-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
THE HOBBIT IS COMING!!!!! WDW better get their act together and bid on Tolkien.
- Thread starter JimboJones123
- Start date
Ah I see. Any idea where I can pick one of those babies up? The lottery here in Florida is up to 38 million and I would really like not to have to come back to work after Christmas.
Ah I see. Any idea where I can pick one of those babies up? The lottery here in Florida is up to 38 million and I would really like not to have to come back to work after Christmas.
I don't think Sauron is using his anymore, maybe he would sell it???
And I don't think we need a crystal ball to realize this thread is COMPLETELY off track and may get canned by the secret police soon...
I guess I'm really, really not understanding this whole "it wouldn't fit at Disney" thing. If not "The Hobbit," then what? Could someone please explain exactly what would "fit" better?
So no Tolkein? No Rowling? Nothing even remotely swords-and-sorcery-like or medieval-esque? No "magic" unless it's in bibbity-bobbety cartoon form?
I'm completely not "getting" the whole "it's not family" thing either. That's just a tired refrain from the "everything MUST be safe for 5 year olds" contingent that finds an issue with literally anything harder than a "G" rating. (That particular over-protected generation when - if ever - it grows up is going to have endless psychological and socialization issues. But that's a post for another day.) Nothing brought my family together over the years better than LOTR in its various forms - especially in the late 70's/early 80's when the Rankin & Bass version of the Hobbit was all the rage, but also over those three magical Christmases where we got to "open" a new LOTR film on or around the holidays.
I think people need to remember that Disney doesn't exactly have the mainstream pulse when it comes to all things family entertainment. Barring the accidental "Pirates" blockbuster trifecta and the crutch of Pixar, the "House of Mouse" isn't exactly bursting with original intellectual properties that can be turned into themed attractions. Have you people even seen those horrid sequels to the classic Disney fairytales? Do you honestly think "Enchanted" is going to be carried over to create a whole new themed experience for the parks? When, oh when, will we get "High School the Musical: THE RIDE?"
As a popular piece of entertainment that the whole "family" could enjoy, "The Hobbit" fits just swimmingly into the Disney whole. No one has articulated even one reason why it would not - just as they could not when the whole Harry Potter rigamorale came down.
So no Tolkein? No Rowling? Nothing even remotely swords-and-sorcery-like or medieval-esque? No "magic" unless it's in bibbity-bobbety cartoon form?
I'm completely not "getting" the whole "it's not family" thing either. That's just a tired refrain from the "everything MUST be safe for 5 year olds" contingent that finds an issue with literally anything harder than a "G" rating. (That particular over-protected generation when - if ever - it grows up is going to have endless psychological and socialization issues. But that's a post for another day.) Nothing brought my family together over the years better than LOTR in its various forms - especially in the late 70's/early 80's when the Rankin & Bass version of the Hobbit was all the rage, but also over those three magical Christmases where we got to "open" a new LOTR film on or around the holidays.
I think people need to remember that Disney doesn't exactly have the mainstream pulse when it comes to all things family entertainment. Barring the accidental "Pirates" blockbuster trifecta and the crutch of Pixar, the "House of Mouse" isn't exactly bursting with original intellectual properties that can be turned into themed attractions. Have you people even seen those horrid sequels to the classic Disney fairytales? Do you honestly think "Enchanted" is going to be carried over to create a whole new themed experience for the parks? When, oh when, will we get "High School the Musical: THE RIDE?"
As a popular piece of entertainment that the whole "family" could enjoy, "The Hobbit" fits just swimmingly into the Disney whole. No one has articulated even one reason why it would not - just as they could not when the whole Harry Potter rigamorale came down.
I understand where you are coming from. I love the LOTR stuff too, but that doesn't mean that Disney has to have it or that it necessarily fits with Disney's approach (which I totally agree, at least in films has been less than spectacular of the last 10 years).
