The IP Movement Thread

[Model3 McQueen]

Spoiler: Do theme parks need outside IP to build great rides and shows?

https://www.themeparkinsider.com/flume/201701/5417/

Ultimately, great IP can't distinguish a mediocre ride. Do all those DC Comics brands slapped on Six Flags' coasters and carnival spinners really make a difference in our enjoyment of them? But a mediocre IP can inspire a wonderful theme park attraction. Universal Studios Hollywood's Waterworld stunt show has entertained far more fans than ever saw the Kevin Coster film that inspired it. And Disney's Splash Mountain is far more beloved that the often cringe-worthy South of the South that Disney has buried in its vault.

Spoiler: Disney's IP Movement

http://www.wdwinfo.com/walt-disney-world/disneys-ip-movement/

Not only is IP itself in question by many, but where Disney is placing that IP seems to be even more controversial..

Specifically in Epcot‘s case, many (including myself) question how all of this fits into the theme of that theme park. Epcot was originally envisioned as a living and working community of tomorrow by Walt himself. As built in 1982, Epcot Center was intended to be a permanent world’s fair, showing off futuristic ideas in Future World and celebrating nations around the world in World Showcase. Today, Epcot has fallen from that as it has lost corporate sponsors and suffers to keep up with the ever-changing future. Frozen Ever After took over the Norwaypavilion in 2016. Many were upset with this move, including myself, and felt this property would be better represented in Fantasyland or Hollywood Studios. Moving forward, we now have Ratatouille coming to France, Guardians of the Galaxy coming to Universe of Energy, and possibly another IP coming to the United Kingdom.

Looking at Guardians of the Galaxy specifically, I question whether the theme of Future World matters today to Disney. The Universe of Energy pavilion has certainly struggled in past years with popularity, but it was a high-capacity attraction that helped celebrate the world’s fair theme. Does a Guardians of the Galaxy family coaster do that? In my opinion, no. This summer we even have a Guardians of the Galaxy dance party coming to the American Gardens Theatre in World Showcase. Does Gamora and Starlord with an alien band showcase what America has to offer? Again, I don’t think so. Had Disney put this in Tomorrowland or even Future World it could have worked better. Thematically, this IP doesn’t fit in World Showcase.

Spoiler: Original Disney Attractions That Could Easily Go the Way of an IP Makeover

http://www.wdwinfo.com/walt-disney-...at-could-easily-go-the-way-of-an-ip-makeover/

All of these latest attractions illustrate the fact that Disney just isn’t that interested in opening original-storied attractions anymore. I can’t say with any absolute certainty why that is. It could be merchandising — people are more likely to buy products at the end of the attraction gift shop if they are already familiar with the characters, like Anna and Elsa or Darth Vader. It could just be easier for imagineers to come up with story lines that already exist. Could this also mean that our favorite non-IP Disney attractions might be in trouble? Is it possible that Disney parks might want to change the old favorites into IP-driven attractions? I honestly wouldn’t be that surprised if Disney went this way.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rather or not you are for or against specific IP's making their residence in Disney parks, few would argue that the future of Disney looks like it's headed into solid IP representation for their newest attractions and makeovers. I wanted to pick everyone's brains on what your stance is with this new direction Disney is headed in (especially keeping in mind that parks had merged with consumer products).

Is thematic integrity still being considered? Are the quality of these attractions on par with our vision of the parks? It's difficult to paint these changes with a broad brush - would you consider Mission Breakout at DCA as high quality when compared to Frozen Ever After, or what is so-far understood with SWGE offerings? Was Hyperspace mountain created to enhance the rider experience, or to advertise more Star Wars and their newest movies / merchandise? Does Dinosaur really need the IP Dinosaur? Should we even begin to mention TSL?

Here is ultimately what I like to keep in mind:
1. Does the ride relay too much on the IP, and the rider's familiarity with it?
2. Does IP severely limit the creative ability of the imagineers to work their magic? (excluding budget worries)
3. Does IP even matter? If the ride is good, it's good. If it's bad, it's bad. Though it may be a ding on the franchise
4. Are there still ideas out there that would work on their own, without any tie ins?

Some of the greatest Disney park attractions are IPs. Splash Mountain, ToT, Indiana Jones Aventure (DL), . I'd personally argue that the IP isn't the reason why, but the quality of the ride experience. You can ride those attractions without knowing the namesake program and understand what is going on in their completely immersive environments. I do think we need a healthy mix of non-IP E-tickets too, but DL and WDW simply aren't getting them. I don't know how many of you would really argue if some concept with the quality of Mystic Manor or TDS ToT made its way over. Anyway, let's discuss.

 

[Shouldigo12]

I don't think IPs matter. What matters is if I like the ride.

 

[Model3 McQueen]

I don't think IPs matter. What matters is if I like the ride.

