:
But Universal did do just that and its something they keep repeating about their approach. The books and films never mention a Muggle open house at Hogwarts, an Olivanders Wand Shop in Hogsmead, Butterbeer Ice Cream, Voldemort and Bellatrix being sidetracked by Bill Weasley and others while in Gringotts, or Horizont Alley (where some noted places were relocated). Universal also changed/corrected King's Cross station to closer match the real life station instead of using St. Pancras station like was done for the films.
.
Click to expand...

Also, a lot of Star Tours was new material. The whole queue, Rex, the Starspeeder, the comet scene, etc, are not from the movies, but they still felt like Star Wars.
 
Mawg

Mawg

Well-Known Member
Kamikaze said:
Lets just look at the planets from Ep IV, V, VI.

Tatooine - Dust bowl. Bland. Uninteresting. Would also be extremely hot in the Florida sun.
Yavin IV - Would probably make a decent theme. They would have to build the temple, though, and I don't think they would do it.
Hoth - Ice planet in Florida is a no-go.
Cloud City - impossible to pull off as an outdoor 'land'
Dagobah - Swamp. Overgrown. Not a place you'd want to visit. There is also nothing on Dagobah but Yoda's hut and the dark side cave. So its completely out.
Endor's forest Moon - Since its basically the Redwood National Park, and thats already used at DCA with Grizzly Peak, they wouldn't repeat the same theme half a mile away. Also, we have the Ewok village with Star Tours already, which I imagine will be replaced, and I think there would be even MORE complaining if it was Endor because 'we already have Endor theming'

They aren't going to use a planet from the prequels. Coruscant could be amazing but theres problems with using Coruscant, the first being that it was Timothy Zahn's creation and it didn't originate in the movies. Naboo would be choice from the prequels but that would mean Gungans, and no one *NO ONE* wants Gungans.

So they are using a planet from the new trilogy that fits well with what they want to do.
Click to expand...
What was that planet covered with Lava, I think they should use that one!:rolleyes:
 
Disneyhead'71

Disneyhead'71

Well-Known Member
Mawg said:
Keep in mind there will be the iconic Falcon out front, it really is a place from the movies.
Click to expand...
Yes. And there will be the Cantina.

See, after RotJ, Bennigan's came in and bought the Cantina, and trying to replicate their success in the 1980s of spreading "Fern Bars" across the known Universe they found success with their new "Mud Bars". They can be found in all the popular Spaceports in the Universe.

I really didn't mean for this to blow up like it did. I just think it's a really odd concept considering the entire reason for building a land based on a popular film franchise is to visit the places shown in the films.

I get that they will shove this in the new films just like they will shove obvious Norway flags in the new Frozen movie.
 
erasure fan1

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
For me, it all comes down to the force awakens. It seems like a sure bet this planet is featured in the movie and has a fairly big significance. If the movie is awesome and captures that classic star wars feel (and so far it seems to) then you bet I will banging the door down to visit this new land. I am more concerned that the land will end up more show over substance rather than what the setting is. I really don't think that Disney would spend the money for star wars then build a land that has no "feel" of star wars. Now I can see them going new fantasy land on us and that is why my excitement is tempered until I see what we actually end up with.
 
stretchsje

stretchsje

Well-Known Member
On the subject of Kuka arms: Harry Potter uses a generation 2 RoboCoaster design. There is a generation 3 that allows what is essentially a Kuka arm on a traditional, high-speed roller coaster track. The arms themselves have less mobility in this configuration, but imagine how cool it would be to go through a high-speed getaway (making the Kessel Run in < 12 parsecs!) on the Falcon, all while controlling the direction (probably in limited range) of your gun prior to that point!

More on the different generations of RoboCoasters here:
http://www.allonrobots.com/robocoaster.html

Video of G3:
 
Last edited:
Bairstow

Bairstow

Well-Known Member
stretchsje said:
Yes, in 2017. And reportedly, Imagineering was heartbroken about Universal getting that exclusivity agreement.

It's a good bet that Disney is readying a Kuka arm ride.

Here's a write-up about what Disney was thinking about Kuka in 2007: http://jimhillmedia.com/editor_in_c...as-well-as-kuka-s-robotic-arm-technology.aspx

Some excerpts:

...continuing...
Click to expand...

No excuse for Disney not going forward with an Incredibles attraction, if you ask me.
I always liked to think that Vekoma developed Pandora's Box with that specific application in mind.

 
Disneyhead'71

Disneyhead'71

Well-Known Member
jakeman said:
Where is there information that the attraction in the new Star Wars land are going to be heavily screen based?
Click to expand...
Star Tours is almost entirely screen based. It appears that flying the Falcon will be heavily screen based. And if the LPS ride is anything like Ratatouille or even Mystic Manor there will be plenty screens and projections.
 
Mawg

Mawg

Well-Known Member
Disneyhead'71 said:
Yes. And there will be the Cantina.

See, after RotJ, Bennigan's came in and bought the Cantina, and trying to replicate their success in the 1980s of spreading "Fern Bars" across the known Universe they found success with their new "Mud Bars". They can be found in all the popular Spaceports in the Universe.

