Star Wars Land announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios

[mikejs78]

Or....build a land that celebrates ALL eras of Star Wars past, present, and future and doesn’t have a locked time/place. I don’t see a lot of people saying they should have built a land ONLY with OT and ban the prequels, Disney Star Wars, Clone Wars, Mandalorian, upcoming Kenobi series, future movies and TV, etc, etc.

That would be equally idiotic to what they did - build a land ONLY and forever locked into Disney Star Wars. We all know why they did it, it is just a terrible and needlessly limiting creative choice.

Agreed - simple survey to Disney, Star Wars, and general theme park fans as they enter the park:

Which of the below do you think you would enjoy more and would entice you to visit a Disney Star Wars land?

A land with attractions, merchandise, shows, and meet and greet characters with:

A) Rey, Chewie, Kylo Ren, Finn, Poe, BB8, and R2D2 (when not only for sale in a shop like every time I’ve ever been)

B) Rey, Chewie, Kylo Ren, Finn, Poe, BB8, R2D2, C3PO, Darth Vader, Luke, Leia, Han Solo, Yoda, Obi Wan Kenobi, Darth Maul, General Grevious, Anakin Skywalker, Padme, Admiral Ackbar, Count Dooku, Mace Windu, Boba Fett, Jabba the Hutt, Jango Fett, the Mandalorian, and Baby Yoda

Please select one of the above.

Hmmmmmmm....wonder what that percentage breakdown would be.....

Because that's fan service, not storytelling. Disney has always been about storytelling in all its attractions, and setting has a lot to do with that. Having all eras "represented" would make it a glorified Star Wars convention, rather than a unique vehicle for story telling, which in every other conversation about every other ride or land in WDW *except Galaxy's Edge* we argue every day about things being on theme, getting the setting right, etc.

I'd rather they tell a good story in any timeline than just open it up to everything. I do think they need to do a little more work to set the story better - but getting rid of the story altogether just seems like cheap fan service and pure laziness to appease a small, select subset of fans.

 

[Mike S]

Because that's fan service, not storytelling. Disney has always been about storytelling in all its attractions, and setting has a lot to do with that. Having all eras "represented" would make it a glorified Star Wars convention, rather than a unique vehicle for story telling, which in every other conversation about every other ride or land in WDW *except Galaxy's Edge* we argue every day about things being on theme, getting the setting right, etc.

I'd rather they tell a good story in any timeline than just open it up to everything. I do think they need to do a little more work to set the story better - but getting rid of the story altogether just seems like cheap fan service and pure laziness to appease a small, select subset of fans.

Small. Right.

Keep telling yourself that. It’s only a small group of people that prefer more of what Star Wars has to offer than just the Disney Trilogy. The declining BO numbers and difficult to sell merchandise tells a different story.

 

[The_Jobu]

a small, select subset of fans.

Your fan service debate is interesting, but you dont really believe this part, do you?

 

[mikejs78]

Your fan service debate is interesting, but you dont really believe this part, do you?

I'm talking about those complaining about Galaxy's Edge, yes.

 

[The_Jobu]

I'm talking about those complaining about Galaxy's Edge, yes.

As in only a small subset of fans would enjoy more OT content?

 

[mikejs78]

As in only a small subset of fans would enjoy more OT content?

As in only a small number of fans keep complaining about it.

 

[The_Jobu]

As in only a small number of fans keep complaining about it.

Ah I see. I think we are in agreement then that most people would like some more OT in GE, but only a small number are vocal about it.

 

[mikejs78]

Ah I see. I think we are in agreement then that most people would like some more OT in GE, but only a small number are vocal about it.

"Most people" want more characters in Epcot. That's why we are in the mess we are in over there.

 

[The_Jobu]

"Most people" want more characters in Epcot. That's why we are in the mess we are in over there.

Well, that's a whole other kettle of fish, but I dont think populism is necessarily always bad, I see it as a question of theming and suitability. Many people want more characters and IP in everything, which is fine in MK but isnt suited to the intentions of epcot. I wouldn't see popular OT content in GE as going against suitability or theming of the park.

Very interesting concepts though, I like abstract discussions of WDW concepts.

 

[Rich Brownn]

Ah I see. I think we are in agreement then that most people would like some more OT in GE, but only a small number are vocal about it.

Most people could care less, so long as its good. I've been on RoTR 6 times now and yet to hear anyone say "Oh, thats was ok, but it would be soooo much better with Darth Vader".

 

[The_Jobu]

Most people could care less, so long as its good. I've been on RoTR 6 times now and yet to hear anyone say "Oh, thats was ok, but it would be soooo much better with Darth Vader".

Well if no one said that out loud it must be proof. Good call.

 

[doctornick]

Well, that's a whole other kettle of fish, but I dont think populism is necessarily always bad, I see it as a question of theming and suitability. Many people want more characters and IP in everything, which is fine in MK but isnt suited to the intentions of epcot. I wouldn't see popular OT content in GE as going against suitability or theming of the park.

Very interesting concepts though, I like abstract discussions of WDW concepts.

@mikejs78 is correct though - many on these boards complain when Disney ignores proper storytelling and placemaking in their efforts to increase IP exposure and usage. Then other want them to just blow up the setting of GE just to see some different characters. Granted they aren't necessarily the same people, but there seems to be some overlap from what I've seen.

