Star Wars Launch Bay coming to Disney's Hollywood Studios later this year

[tokengator]

That rings true.

JJ's best move was getting Kasdan involved,imo. No one knows star wars better than that guy.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The aesthetic was never the main draw of Star Wars though. It's the CHARACTERS of the films that are the draw.

Exactly! Which is why Star Wars isn't this absolutely perfect choice for themed entertainment because the aesthetics and places are what drive such an experience but they are not what make the films so engaging.

 

[twebber55]

i g

Exactly! Which is why Star Wars isn't this absolutely perfect choice for themed entertainment because the aesthetics and places are what drive such an experience but they are not what make the films so engaging.

completely agree
im assuming thats why they went with a new design of a place for the theme park setting instead of tattoine or hoth or whatever

 

[Matt_Black]

Exactly! Which is why Star Wars isn't this absolutely perfect choice for themed entertainment because the aesthetics and places are what drive such an experience but they are not what make the films so engaging.

"I'm sorry, children and young at heart all over the world, but since theming is more important than your enjoyment, we have to cancel Star Wars Land."

 

[lazyboy97o]

"I'm sorry, children and young at heart all over the world, but since theming is more important than your enjoyment, we have to cancel Star Wars Land."

Theme is not the source of enjoyment at a theme park? If people want to see a movie they can watch it whenever they want.

 

[tokengator]

Theme is not the source of enjoyment at a theme park? If people want to see a movie they can watch it whenever they want.

it is part of the experience. This star wars land they are building would have zero excitement and a lot of "?" type comments and looks if it was just a "transport hub planet" or whatever they said it would be. The fact that it is a STAR WARS planet is what makes it special and brings the excitement. These things are a bit mutually exclusive. Transport hub planet - BOO!! Star Wars Transport Hub planet -- YAY!!!

So again, back to my point about hoth -- which is an iconic scene and battle in Star Wars -- it can absolutely be done and in a magnificent way, and in a way that would draw excitement. Disney chose to go a different direction with a new planet, explained why they did, and it made sense to me.

keep in mind 30+ years later people still travel to a barren desert in Tunisia just to visit the remnants of the Tootoine movie set. Just to get a piece of that real life star wars experience.

and there is no rides here. No characters. Nothing. Just old, empty, and decrepit buildings in the middle of a desert.

So yes they could take any planet from the current Movies, from the spin-off movies i mentioned, or create a new planet and tie it into these movies like this planet they are doing and it will be a massive draw. The key of course is the quality of the work they do.

 

[Matt_Black]

Theme is not the source of enjoyment at a theme park? If people want to see a movie they can watch it whenever they want.

You want theme in excess, draconian levels of enforced theme. Much like Captain Nemo in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, you want harsh, unforgiving perfection of theme.

 

[twebber55]

im kind of in the middle on this debate
There is no central environment to star wars therefore it can be tough to build in a theme park setting unlike
HP, Carsland, or Avatar
thats why i think a new never seen before Star wars land was the way to go

 

[tokengator]

im kind of in the middle on this debate
There is no central environment to star wars therefore it can be tough to build in a theme park setting unlike
HP, Carsland, or Avatar
thats why i think a new never seen before Star wars land was the way to go

and the IP gives that flexibility. Which is the crux of the debate -- that they have pretty much limitless resources to work with when it comes to star wars. Don't like any of the sets in the movies? Make one up! That easy. And they are doing it.

Star Wars is really unique in this way being that it is an interstellar platform where you can just make up any type of planet you can dream up and tie it in however you want.

Whether or not they could use existing settings is really here nor there to the discussion.

 

[Matt_Black]

and the IP gives that flexibility. Which is the crux of the debate -- that they have pretty much limitless resources to work with when it comes to star wars. Don't like any of the sets in the movies? Make one up! That easy. And they are doing it.

Star Wars is really unique in this way being that it is an interstellar platform where you can just make up any type of planet you can dream up and tie it in however you want.

Whether or not they could use existing settings is really here nor there to the discussion.

And even if it WERE, well, you've got 7 movies and counting and two animated series to pull from. And that's only counting canon material.

 

[lazyboy97o]

it is part of the experience. This star wars land they are building would have zero excitement and a lot of "***?" type comments and looks if it was just a "transport hub planet" or whatever they said it would be. The fact that it is a STAR WARS planet is what makes it special and brings the excitement. These things are a bit mutually exclusive. Transport hub planet - BOO!! Star Wars Transport Hub planet -- YAY!!!

So again, back to my point about hoth -- which is an iconic scene and battle in Star Wars -- it can absolutely be done and in a magnificent way, and in a way that would draw excitement. Disney chose to go a different direction with a new planet, explained why they did, and it made sense to me.

keep in mind 30+ years later people still travel to a barren desert in Tunisia just to visit the remnants of the Tootoine movie set. Just to get a piece of that real life star wars experience.

and there is no rides here. No characters. Nothing. Just old, empty, and decrepit buildings in the middle of a desert.

So yes they could take any planet from the current Movies, from the spin-off movies i mentioned, or create a new planet and tie it into these movies like this planet they are doing and it will be a massive draw. The key of course is the quality of the work they do.

Whether or not people show up is entirely unrelated to creative success.

You want theme in excess, draconian levels of enforced theme. Much like Captain Nemo in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, you want harsh, unforgiving perfection of theme.

There aren't many examples of lousy theme that are widely celebrated. Disney has had the rights for 30 years and yet not a single place out of the supposedly many great place have been built.

and the IP gives that flexibility. Which is the crux of the debate -- that they have pretty much limitless resources to work with when it comes to star wars. Don't like any of the sets in the movies? Make one up! That easy. And they are doing it.

