DisneyPrincess5
Well-Known Member
Um this sounds pretty fun. Can't wait to watch a video of it when it kicks off.
I think the muppet show is a good idea to get more people interested in the Hall of Presidents.
Ok... I'm just a dumb retired firefighter... so I'll man up and admit I had to look this one up. For those of you in the same boat:No, he's a caricature of blind jingoism, and the other puppets all make fun of him for it.
Could be a way to move Muppets out of DHS so Star Tours can be connected to Star Wars Land. Valuable land thereI just dont get it?? They have somewhat a whole area dedicated to them and possibly a land coming up for them at Hollywood Studios and they get a show at the Magic Kingdom? Okay then..
Then why redo a restaurant as a Muppets venue?C
Could be a way to move Muppets out of DHS so Star Tours can be connected to Star Wars Land. Valuable land there
Too few people were interested in the Muppets' new show, and it got cancelled. If they can't even get people interested in THEM, how can they help HoP?
And the HoP doesn't need help anyway. It's a masterful show that is very moving and inspiring. At least for anyone over the age of 10.
I just saw on Allears that the Muppets are getting their own show in the Magic Kingdom this fall. For some reason, I'm not sure I really like the idea of the Muppets being in the Magic Kingdom. Anybody else feel kinda conflicted about this? For the record, I adore the Muppets in general. I'm just more of a "purist" about the MK and think of it more as a place for more traditionally animated characters.
Hmmm... knee jerk reaction is I don't like it. Not because I don't like change... just not sure this fits the spirit of MK. Most, if not all, the other character related attractions/shows are themed or performed by Disney characters from Disney shows & movies. The muppets are a fine addition to the Disney family, but are not Disney originals. Traditionalists like myself associate the MK with Disney and Disney characters. I will see the show when we are there in late Nov... and I will keep an open mind when I watch it!
Yeah it's not that I won't watch it or anything but just that I think the MK is sort of an odd place for The Muppets. I love the Muppet Show at Hollywood Studios and actually consider it an under appreciated attraction. I'm definitely more comfortable with the Muppets than I ever will be with Marvel characters in the MK or even Star Wars characters for that matter. I've heard that Marvel characters aren't allowed east of the Mississippi though because of some kind of contractual stuff with Universal. Not sure if that's true or not. I wouldn't mind them at Hollywood Studios but I would absolutely oppose them at the MK.Hmmm... knee jerk reaction is I don't like it. Not because I don't like change... just not sure this fits the spirit of MK. Most, if not all, the other character related attractions/shows are themed or performed by Disney characters from Disney shows & movies. The muppets are a fine addition to the Disney family, but are not Disney originals. Traditionalists like myself associate the MK with Disney and Disney characters. I will see the show when we are there in late Nov... and I will keep an open mind when I watch it!
They are definitely perceived and identified with Disney though. When I think of the Muppets I think more Jim Henson than I do Walt Disney. When I think of Pixar I do think of Disney. Although I probably think more John Lasseter when I think of the sort of "mastermind" behind a lot of it. I can't stress enough how much I love the Muppets though. Muppet Babies was one of my favorite shows as a kid and I still think it's awesome today.Pixar characters aren't Disney originals, either, and they're all over MK.
Not true at all Matt. The Pixar movies were released and distributed under the Disney name. At the time of the early Pixar movies, Pixar was still an independent production company. But significant funding and support came from Disney. And probably a little story line assistance as well. The first Pixar feature film was a collaboration with Disney. As was every one since. Until Disney just outright bought Pixar.Pixar characters aren't Disney originals, either, and they're all over MK.
Most of the big name people there studied at Mickey Mouse Academy and that's why A113 appears in every Pixar movie because it was the number of their college classroom.Not true at all Matt. The Pixar movies were released and distributed under the Disney name. At the time of the early Pixar movies, Pixar was still an independent production company. But significant funding and support came from Disney. And probably a little story line assistance as well. The first Pixar feature film was a collaboration with Disney. As was every one since. Until Disney just outright bought Pixar.
Not true at all Matt. The Pixar movies were released and distributed under the Disney name. At the time of the early Pixar movies, Pixar was still an independent production company. But significant funding and support came from Disney. And probably a little story line assistance as well. The first Pixar feature film was a collaboration with Disney. As was every one since. Until Disney just outright bought Pixar.
Not really. Everything Pixar did before Toy Story were shorts that were more to showcase the technology they were developing than anything. There was no full length feature from Pixar that was not a collaboration with Disney. Pixar (read Steve Jobs by the way - he created Pixar) developed the computer animation technology. Disney took them to mainstream stardom.You're giving Disney way too much credit for the early Pixar films. Way too much.
Pixar (read Steve Jobs by the way - he created Pixar) developed the computer animation technology.
Yeah, that's why many on this board list it as a great napping spot.
Not true at all Matt. The Pixar movies were released and distributed under the Disney name. At the time of the early Pixar movies, Pixar was still an independent production company. But significant funding and support came from Disney. And probably a little story line assistance as well. The first Pixar feature film was a collaboration with Disney. As was every one since. Until Disney just outright bought Pixar.
You do know the Henson family initiated the sale right? That after reclaiming the company from the Germans that barely did a thing with the assets, they decided to give CTW full custody of Sesame Street and sell the Muppets to Disney to check off those things on what Jim wanted, while desiring the freedom to do experimental adult stuff hence why they didn't go all in.It's hardly comparable to Eisner's impulse buy of a played-out novelty act.
But at least it's not an Extremely Goofy Movie. Get it??? (i will show myself out now)Didn't Jobs BUY Pixar after they separated from being a division of Lucasfilm? Prior to that, most of their film work was doing CGI for live-action films, like the Glass Man sequence from The Adventures of Young Sherlock Holmes, a bit far better than the movie it's in. (That's not to say I dislike the film, but it's a really goofy movie.)
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.