I really didn't mean for this to blow up like it did. I just think it's a really odd concept considering the entire reason for building a land based on a popular film franchise is to visit the places shown in the films.

I get that they will shove this in the new films just like they will shove obvious Norway flags in the new Frozen movie.
Click to expand...

I don't want to get too involved in this argument because I understand and agree with both sides of it. Most of us grew up with Star Wars and always dreamed of visiting some of the locations. But, you can't create all of the locations and make everyone happy. Bringing the characters, creatures, aliens and space ships to a location still lets us geek out. And, hopefully being that this is a trading post and gateway to the planets we wanted to go to will allow the attractions themselves to take us to these planets. Keep in mind this land is a clone and will be built simultaneously on both coasts and so must work in both parks. It probably was not an easy decision to find a planet that would have worked well and can be expanded on in the future. Having a gateway planet as the Hub and then the attractions can take you to those locations works well in my opinion and can be easily expanded on to any location in the Star Wars universe in the future.
 
jakeman

jakeman

Well-Known Member
Disneyhead'71 said:
Yes. And there will be the Cantina.

See, after RotJ, Bennigan's came in and bought the Cantina, and trying to replicate their success in the 1980s of spreading "Fern Bars" across the known Universe they found success with their new "Mud Bars". They can be found in all the popular Spaceports in the Universe.
Click to expand...
Just curious as to why you are hung on the word cantina. It's a generic term for a bar in both the Star Wars universe and here (origination is Spanish for a wine cellar).

There is no reason that a cantina can't exist in whatever this new port is. In the Star Wars universe it would be odd if there wasn't a cantina in the port.
 
Mawg

Mawg

Well-Known Member
jakeman said:
Just curious as to why you are hung on the word cantina. It's a generic term for a bar in both the Star Wars universe and here (origination is Spanish for a wine cellar).

There is no reason that a cantina can't exist in whatever this new port is. In the Star Wars universe it would be odd if there wasn't a cantina in the port.
Click to expand...
I think he understands this and is not hung up on it and recognizes that the cantina can be anywhere.
 
Disneyhead'71

Disneyhead'71

Well-Known Member
And again, I'll go back to where this all started. I think the concept art looks amazing. And this choice doesn't even bother me. I just think it's an odd choice. Others took issue with that point of view.

And to be honest, I hope the new planet isn't in the movies. Not so I can say I told you so, but I don't want the movies to feel any more contrived than they already will.

WARNING!!!: Now I am going to pontificate philosphically using Potter as an example.

Organic vs Contrived

First off, I am fully aware that all theme park lands are contrived. But the less contrived it "feels" the more immersive it is. If you build what we've seen in exacting detail, there will be less breaks in the immersion, like Ollivander's in Hogsmeade, and the more organic it is in reference to the source material.

When Universal built the WWoHP, there were many locations to choose from. Many fans wanted The Barrow to be included. And when Hogsmeade was announced, many fans were apoplectic that Universal wasn't building Diagon Alley, and that you weren't arriving at Hogsmeade on the Hogwarts Experess. Universal made a choice of one location. They carefully picked their immersion breaks. And then executed the plan very well. It feels very organic to the source material.

The best I am hoping for with this new planet is that it feels like an authentic new Star Wars location/adventure. Ep. VI.V if you will. And if that's the case I would rather not see anything but the The Falcon and characters from the previous 6 films. So have a Cantina, but it really shouldn't look anything like Mos Eisley's.

And here is why I think the choice is odd. To pull this off, they would intentionally not include things from the first 6 films, which seems counterintuitive to the reasons for building the land in the first place.

And now I have nothing left to say on this topic. Moving on.
 
Last edited:
Kamikaze

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
jakeman said:
It made it into the movies therefore it is G Level canon (not that it matters now). Other than Lucas's ego (he wasn't happy that he had to use that, as well as Kashyyyk) there wouldn't be any canoncal reason that it couldn't be used. With that said, I think it would be pretty hard to create the full immersion of a several thousand foot high city-plant in 14 acres.
Click to expand...

There is only one level of canon now.

And it does actually matter, because the Thrawn trilogy was written before the 'Expanded Universe' was a thing so Zahn did not sign any of the later created agreements about the rights to the material.
 
PhotoDave219

PhotoDave219

Well-Known Member
Kamikaze

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
Disneyhead'71 said:
And given the years of the "screeeenz!" debate, where many Disney fans seem to fall outside of the "Luv 'em" category, I believe that the fact SWL appears to be heavy on the screens is relevant conversation. And again, I didn't bring Gringott's into the conversation.
Click to expand...

Star Wars, being sci-fi and futuristic, kind of has to have its attractions based on screens. I don't really see how anything else can do it justice. A slow dark ride through a space battle? Thats just not going to work.

I haven't been on any Potter attractions. However, I think that Spiderman is a crappy attraction because the ride itself isn't thrilling or entertaining, not because it uses screens. I feel the same way about Dinosaur, which is actually much the same style ride as Spiderman but without the screens. Its not about the tech, its about the experience.
 
Last edited:

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

Back
Top Bottom