Star Wars is really unique in this way being that it is an interstellar platform where you can just make up any type of planet you can dream up and tie it in however you want.

Whether or not they could use existing settings is really here nor there to the discussion.

Except that a new land is not being created whole cloth. Disney has already said that it will be an amalgamation of established places and the released art is dominated by the known Millenium Falcon. This is exactly what Star Tours did and it did that for the same reasons, there isn't enough to any one location to solidly anchor a built environment.

 

[twebber55]

and the IP gives that flexibility. Which is the crux of the debate -- that they have pretty much limitless resources to work with when it comes to star wars. Don't like any of the sets in the movies? Make one up! That easy. And they are doing it.

Star Wars is really unique in this way being that it is an interstellar platform where you can just make up any type of planet you can dream up and tie it in however you want.

Whether or not they could use existing settings is really here nor there to the discussion.

oh i agree
i just think there are easier IPs to create a theme park environment that Star Wars even though SWL will obviously be popular

EDIT: for what its worth i love the look of the concept art

 

[tokengator]

97% on RT with 130+ reviews

 

[RSoxNo1]

I checked it out tonight.

I'm really not sure what people are going ape about. It's really nice. Very well done. I have no complaints with it. No real spoilers.

Looks a lot nicer than most photos I've seen. At the end of the day, it's some nice props, some meet and greets, a store and a small film. Not sure how that isn't enough for some people but I really liked it.

It's a small D23 exhibit with a couple of meet and greets. That's all it was ever promised to be. It's a temporary exhibit to celebrate an upcoming movie. It's the type of thing that the Studios should do whenever there is a major production in the works. They did it with the 2 years of Frozen stuff. These are temporary additions that DO have a place in the park. The issue is that the permanent additions have taken too long to get off the ground. They were only announced in August, but they should have been announced at minimum two years prior.

 

[ToTBellHop]

It's a small D23 exhibit with a couple of meet and greets. That's all it was ever promised to be. It's a temporary exhibit to celebrate an upcoming movie. It's the type of thing that the Studios should do whenever there is a major production in the works. They did it with the 2 years of Frozen stuff. These are temporary additions that DO have a place in the park. The issue is that the permanent additions have taken too long to get off the ground. They were only announced in August, but they should have been announced at minimum two years prior.

It confuses me as well. Was there ever any doubt that Star Wars would make a fortune? Disney is so slow to commit to IPs anymore. Remember American Idol Experience opening about five years too late? Or Kim Possible opening about four years too late at Epcot and becoming Phineas and Ferb about four years late? Why is Iger so gun shy adding IPs to the parks when he isn't gun shy on buying the IPs in the first place?

 

[danlb_2000]

It confuses me as well. Was there ever any doubt that Star Wars would make a fortune? Disney is so slow to commit to IPs anymore. Remember American Idol Experience opening about five years too late? Or Kim Possible opening about four years too late at Epcot and becoming Phineas and Ferb about four years late? Why is Iger so gun shy adding IPs to the parks when he isn't gun shy on buying the IPs in the first place?

Yeah, not being willing to go all in for Star Wars brings new meaning to the term "risk averse".

 

[barkerbird]

It's a small D23 exhibit with a couple of meet and greets. That's all it was ever promised to be. It's a temporary exhibit to celebrate an upcoming movie. It's the type of thing that the Studios should do whenever there is a major production in the works. They did it with the 2 years of Frozen stuff. These are temporary additions that DO have a place in the park. The issue is that the permanent additions have taken too long to get off the ground. They were only announced in August, but they should have been announced at minimum two years prior.

The Sorcerer's Hat was "temporary" as well as the millennium celebration sign on Spaceship Earth which stayed for years..only the "2000" changed to "Epcot"

 

[Incomudro]

Yeah, but what does that matter?
Launch Bay is a thrown together attraction to put some Star Wars into the park - along with the revamp of the Jedi Training show - until Star Wars Land is completed. A place holder of sorts.
It's not as though it would be a crime if Launch Bay sticks around after the completion of SWL.
Launch Bay could always be updated as well.

 

[Incomudro]

Yeah, not being willing to go all in for Star Wars brings new meaning to the term "risk averse".

This is indeed kind of funny.
There's probably not a film ever that's got the legs that Star Wars has.
Perhaps there are more "classic" classics, though given the age of Star Wars now - it's pretty classic.
It also never stops generating new audiences.
Star Wars wasn't my thing (JAWS was) but it's amazing to watch it grab generation after generation of kids. Not only grab them, but hold them.
At its heart, it is indeed a classic - a simple story of good vs evil - which is timeless.

 

[boufa]

This is indeed kind of funny.
There's probably not a film ever that's got the legs that Star Wars has.
Perhaps there are more "classic" classics, though given the age of Star Wars now - it's pretty classic.
It also never stops generating new audiences.
Star Wars wasn't my thing (JAWS was) but it's amazing to watch it grab generation after generation of kids. Not only grab them, but hold them.
At its heart, it is indeed a classic - a simple story of good vs evil - which is timeless.

I don't know about that completely. If The Force Awakens had gotten reviews comparing it to Phantom Menace the I think we would have a major SW problem. I think it is universally accepted that SW Ep1 was not too good. (I didn't mind it, it was wonderfully average). If it looked like this group was going to start off the same way, there could have been real ticket selling issues with the next SW movie in a few years.

Thankfully, things seem to be pointing to this movie being a HUGE success. But the entire new trilogy isn't or at least wasn't a lock to be gigantic. Certainly it would have been ok... but not gigantic.

Also remember that there was an outcry when Disney bought LucasFilm that Disney would ruin Star Wars... this looks good now, but certainly wasn't a lock.