But theme park rides don't have to be based on movies, as some of the original MK attractions and EPCOT attractions have proven. The Haunted Mansion, Space Mountain, Alien Encounter (I'm with you on the G rating thing there destroying this masterpiece), etc etc.
I just think that LOTR and Disney is like wearing a striped shirt with plaid pants.....
They may both look okay separately, but together....hmmmmm.
Would you feel differently if Disney were to throw down hardcore and do a massive AA dark ride covering the entire 20k plot? I know I would give my left you know what for that.I understand where you are coming from. I love the LOTR stuff too, but that doesn't mean that Disney has to have it or that it necessarily fits with Disney's approach (which I totally agree, at least in films has been less than spectacular of the last 10 years).
But theme park rides don't have to be based on movies, as some of the original MK attractions and EPCOT attractions have proven. The Haunted Mansion, Space Mountain, Alien Encounter (I'm with you on the G rating thing there destroying this masterpiece), etc etc.
I just think that LOTR and Disney is like wearing a striped shirt with plaid pants.....
They may both look okay separately, but together....hmmmmm.
I would love for them to turn the 20k lot into a dark E-ticket ride. If it was LOTR would I still like it? maybe IDK honestly.
Just my opinion right now is they don't fit, and I think Fantasyland at MK is definitely the wrong place for it if they do it...
Maybe something at the Studios would be better placed.
This is another thing that I do not really get. It seems to be a common theme that every attraction based on a movie should belong at the studios. Sure it is an easy fit at the studios because of the absence of lands like in MK, Epcot or AK but IMHO a story like LOTR or Narnia for that matter would be as much of a fit in Fantasyland as 20k did.
Thiger
New Member
do we really need a land based on LOTR? I doubt it. This is a response to the HP universal, which, will be very popular with the kids. I've always thought that a 'Super Mario World' would be very popular and have a universal appeal. I just hope that if they do decide to go w/ bilbo and the gang in a MILF screen approach
Several great points here. If many people are saying that Tolkien isn't "family friendly" I sure hope to hell they aren't the same people that get upset at Pixarification and Adding more characters to Epcot. Especially WS that is about as Un-family friendly as anything at WDW has ever been. And that's why WS works so well. That's also why even in the offseason, 10s of thousands stay at Epcot all day and after dark when FW cuts back.
Next, Disney Animation and Live action do SUCK without Pixar and Pirates. In a world where Shrek 3 makes more than Meet the Robinsons, Chicken Little, and Home on the Range combined -- DISNEY IS DOING SOMETHING VERY VERY WRONG!!!! I don't know what it is. Bee movie beat all these movies. So did Over the Hedge I believe. Disney isn't hitting where it should be.
Why not latch onto something that's working when they are in a slump. That's what happend with Pixar. That's also why the Star Wars deal happened to begin with. Dark Cauldron didn't cut it. So, time to venture outside.
Times when Disney did get bit is when they DIDN'T go outside for material. The before mentioned LOTR, Pottermania, there are good ideas out there... Disney needs to evaluate the public MUCH better. Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Pinocchio, Snow White, Cindy. Guess what. They aren't original ideas. Why should they fit in a Disney park????
It's just that I couldn't think of anywhere at MK that "felt" right.
Then I went to EPCOT and thought about having it between Japan and Morrocco, but that seeemed odd.
Perhaps Animal Kingdom, replace Chester and Hester with Frodo and Sam, but that didn't feel right either.
So I settled on the Studios kind of by default, like taking a mutiple choice exam...
I disagree. The current Fantasyland now is nothing more than a tour through Disney's best animated features. You've got Cinderella, Peter Pan, Pinocchio, The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh, Alice in Wonderland, Dumbo, The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King, and Snow White all featured in Fantasyland. Oh and Sword in the Stone. I think it would be very odd to fill the old 20K space with anything other than another classic animated feature based attraction. The only ride there that doesn't fit the theme now is Small World. :lol:
Oops - forgot Fantasia too. That's what, 13 animated features now in Fantasyland?
