Star Wars themed land announced for Disneyland

[Deleted member 107043]

Sounds like what Industrial Light and Magic had to do for Transformers: The Ride 3D, an issue first tackled by Universal in the late 1990s.

Has it been there that long? I thought it opened in 2012 or 2013.

 

[Travel Junkie]

I'm not sure how a boat ride fits in the Star Wars universe. It's possible wires were crossed and they were talking about the Avatar boat ride. The way they described it, sounds like the Shanghai POTC ride system. If it does make the cut, it would be a much needed people eater.

I have little doubt that the First order attraction will be visually impressive. Theme park makers have had mixed results with trackless rides in my opinion so far but there is a ton of potential there. When done right like Honey Hunt in Tokyo, it turns out great.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Has it been there that long? I thought it opened in 2012 or 2013.

The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man opened in 1999.

 

[Travel Junkie]

I've always thought micechatters were 3 year olds... and figured it was common knowledge. Micechat bashing aside...

I've been thinking lately about Disney and mass entertainment and society in general... I've had some discussions with my friends and I've seem to come to the conclusion that opinions on Disneyland run deeper than just entertainment aspects... it's part of modern society itself and how people function these days...

(Prepare yourself for cranky jerk nonsensical ranting overload...)

What I want to know is... why 'should' Walt matter these days? Because he founded the company? Because he created the park? Who cares? Micechat screams that Tom Sawyer's Island is WALT'S ISLAND. So what? Why does that matter to 99% of the people who visit the park every day and spend money there? Should it matter? Why would anyone in today's society give a flying monkey about an island personally designed by a guy over 60 years ago? Nostalgia and history aside, does anyone honestly expect the 99% of visitors to the park to give a care about it? People today are visiting for a quick thrill, and a happy time for their kids... in today's me, me, me, now, now, now smartphone immediate no substance gratification society, we're beyond the point of having small quiet spaces anywhere any more at a payed park like this. Kids will glance at it, proclaim it boring, and move on to the loud noises and shiny lights.

Speaking of quiet spaces etc... (this thought pains me to say it because I am a huge fan of the old west and spend a lot of time myself in abandoned mines and ghost towns out in the desert)... but every time I see someone go on about "they should expand the desert area and rebuild Nature's Wonderland instead of SWL" etc. I think that person is delusional. The old west is not popular anymore and kids do not care about it at all (neither do most parents these days either). It's over, it's done with, people don't want it anymore. The divide is complete, people from cities are into commercialized aspects of life and do not care for things like the old west or rural areas for that matter... it's boring, dirty, and stupid to them. The bases of old American exploration are now all claimed to be bad by society... homesteading, expansion, and mining is now considered evil by city goers and the old ways of the west are considered prejudiced,offensive, foolish, and wrong. People are not allowed to have a romantic or positive view of things any more as society has been trained to be constructive in its views and focus on the negative aspects (lets be honest, there are lots to focus on). Fact is, the frontier is dead and children will no longer be running around Frontierland with 6-shooters wearing coonskin hats because it's too offensive to people on many different levels (choose your evil- gun violence, racism, animal cruelty, environmental concerns, hunting etc.).

The park needs to evolve. It needs to stay relevant, it needs to make money, and needs to play its part in the company. It has been doing this rather well over the past couple of decades (indicated by how successful it is ATM) but 'fans' still scream the sky is falling when things get altered in any way. I think they need to accept reality that has surrounded them, realize that Disney rightfully doesn't give a crap about what they think anymore, and move on. Disney is doing what it needs to do as a company and is applying itself to what matters most, the 99% of the visiting people who spend money at the parks.

SO... if I can sum all my idiocy up...... the park needs to evolve, society is simply too far gone into immediate gratification and flashy things to care about 'small quiet places' or the 'history' of the park, and Disney will do as it needs to stay relevant and successful. Online 'fans' and Disney 'armchair warriors' should realize they have already lost the battle and that they and their opinions no longer matter.

Back to micechat with that in mind, perhaps we can provide a malicious label for the people who no longer matter just as MiceChat did back with the whole 'defender of mediocrity' ordeal. Though, perhaps we're not 3 years old as they are...

I do believe we should as a society recognize and preserve history where we can and Disneyland is as historical as it gets in the theme park world. It is also hypocritical of Disney on one hand to tout nostalgia and point to it's history on one hand and actively look to get rid of it on the other.

From a business standpoint Disneyland is in the unique position of being the first one and the only one built by its founder. It has leveraged this in its marketing, however they continue to chip away and remove more and more elements that make it unique. If they remove all of these unique elements that just make it another modern park, then what do you have? A smaller, more cramped, cookie cutter version of every other park out there. The advantages have been removed and now it becomes a disadvantage because it doesn't have the wider pathways and as much space as other Disney parks and don't forget the teeny tiny castle. I often have a hard time convincing people that have been to WDW to try DLR. It's hard to explain the difference. It's different, it's unique, it just has something that you don't get at any other Disney park. As more and more of the history gets taken away and replaced with the new bright and shiny thing of the moment, it becomes another theme park. Disneyland should embrace it's history and enhance the uniqueness, not remove it. The Alice redo was spectacular and illustrates exactly what Disneyland should do as technology advances.

