News Test Track to be reimagined

[MerlinTheGoat]

EPCOT, Edutainment or Infomercial?

Technically both, but I didn't realize until I was older how much it was the second one. And I'd take IP over infomercial any day.

Uh, are you under the impression that IP isn't also infomercial? It absolutely is, even more blatantly so than anything in old school EPCOT. You're getting just the infomercial alone, sans the edutainment. IP attractions exist purely to sell movies, TV subscriptions and especially merchandise.

 

[MisterPenguin]

This is the Test Track thread.

This is the Test Track thread.

 

[Gusey]

Uh, are you under the impression that IP isn't also infomercial? It absolutely is, even more blatantly so than anything in old school EPCOT. You're getting just the infomercial alone, sans the edutainment. IP attractions exist purely to sell movies, TV subscriptions and especially merchandise.

This thought process makes sense if you are just a general theme park fan. I only decided to visit Disney Parks because I enjoy Disney movies and want to experience the worlds created, and then discovered the original attractions like Test Track (which this thread is on ) by visiting the parks. The movies become "informecials" for the parks when they use IP. As a Disney fan, I cannot think of any IP-based attraction that made me go "I better watch this movie for the first time".

 

[lazyboy97o]

This thought process makes sense if you are just a general theme park fan. I only decided to visit Disney Parks because I enjoy Disney movies and want to experience the worlds created, and then discovered the original attractions like Test Track (which this thread is on ) by visiting the parks. The movies become "informecials" for the parks when they use IP. As a Disney fan, I cannot think of any IP-based attraction that made me go "I better watch this movie for the first time".

Do you watch a Disney movie for the first time only expecting characters you’ve already seen?

 

[lazyboy97o]

All of this talk of “old Epcot is gone” always missed that the new “Evolved Epcot” desperately wants you to think it is related to the old EPCOT Center. EPCOT Center is still something with cultural meaning. Universal Studios Epcot is not.

 

[Gusey]

Do you watch a Disney movie for the first time only expecting characters you’ve already seen?

Missing the point. I'm saying the Disney IP is what encourages me to visit Disney Parks over other theme parks in the area. I just struggle to understand why people hate Disney movies being represented at the Disney Parks. If everything was an original attraction, it might as well be called Themed Land

 

[lazyboy97o]

Missing the point. I'm saying the Disney IP is what encourages me to visit Disney Parks over other theme parks in the area. I just struggle to understand why people hate Disney movies being represented at the Disney Parks. If everything was an original attraction, it might as well be called Themed Land

For the same reason people would take issue if every Disney movie only ever had Mickey Mouse in it. Or if Disney announced that from here on out they were only ever making sequels and remakes of movies. Nothing new ever again unless it was for a foreign market with foreign financing.

 

[Gusey]

For the same reason people would take issue if every Disney movie only ever had Mickey Mouse in it. Or if Disney announced that from here on out they were only ever making sequels and remakes of movies. Nothing new ever again unless it was for a foreign market with foreign financing.

I never once said that original attractions are bad, which is what you're implying here. In my first post, I clearly said I visit the parks for Disney IP and discover and appreciate the original attractions whilst I'm there. The Disney movies/characters is drawing the majority of guests to visit the parks, so they shouldn't just stop making attractions based on Disney movies.
If an attraction based on a Disney movies didn't encourage you're families first visit, what was it?

 

[lazyboy97o]

I never once said that original attractions are bad, which is what you're implying here. In my first post, I clearly said I visit the parks for Disney IP and discover and appreciate the original attractions whilst I'm there. The Disney movies/characters is drawing the majority of guests to visit the parks, so they shouldn't just stop making attractions based on Disney movies.
If an attraction based on a Disney movies didn't encourage you're families first visit, what was it?

You said you don’t understand why people have an issue. The reason is because the parks are now limited to only doing one thing. Just as people would have an issue if the next CEO announced all movies would only be sequels and remakes. And I’m sure we’d have people telling us the same thing of “The original movies were good but people want sequels and remakes.”

Some of us visited before Bob Iger was in charge. People somehow thought to visit EPCOT Center before it had movie rides. Some people even visited Disneyland when it was very lacking in movie rides and the ones it did have were based on movies that didn’t interest people. But it’s kind of amazing to see the suggestion that the likes of Pirates of the Caribbean and The Haunted Mansion couldn’t generate interest in the parks on their own.

 

[larryz]

Promoting a product should be done as Walt intended: In the form of rap...

I just love the Hollywood Burbank production values in that clip!

 

[Bocabear]

I believe Disney and their reputation for excellence was what always drew people to the theme parks...IP was secondary and part of the equation... Maybe the world is different now and the guests will only visit for a specific IP...which seems shortsighted and ridiculous...like traveling to Italy only for Spaghetti Carbonara... The magic and reputation for the Disney theme parks was built on a variety of experiences and alot of that was the non-current IP attractions and original attractions. Space Mountain, Haunted Mansion, Pirates of the Caribbean, Enchanted TIki Room, Jungle Cruise, Country Bear Jamboree, The train, the monorails, the steamboat, Hall of Presidents, Main Street, Tomorrowland, Small World, All of the attraction in the Original EPCOT, all of the attractions in DAK prior to Pandora (except Festival of the Lion King and TTBAB... All of these attractions somehow drew millions and millions of guests...but now they feel like nothing will be successful without a movie plug? I don't believe that...Though one person on here says they come specifically for the IP...so I guess there are those that do... but if Disney started building engaging attractions without a current trending movie IP attached would people be like... Yeah, no I don't want to go to Disney because there isn't a new Stitch ride... I don't think so....