Personally, I firmly believe that having SW:GE exist in a particular location and time is the right thing to do with the IP. The better debate IMHO is whether they choice the "best" setting, not whether having a specific one was a good idea. I can see the benefit of using the ST timeframe though since it allows for references to the entire story of Star Wars.

That said, I'm surprised that they didn't incorporate OT elements into the land more in ways that would make sense in the timeframe. Like having 3P0 and R2-D2 in the land (why wouldn't they?) Or using a "Force sensitive" area and featuring Force Ghosts of Luke/Obi-Wan/Yoda or "dark side cave" manifestations of Vader/Maul/etc. Or, quite honestly, have plans for a second land to be build soon which would be centered on the timeframe of the OT. Those would be the proper theme park ways to incorporate other (more popular) Star wars elements without just "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" and ignoring proper placemaking.

 

[The_Jobu]

@mikejs78 is correct though - many on these boards complain when Disney ignores proper storytelling and placemaking in their efforts to increase IP exposure and usage. Then other want them to just blow up the setting of GE just to see some different characters. Granted they aren't necessarily the same people, but there seems to be some overlap from what I've seen.

Personally, I firmly believe that having SW:GE exist in a particular location and time is the right thing to do with the IP. The better debate IMHO is whether they choice the "best" setting, not whether having a specific one was a good idea. I can see the benefit of using the ST timeframe though since it allows for references to the entire story of Star Wars.

That said, I'm surprised that they didn't incorporate OT elements into the land more in ways that would make sense in the timeframe. Like having 3P0 and R2-D2 in the land (why wouldn't they?) Or using a "Force sensitive" area and featuring Force Ghosts of Luke/Obi-Wan/Yoda or "dark side cave" manifestations of Vader/Maul/etc. Or, quite honestly, have plans for a second land to be build soon which would be centered on the timeframe of the OT. Those would be the proper theme park ways to incorporate other (more popular) Star wars elements without just "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" and ignoring proper placemaking.

Definitely an interesting turn of events. I'm hoping to see it for myself what it's like and what could be improved.

 

[mikejs78]

That said, I'm surprised that they didn't incorporate OT elements into the land more in ways that would make sense in the timeframe. Like having 3P0 and R2-D2 in the land (why wouldn't they?) Or using a "Force sensitive" area and featuring Force Ghosts of Luke/Obi-Wan/Yoda or "dark side cave" manifestations of Vader/Maul/etc. Or, quite honestly, have plans for a second land to be build soon which would be centered on the timeframe of the OT. Those would be the proper theme park ways to incorporate other (more popular) Star wars elements without just "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" and ignoring proper placemaking.

Exactly this. As much as I'm critical of the idea of just "shove all the characters in", there are ways to incorporate more OT (and PT) elements in a way that makes sense to the placemaking. Short of announcing a new OT land (which I'd be in favor of but that I doubt they would do so soon), all your other ideas are spot on and should, IMO, be incorporated into the land.

 

[Rich Brownn]

Well if no one said that out loud it must be proof. Good call.

I haven't seen anyone in print do it either.

 

[DarkMetroid567]

Small. Right.

Keep telling yourself that. It’s only a small group of people that prefer more of what Star Wars has to offer than just the Disney Trilogy. The declining BO numbers and difficult to sell merchandise tells a different story.

my go to has been to basically ignore anyone who uses the terminology "Disney Trilogy" or "DT"

 

[Joesixtoe]

Most people could care less, so long as its good. I've been on RoTR 6 times now and yet to hear anyone say "Oh, thats was ok, but it would be soooo much better with Darth Vader".

I have.. atleast while in line after being detained.. same as Millennium Falcon, in line listening to the over head announcement and this lady says "is that Luke Skywalker??"
I get what your saying though.. however I do believe Disney should do something cause I don't believe this land has a shelf life like Harry Potter's world land thingy does.

 

[Joesixtoe]

@mikejs78 is correct though - many on these boards complain when Disney ignores proper storytelling and placemaking in their efforts to increase IP exposure and usage. Then other want them to just blow up the setting of GE just to see some different characters. Granted they aren't necessarily the same people, but there seems to be some overlap from what I've seen.

Personally, I firmly believe that having SW:GE exist in a particular location and time is the right thing to do with the IP. The better debate IMHO is whether they choice the "best" setting, not whether having a specific one was a good idea. I can see the benefit of using the ST timeframe though since it allows for references to the entire story of Star Wars.

That said, I'm surprised that they didn't incorporate OT elements into the land more in ways that would make sense in the timeframe. Like having 3P0 and R2-D2 in the land (why wouldn't they?) Or using a "Force sensitive" area and featuring Force Ghosts of Luke/Obi-Wan/Yoda or "dark side cave" manifestations of Vader/Maul/etc. Or, quite honestly, have plans for a second land to be build soon which would be centered on the timeframe of the OT. Those would be the proper theme park ways to incorporate other (more popular) Star wars elements without just "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" and ignoring proper placemaking.

Problem with setting the land in a particular time frame is, you have or could have more well recieved story treatments out that could have been in implemented into the land if not for the time frame. I.E Mandalorian and baby Yoda.. future movies or shows like Kenobi which I'm sure people will love.

 

[Mike S]

my go to has been to basically ignore anyone who uses the terminology "Disney Trilogy" or "DT"

Great conversation. I just saw the term and thought it fit. Technically that is what it is no? The Trilogy made by Disney?

 

[The_Jobu]

my go to has been to basically ignore anyone who uses the terminology "Disney Trilogy" or "DT"