So let me ask you this - what if it's a ride you like, but the story revolves too heavily around the IP so you can't follow it fully? Do you feel that this is compromising the thematic integrity of the attraction, which arguably is the purpose for our love for Disney parks?

 

[Shouldigo12]

So let me ask you this - what if it's a ride you like, but the story revolves too heavily around the IP so you can't follow it fully? Do you feel that this is compromising the thematic integrity of the attraction, which arguably is the purpose for our love for Disney parks?

Do you mean if I haven't seen the movie the ride comes from, so I don't understand all the scenes or catch all of the references?

 

[Model3 McQueen]

Do you mean if I haven't seen the movie the ride comes from, so I don't understand all the scenes or catch all of the references?

Yes, sorry. I'm working on my context when I write haha. Say the ride is great, but the IP has you lost. How important is themeing to you in this regards, even if you like the ride system itself?

 

[Shouldigo12]

Yes, sorry. I'm working on my context when I write haha. Say the ride is great, but the IP has you lost. How important is themeing to you in this regards, even if you like the ride system itself?

I guess it would depend on how badly it confused me. Like, take splash mountain. I've never seen Song of the South, so I had no clue what a lot of the things on that ride were a reference too. I still liked the ride though, and i still liked watching the scenes. If a ride was really story focused though and is constantly making references to the plot that are important for me to understand or things like that, I don't know. In my opinion that would fall into poorly designed-rides shouldn't require background research in order to fully enjoy them (like Splash Mountain).
ETA: For clarity I mean Splash Mountain as a well designed ride. And your writing is fine, I just wanted to make sure I was anwsering the question right haha.

 

[LUVofDIS]

Yes, sorry. I'm working on my context when I write haha. Say the ride is great, but the IP has you lost. How important is themeing to you in this regards, even if you like the ride system itself?

For an attraction to be truly great than everything is great, story, timeline, theming etc.

 

[erasure fan1]

The problem in my eyes revolves around abandoning original content for only IPs. Of course I want some IPs. I've dreamed of a star wars land for 35yrs. I want to jump into my favorite franchises but I also love new experiences where I have no expectations for it to live up to. I can just experience what they created, like Everest or thunder mountain. The other part of the IP push that is a problem for me can be summed up in one word, Frozen. I have issues when IPs are forced into a place they don't fit. Disney has plenty of space, they don't need to force things anywhere.

 

[Model3 McQueen]

I guess it would depend on how badly it confused me. Like, take splash mountain. I've never seen Song of the South, so I had no clue what a lot of the things on that ride were a reference too. I still liked the ride though, and i still liked watching the scenes. If a ride was really story focused though and is constantly making references to the plot that are important for me to understand or things like that, I don't know. In my opinion that would fall into poorly designed-rides shouldn't require background research in order to fully enjoy them (like Splash Mountain).
ETA: For clarity I mean Splash Mountain as a well designed ride. And your writing is fine, I just wanted to make sure I was anwsering the question right haha.

Absolutely! I love Splash Mountain. The story of that attraction revolves around Brer Rabbit and his wanting to leave home, right? So while it does have the SotS IP, it stands on its own without the namesake program. It's a high quality attraction with so much to like.

For an attraction to be truly great than everything is great, story, timeline, theming etc.

Generally, how immersive and high quality the experience is? I would have to agree.

The problem in my eyes revolves around abandoning original content for only IPs. Of course I want some IPs. I've dreamed of a star wars land for 35yrs. I want to jump into my favorite franchises but I also love new experiences where I have no expectations for it to live up to. I can just experience what they created, like Everest or thunder mountain. The other part of the IP push that is a problem for me can be summed up in one word, Frozen. I have issues when IPs are forced into a place they don't fit. Disney has plenty of space, they don't need to force things anywhere.

This is something I too have an issue with. Everything new is IP, and i'm afraid that creativity is taking a back seat because of it. But things like SWL, Tron Coaster, i'm all for. I do agree that shoehorning in IP attractions (like they're doing at EPCOT) damages the park's reputation and vision.

 

[Mickey5150]

One thing I will say about IP is that if you look at all the IPs that Walt had to work with when he created Disneyland he really did rely heavily on IPs. The area of the park with the most rides. Fantasyland, was almost exclusively IP based. IPs are nothing new to Disney parks and even Walt used a lot of them. I'm not defending every use of IPs as good but just want people to realize this isn't some evil Eisner creation, it was Walt's creation.

 

[TwilightZone]

I don't care, as long as the ride is good, or replacing something that wasn't too great to begin with.
If an IP ride is lazily done, I will hate it - see my 1 million comments about incredicoaster.

 

[NickWilde]

I don't care, as long as the ride is good, or replacing something that wasn't too great to begin with.
If an IP ride is lazily done, I will hate it - see my 1 million comments about incredicoaster.

My thoughts exactly, except adding the fact that I’d be more okay with it if it was an IP I liked, and less okay if it was a ride I deeply cared for.