 

[Gusey]

Though one person on here says they come specifically for the IP...so I guess there are those that do... but if Disney started building engaging attractions without a current trending movie IP attached would people be like... Yeah, no I don't want to go to Disney because there isn't a new Stitch ride... I don't think so....

Missing the point again. I never said I'm not going to Disney if they build an original attraction, I really appreciate the original attractions. I'm saying I wasn't aware of the original attractions until I visited, and I only visited because of the DISNEY IP. Maybe it's an international thing as our adverts say come to WDW to enter the world of Star Wars, see Cinderella's Castle, see Festival of the Lion King and ride Frozen Ever After. 1955 Disneyland was mainly advertised by a TV show telling guests they can meet Davy Crockett and enter the world of classic Disney movies like Peter Pan.
This isn't limited to just Disney though. I like properties featured at Universal Studios (like ET and Harry Potter), so I visit those parks. I like Lego so visit Legoland. I'm not interested in animal themed rollercoasters so I don't visit Sea World

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

I just in general think that Disney fans don’t understand what general audiences want out of the parks and this makes them get really defensive and gatekeepy about it. And then the GA looks at Disney fans weird because they don’t understand what Disney fans want out of the parks either because they don’t view them as anything more than top of the line theme parks Disney owns.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I just in general think that Disney fans don’t understand what general audiences want out of the parks and this makes them get really defensive and gatekeepy about it.

Who exactly is the general public and how do we know what they want?

Disney as a company almost exclusively decides what happens with their parks, and history has shown that even if they do the bare minimum people will still show up to some out of an innate curiosity and built in demand from decades of cultural awareness. Disneyland Paris hasn't had a new ride in almost 20 years and it's still the #1 European theme park.

Disney has also built theme parks that failed to meet expectations despite their name and IP attached. They also have a habit of announcing and cancelling things on an as needs basis. They make decisions all the time that are obviously unappealing to their customer base, but get away with it because people don't visit the parks for one reason alone and that built in demand means people are willing to put up with a lot of nonsense to go due to a lack of major competition.

That some will rationalize decisions Disney makes does not mean the company knows exactly what their customer base wants and always makes decisions that appeal to them more than other potential ideas.

 

[lazyboy97o]

1955 Disneyland was mainly advertised by a TV show telling guests they can meet Davy Crockett and enter the world of classic Disney movies like Peter Pan.

Davy Crockett was a segment on Disneyland created to promote Frontierland…

Peter Pan was the exception to movies the public otherwise had ignored. They weren’t yet considered classics. They weren’t placed in the park based on box office performance or merchandise sales.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Who exactly is the general public and how do we know what they want?

This. The general public are the people who ask what time the 3:00 parade starts and where Harry Potter is at Universal-MGM Studios while standing in front Harambe. In no other medium would people buy the idea that the key to creative success is to mash together whatever random people say they want.

 

[JackCH]

I think it is a bit elitist to say the “general public” are the ones who ask what time the 3:00 parade is. That is the lowest commons denominator, not the general public.

And as this is the Test Track thread, isn’t this an example of Disney actually taking the ride back to more of a classic version anyway? Why is this discussion here?

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

Who exactly is the general public and how do we know what they want?

Disney as a company almost exclusively decides what happens with their parks, and history has shown that even if they do the bare minimum people will still show up to some out of an innate curiosity and built in demand from decades of cultural awareness. Disneyland Paris hasn't had a new ride in almost 20 years and it's still the #1 European theme park.

Disney has also built theme parks that failed to meet expectations despite their name and IP attached. They also have a habit of announcing and cancelling things on an as needs basis. They make decisions all the time that are obviously unappealing to their customer base, but get away with it because people don't visit the parks for one reason alone and that built in demand means people are willing to put up with a lot of nonsense to go due to a lack of major competition.

That some will rationalize decisions Disney makes does not mean the company knows exactly what their customer base wants and always makes decisions that appeal to them more than other potential ideas.

I would say we know what they want based on the repeated sales of tickets and noticeable growth in certain areas. I would say their movies being some of the most watched streaming service movies of the year would also be a good indicator. Dare I say the box office numbers even? Or the yearly attendance count... or the wait times for certain attractions... there are many ways to tell what speaks to people vs what doesnt.

 

[SteveAZee]

This is the Test Track thread.

Could you repeat that?

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I would say we know what they want based on the repeated sales of tickets and noticeable growth in certain areas. I would say their movies being some of the most watched streaming service movies of the year would also be a good indicator. Dare I say the box office numbers even? Or the yearly attendance count... or the wait times for certain attractions... there are many ways to tell what speaks to people vs what doesnt.

Streaming and movie box office does not correlate to attraction popularity, resort bookings or actual park specific metrics.

Movie success = theme park success is a fallacy used to justify Disney's IP only strategy.

We have decades of pre-Iger evidence to show well done Disney attractions, or those not based on Disney IP, succeed.

Disney saw the success of Expedition Everest (still a popular ride) and response decided to built things like Webslingers.

Because there's no alternative for the consumer, people just assume that was the only correct decision.