As far as not needing quiet spaces because of today's world, I would argue that only enhances the need for more quiet zones. One of the reasons you attend Disney parks is to escape from what you are used to. I didn't pay a boat load of money to get something I can get in the outside world. I want a Frontierland because where else but Disneyland can you get that experience?

Disneyland is beloved because it has unique experiences. There is certainly a place for modern rides where they fit. Indy was a great example of a cutting edge attraction that fit right in with the aesthetics of the existing park. That is what Disneyland should strive for.

I also think putting Star Wars land in a park that can't handle the crowds it will bring and in a place that it can't expand. That seems to be lost in the discussion. What an operational nightmare it will be.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man opened in 1999.

Oh... you said Transformers.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Oh... you said Transformers.

Transformers is when ILM was involved, but it was first an issue for Universal Creative with Spider-Man.

 

[Curious Constance]

I do believe we should as a society recognize and preserve history where we can and Disneyland is as historical as it gets in the theme park world. It is also hypocritical of Disney on one hand to tout nostalgia and point to it's history on one hand and actively look to get rid of it on the other.

From a business standpoint Disneyland is in the unique position of being the first one and the only one built by its founder. It has leveraged this in its marketing, however they continue to chip away and remove more and more elements that make it unique. If they remove all of these unique elements that just make it another modern park, then what do you have? A smaller, more cramped, cookie cutter version of every other park out there. The advantages have been removed and now it becomes a disadvantage because it doesn't have the wider pathways and as much space as other Disney parks and don't forget the teeny tiny castle. I often have a hard time convincing people that have been to WDW to try DLR. It's hard to explain the difference. It's different, it's unique, it just has something that you don't get at any other Disney park. As more and more of the history gets taken away and replaced with the new bright and shiny thing of the moment, it becomes another theme park. Disneyland should embrace it's history and enhance the uniqueness, not remove it. The Alice redo was spectacular and illustrates exactly what Disneyland should do as technology advances.

As far as not needing quiet spaces because of today's world, I would argue that only enhances the need for more quiet zones. One of the reasons you attend Disney parks is to escape from what you are used to. I didn't pay a boat load of money to get something I can get in the outside world. I want a Frontierland because where else but Disneyland can you get that experience?

Disneyland is beloved because it has unique experiences. There is certainly a place for modern rides where they fit. Indy was a great example of a cutting edge attraction that fit right in with the aesthetics of the existing park. That is what Disneyland should strive for.

I also think putting Star Wars land in a park that can't handle the crowds it will bring and in a place that it can't expand. That seems to be lost in the discussion. What an operational nightmare it will be.

I have a feeling before Star wars opens, there will be severe cutbacks to the annual pass program. I think they've been taking baby steps to eventually get there the last couple of years.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

Indy was a great example of a cutting edge attraction that fit right in with the aesthetics of the existing park.

You talk about potential operational nightmares with SW Land and then say that Indy fit right in. Did you visit during busy times in the first couple of years after it opened? If you did during the first summer you'll recall that it most definitely was an operational nightmare, with lines winding through Adventureland stretching out to the Hub and looping back into Frontierland to the Golden Horseshoe entrance. At the time it was also only the second attraction in the park featuring IP from a film studio that had zero connection to Disney, which bothered many park fans.

I'm curious... do you like Star Wars?

 

[Curious Constance]

By the way, I'm not against Disneyland taking measures to preserve its history. I think its important that they do keep that in mind when developing new ideas. Although, I think it would be a mistake if that where their top or only priority. I think that kind of thinking would leave Disneyland irrelevant and completely vulnerable to being left behind and forgotten.
Rather than keep it exactly the same, with no changes, there has to be a middle ground.
To me the decision to keep the river, but shorten its route, is a good middle ground.
I understand not many agree with that around here. But I really do get tired of the Miceage hyperbole their updates are full of. To say Disney doesn't care about its history, to me is silly. I don't know many other companies that do so much to not lose sight of where they came from and please its fanbase.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

I have a feeling before Star wars opens, there will be severe cutbacks to the annual pass program. I think they've been taking baby steps to eventually get there the last couple of years.

Yep. Everything they've been doing with admissions over the past few years seems to indicate that they are gradually focusing on big spending customers. I would not be surprised to the AP payment plan finally sailed off to Yesterland by the time SW Land opens.

 

[Curious Constance]

Yep. Everything they've been doing with admissions over the past few years seems to indicate that they are gradually focusing on big spending customers. I would not be surprised to the AP payment plan finally sailed off to Yesterland by the time SW Land opens.

As someone who travels from out of state to go to Disneyland, this would be a welcome change for my family.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Disney has removed or severally altered many historical aspects of the park in the last few years. You may agree or disagree with the decisions Disney has made, but the opinion that Disney has put preserving the history of Disneyland at the bottom of the priority list is very valid and furthermore dismissing and denigrating an any opinion other than your own shows a complete lack of respect for other people.

