Star Wars themed land announced for Disneyland

D

Deleted member 107043

Star Wars should always be associated with George Lucas just like Disneyland should always be associated with Walt Disney.

I get what you're saying, but George Lucas is a Hollywood legend. Of course there will be future generations who aren't going to know what's what, but I don't think we need to be concerned that credit for the creation of the Star Wars universe will be lost because Disney owns the franchise.
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
All indications are that Disney's corporate strategy for the parks going forward is to drive franchises, and as a result there are some pretty poor IP fits at the MK, primarily in TL. Now that I think about it, hasn't every major attraction that has been added to the MK over past decade or so been related to a film or character franchise? In any case, based on the success of IP based attractions and the phenomenal draw of WWoHP and Cars Land, we should assume that most or all future additions will follow a similar strategy across the P&R portfolio, including the possibility of an entire land at the MK being devoted to a valuable franchise. Again, the precedent for IP being the main focus at Disney parks, including the MK, was set at least a decade ago.
Well, true but like you said, never to this extent until recently. As I said most IP insertions in the kingdoms have been good for the most part. As far as poor fits go, Monsters Inc. Laugh Floor was a much better fit for the Studios rather than Tomorrowland, but most Insertions have been in theme, quality aside. There have been original ideas around the world in recent years like Grizzly Gulch, Mystic Point, and most of the rides in Shanghai's Adventure Isle, but I thi that's because they were planned before all this IP stuff got out of hand for Disney. The executives beyond blind if this is in fact their only direction as they may some day end up ruining the parks one day because of it. While I still out hope that the parks won't become polluted with Iger's purchases and IP lands where they don't belong, Star Wars land at DL still makes worry that one day huge chunks of the Kingdoms will be gone and replaced with profit center lands.
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
I get what you're saying, but George Lucas is a Hollywood legend. Of course there will be future generations who aren't going to know what's what, but I don't think we need to be concerned that credit for the creation of the Star Wars universe will be lost because Disney owns the franchise.
I guess that you're right. The franchise's park insertion won't be so misleading here in Florida so that's a good thing. Plus I'm sure those involved with Lucasfilm will try to keep the history from getting lost, no matter how much executives want to make it part of the "Disney" brand.
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
The problem extends to existing classic attractions, which are altered to have a movie theme. Jack Sparrows of the Caribbean, Haunted Mansion Garbage Day, ''it's a small world with a crapload of movie characters'', etc. This is perhaps even more offensive.
Haunted Mansion's Garbage Day? I can see how the POTC and IASW additions may get on people's nerves, but I perso don't think that they distract from the rides too much. The POTC additions are annoying in Florida with the Siren song in the caves. That just takes away from the whole beginning of the ride.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Are you shocked? A lot of people on here don't understand and appreciate the concepts of WDW. Fascinating isn't it?
It isn't helped by the self-loathing that makes appreciation of fixed amusements acceptable. That gets combined with people don't really like themed entertainment but do want more of the Disney brand for a mix that dares a 'fandom' that doesn't really like what made Disney's theme park offerings unique.
 
D

Deleted member 107043

I've been called out for not being respectful of DL's history here, so I feel compelled to comment.

No other entertainment organization its size is as respectful to its founder and legacy than the Walt Disney Company. Look no further than the efforts being done to ensure that the Pope House is kept intact as an example. As a lifelong Disneyland fan I love and celebrate the park's history, as we all do, but at the same time I've accepted that my adoration and appreciation for DL's legacy doesn't make me an authority on how the place should be run, rain on someone else's fun when I disagree, judge how others choose to experience the place, or demonize management for milking an IP strategy that has seen extraordinary success across its resort portfolio over the past decade.

We all have varying opinions on how the park should function, and that's ok, but the only right answer is the one that honors Disneyland's historical context as a ground breaking themed entertainment complex and keeps profits growing in the 21st Century, which is exactly the fine line that Disney is walking right now. So please, don't berate me or assume I'm dissing DL legacy when I'm excited about new relevant content being added to the park that may infringe on a piece of the park's history.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
I've been called out for not being respectful of DL's history here, so I feel compelled to comment.

No other entertainment organization its size is as respectful to its founder and legacy than the Walt Disney Company. Look no further than the efforts being done to ensure that the Pope House in kept intact as an example. As a lifelong Disneyland fan I love and celebrate the park's history, as we all do, but at the same time I've accepted that my adoration and appreciation for DL's legacy doesn't make me an authority on how the place should be run, rain on someone else's fun when I disagree, judge how others choose to experience the place, or demonize management for milking an IP strategy that has seen extraordinary success across its resort portfolio over the past decade.

We all have varying opinions on how the park should function, and that's ok, but the only right answer is the one that honors Disneyland's historical context as ground breaking themed entertainment complex and keeps profits growing in the 21st Century, which is exactly the fine line that Disney is walking right now. So please, don't berate me or assume I'm dissing DL legacy when I'm excited about new relevant content being added to the park that may infringe on a piece of the park's history.
I agree with you that Disney has been very respectful to Walt, but there's nothing wrong with being critical of a corporation's decisions and a potential path. When corporations mill certain methods and use them as the only way to market something, like IP lands, it eventually causes controversy amongst fans and people will eventually tire of it. Fans do have a right to criticize decisions because they may have a longer more passionate history with the fandom than those making the decisions. After all, fans are the most dedicated customers, they should listen. You also have the right not to criticize decisions as well since its all subjective. No one was trying to try to ruin anyone's enjoym of anything.
 

George Lucas on a Bench

Well-Known Member
It's not even about Tim Burton. I'm a huge fan of his earlier films (Batman Returns is second only to E.T. as my favorite of all time) and I never had an issue with TNBC, although I didn't particularly like it. But Haunted Mansion in its (relatively) classic form is my favorite thing the Walt Disney company has ever done, and seeing it trashed with cartoon characters, gaudy decor and neon lights for five months out of the year is the worst thing I've ever experienced in a Disney park.
 
D

Deleted member 107043

Fans do have a right to criticize decisions because they may have a longer more passionate history with the fandom than those making the decisions. After all, fans are the most dedicated customers, they should listen. You also have the right not to criticize decisions as well since its all subjective.

Of course, but when the strategy is yeilding the results the company wants what is there to argue? All I'm saying is just because I appear to be supportive of certain things the company does doesn't mean that I don't hold the park's history in high regard.
 

George Lucas on a Bench

Well-Known Member
It's too bad Disney didn't retheme Haunted Mansion to the superior Tim Burton Christmas movie: Batman Returns. Then I might actually love it. It seems perfect. The Mansion becomes Wayne Manor and the stretching rooms can be elevators that descend into the Batcave. The Doom Buggies look like Anton Furst Batman designs from that era. Batman would fight Penguin and Catwoman. I'm drunk, but I know this is an amazing idea.
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
It's too bad Disney didn't retheme Haunted Mansion to the superior Tim Burton Christmas movie: Batman Returns. Then I might actually love it. It seems perfect. The Mansion becomes Wayne Manor and the stretching rooms can be elevators that descend into the Batcave. The Doom Buggies look like Anton Furst Batman designs from that era. Batman would fight Penguin and Catwoman. I'm drunk, but I know this is an amazing idea.
Well unfortunately for you, Disney owns Marvel so you may have to settle for a Doctor Strange overlay since a movie's coming out later this year. lol
 

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

Back
Top Bottom