 

[Walt Disney1955]

Here is the thing, IPs have their purpose. Walt used them in Disneyland although he did tend to keep them more for Fantasyland. The problem is that it has been 12 years since WDW added a major non-IP ride and that was Expedition Everest. There is nothing wrong with using a movie that will withstand the test of time for a ride. Peter Pan is still insanely popular, we know this. Snow White, Pinocchio, Winnie the Pooh, Alice in Wonderland, Dumbo, etc. are all still popular at the various parks. That's a good thing. Splash Mountain technically is an IP but they left Uncle Remus completely off the ride. But they did that ride right. It fits on the left side of Frontierland.

The problem with IPs being overused is that Disney seems to reliant on them. It seems to stunt their creativity. I know Walt is not here anymore but look at what he did with non-IPs that we still enjoy today. Jungle Cruise, Pirates, Small World, Great Times with Mr. Lincoln (which inspired Hall of Presidents), Carousel of Progress, Tiki Birds, Autopia, Matterhorn and then even things that were in the rough stages when he died like Haunted Mansion and Country Bear Jamboree. I guess technically stuff like Tom Sawyer's Island isn't something original. But stuff like the Liberty Belle Riverboat ties into that as well.

The point is, even 50-60 years after these rides were created they are still among the favourites of the parks. Before Pirates of the Caribbean came out who would have ever thought about a Pirate ride? Disney should still have some of the best innovators that can do this rather than just slapping an IP on a ride. It gets a little nuts when Tower of Terror in California is transformed into Guardians of the Galaxy which may or may not be remembered in 20 years. But Tower of Terror would have been.........and was! Don't ever lose that originality that made the park so special even if the man who started it has been dead since 1966.

 

[ChrisFL]

This is great as I have a lot of thoughts about IP's in the parks (long thread ahead)

First, let's break down, what is an IP...really? Something familiar to people. Something that has an established fan-base and is a known quantity.

In theme parks, as in hollywood where companies have to worry about investors and quarterly profits...risks are not their favorite thing right now, which is why we see so many remakes, sequels, prequels, spin-offs, etc. Disney is a hollywood media company run by a TV exec.

Having said that, it makes sense in a lot of ways.

Now let's turn the clock back to 1955 and Disneyland's first opening. The entire landscape of themed entertainment was completely different. With a few exceptions, there wasn't a place where you could visit a re-creation of life in turn of the century USA, a 1800's frontier land with safe rides and no actual chance of encountering bears, coyotes, etc.

The point is...MANY popular themes that we're familiar with in history have some kind of representation in the various theme parks around the world by now. There isn't a lot of things left not done yet. Central Florida itself has 9 theme parks (depending on how you count things such as Discovery Cove).

Other parks in different areas have adopted a lot of the ideas that Disney had for their parks, and Disney has become a bit less unique over the years because of this. I see videos of parks in Europe and am blown away by the quality that many of them have. I'm actually taking a friend of mine to Epcot and MK in a few weeks. She's German and has visited all of the parks over there, but hasn't been to Disney yet. I've shown her photos of some of the attractions and she compares them to Europa Park. In some ways they're bad knock-offs , Spaceship Earth vs. EuroSAT for example, but others like their old Pirates ride (that sadly just burned down and is being rebuilt) look to be of similar quality.

So when I take her in a few weeks, I'll be interested to see her impression of WDW.

The next arguments are: Should Disney focus on their own IP's only, and is it a question of whether IP's actually fit into the existing lands/parks they inhabit.

I think these two questions are the more relevant ones, vs. whether "IP's" as a thing should be used at all, because as we've stated time and time again, Disneyland had a LOT of IP's....but they were just Disney's own. And if an IP fits for a ride system and the story is already well known, why not add the IP?

Similar to Disney's animated classics, they weren't all original stories, they were mostly adopted from existing fairy tales and stories, and sometimes made a bit more family friendly.

Sure, Peter Pan's Flight could have been a generic flying over a city ride, but that wouldn't make it better.

Let's use a different example that may be more relevant: Star Tours vs. Body Wars - One is a famous IP, the other was an original idea...both had the same ride system and similar experiences, but Star Tours was much more popular and this despite the issues people had with Body Wars.

Disney is also seeing what competitors have done. IOA opened with a nice looking, mostly non-IP based area in The Lost Continent...but it didn't draw people, even though some of it was partially familiar with Sindbad and Merlin (sort of) being part of the land. Harry Potter comes in and blows everyone away, and single-handedly puts Universal on the map as it's own destination unto itself, something that they tried for years prior with either no IP or no longer relevant IP's.

Universal succeeded almost entirely with IP's, both their own and others that they've made contracts with. They're #2 in the theme park industry with the others far, far, behind.

So, when judging things, let's not lump all "IP's" into the same bucket. Some are good, some are bad. Some fit well, some do not. Let's just hope that in the future, Disney, Universal and others can develop IP's that fit thematically into whatever area they're going into.