Over the last few months there have been a few newer posters that have spent most of their time on the forums ripping people for their opinions. Having one opinion and feeling you have to attack anyone who states anything other than something that validates your own opinion is something a child would do.

You're absolutely right. If Disney on the highest of executive levels truly cared about the history and thematic structure of Disneyland, they would've built a third park where Star Wars land would fit in as seamlessy as it will at the Studios.

 

[Travel Junkie]

I have a feeling before Star wars opens, there will be severe cutbacks to the annual pass program. I think they've been taking baby steps to eventually get there the last couple of years.

Some do want to eliminate the AP program but most at TDA love it and would never want to lose the revenue it provides. Alterations will continue to occur, but if they truly wanted to get rid or severely cut back on the AP program they would eliminate monthly payment plans, eliminate the great perks it provides, and stop marketing it. They still market AP's heavily and continue great perks like AP only party nights pretty decent discounts, and free movie screenings. What they are trying to do is squeeze more money out of AP's because they know they can and try and alter their visiting patterns, which is why they are constantly playing around with blackout dates and have so many different passes. I do see the AP's skyrocket in price especially the higher end ones before Star Wars Land opens.

You talk about potential operational nightmares with SW Land and then say that Indy fit right in. Did you visit during busy times in the first couple of years after it opened? If you did during the first summer you'll recall that it most definitely was an operational nightmare, with lines winding through Adventureland stretching out to the Hub and looping back into Frontierland to the Golden Horseshoe entrance. At the time it was also only the second attraction in the park featuring IP from a film studio that had zero connection to Disney, which bothered many park fans.

I'm curious... do you like Star Wars?

I shouldn't need to explain why one ride is different operationally than a whole land. I will say that Disneyland needed a new cutting edge attraction at the time as attendance was declining at an alarming rate when Indy opened and that ride gave Disneyland the economic boost it needed. Disneyland Park has no attendance problems at this time although it could use more ride capacity. Yes Indy bothered some fans. I disagreed then as I do now.

Yes I like Star Wars and I guess you are trying to infer that I don't want it in Disneyland because I don't like the IP. Ideally if they built a 3rd gate anchored by Star Wars, Marvel, and heck throw Frozen in there. How amazing and profitable would be a Star Wars resort be where you could spend the night overlooking a Star Wars heavy park? They can't do that where it is going in and I think shoving it in the back corner with no room for expansion is short sighted. Any expansion will have to go in another park. Perhaps they are wanting that and the plan is to spread the love around, but on top of the other concerns I have this is just another one.

So yes I like Star Wars and I am disappointed that they didn't think bigger.


Edited to add: Since some people have reading comprehension issues, I said ideally as is a perfect world.

 

[Phroobar]

So yes I like Star Wars and I am disappointed that they didn't think bigger.

Maybe they did originally think bigger if we gave credit to the rumor of Star Wars land going into the Simba parking lot with bridge connecting it to DCA. The rumor was that it would have a hotel around it acting as a berm. Maybe those plans got axed because Florida wanted something cheaper for DHS and DLR's version was suppose to be a duplicate or maybe Florida didn't want to be upstaged? I blame bad internal politics.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

I thought the version of SW Land that's being built is the biggest iteration. The rumor is that it started as a TL redo, then moved to Toontown and finally to where it will be now.

 

[dweezil78]

I think, sadly, it's all a matter of timing. We've literally just kicked off a new decade of Star Wars fanfare and getting a big new land expansion is just going to happen a whole lot faster than an entire third gate which I'm sure is far trickier to get done in the city of Anaheim than it would be on WDW's sprawling resort property.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

I've never believed that there would be a third Disney gate in Anaheim and I still don't. At least not in the foreseeable future.

 

[dweezil78]

I've never believed that there would be a third Disney gate in Anaheim and I still don't. At least not in the foreseeable future.

I feel like at some point they've got to find a way in order to keep up with the demand... But you are right as far as that not happening in the foreseeable future. Star Wars Land happening at DL is hard proof of that because there's simply no way that Star Wars and Marvel would not be tenants in a third gate if it were to happen anytime soon.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

DCA is finally performing well, but has a long way to go to catch up to DL or even the bottom performing parks at WDW. According to TEA in 2014 DCA had 8.8 million visitors compared to WDW's least attended park, DHS, which had 10.3 million visitors. In short Disney still has a lot of opportunity for growing its business in Anaheim without adding another gate. I realize that the SoCal and Orlando markets are different animals, but I have to assume that the difference in traffic is significant enough to make Disney hesitant to risk billions of dollars on a third gate in Anaheim. I think it's more likely that we'll see another international park announced before another Disney gate opens in Southern California.

 

[Curious Constance]

I don't know if the City of Anaheim could handle a third part. Can you imagine a three park resort, that's too close to competing with WDW. The city is already filled to the brim with little room to add more hotels/parking etc.