See I think the opposite. I think a little PG rating attraction would be a great addition for Fantasyland and a big name high capacity dark ride would certainly take some pressure off the dark rides currently in FL.
No silly, it would go next to China.:lol:It's just that I couldn't think of anywhere at MK that "felt" right.
Then I went to EPCOT and thought about having it between Japan and Morrocco, but that seeemed odd.
Perhaps Animal Kingdom, replace Chester and Hester with Frodo and Sam, but that didn't feel right either.
So I settled on the Studios kind of by default, like taking a mutiple choice exam...
You are right is would not fit in Epcot or AK but I do think it has a place at MK.
AHHHHH yes!:brick: What was I thinking?
It would fit perfectly on the Norway side...
Shadowdawn
Member
Or they could just re-work England. LOTR was intended to be a vague myth/history of Britian.
Perfect solution!! I like it, give that arrogant Nanny the boot, and put some real meat and potatoes there....
(Sorry I just had to create a visual there....:lol
But honestly, Disney suits seem much more willing to part with the cash when the addition to the park is movie-based. They're looking at product synergy, not necessarily original, novel properties.
What has continued to bother me about the parks is the tendency to lock up whole genres in one or two attractions, instead of branching out and really working the theme over multiple points of interest. That's somewhat vague, so let me try to demonstrate what I mean. I always thought it was such a shame that there was only one Haunted Mansion "experience." Why couldn't there be multiple "haunted" attractions, exploring the same scary story idea in the same park? Disney goes for the iconic experience and 9 times out of 10 hits it out of the park. But wouldn't it be nice to have companion pieces to the classics? Wouldn't it be nice to have a side adventure with some escaped Grim Grinnin' Ghosts? Wouldn't another cowboy themed ride be welcome in Frontier Land? Would not a different sort of jungle cruise be of interest? Not a refurbishment, but a separate companion jungle adventure. You see some of this - sadly - with the rampant Nemo-/Piratization of certain large portions of the park; but wouldn't it be nice to have the freedom to explore the theme of certain lands in more depth?
When I want immersion, I want total immersion. Seeing the initial plans for Universal's Potter world, I got all jealous and possessive. Why couldn't Disney do the same? I just think of all the missed opportunities for the Lucasfilm properties, that I seriously doubt will ever get the make-overs / revamping that some of us Imagineering fans hope. Do you really want a second Star Tours film, when with today's technology, could you imagine how incredible a fully immersive thrill-ride based on the Death Star trench sequence could be? The Tower of Terror and Expedition Everest are so perfectly transporting, why couldn't the same effort be put into the "film" properties that Disney has some connection to?
I seriously dread the Toy Story mania ride - for the same reason people have complained about the SpaceShip Earth re-do. More film projections on scrims or dark-ride as shooting gallery concepts - ho-hum. Does that not disappoint people? Why would a fully immersive trip from the Shire to Mount Doom done in full animatronic glory be a "bad fit" for the Disney parks? Why? Just why?
I'm rambling, but you sort of get the idea, I hope. I just don't see the recent updates to the parks being terribly revolutionary or all that imaginative. They seem like so much window dressing and smack of cost cutting and maximizing returns.
Some interesting points, but I respectfully disagree with the added attractions. Much for the same reason I despised the "direct to video" sequels to the animated films. It cheapens the value of the original.
Although I agree that fully immersive dark rides are what really make the mark.
I just don't know if LOTR would fit.
Could Disney do it justice? Absolutely, when they put their skills and dollars to it they could make a fantastic attraction.
Would people like it? I bet fast passes would be gone before the park even opens, if they did it right.
Do I think it fits Disney? no, and that is just personal opinion based on my perceptions of what Disney is and should be about.
Anothe great idea here. Why not, for the MNSSHP add either the grim grinners to a few attractions, or even more on attraction "Hidden Mickeys".... Would it really cost "that much" or be "that much" effort? Can't cost much more that the talent cost for the night for extra characters.