Things Disney fans let Universal "get away" with...

[twebber55]

I think the answer is: People expect better from Disney. Disney, at least classic Disney, evokes a state of mind and touches the heart in ways that Universal cannot. The name "Disney" is synonymous with "magic" for many people, whereas Universal is just another movie studio. So people expect greater things from Disney. Universal, while a good park in many ways, is kind of a mess and kind of a mix thematically, because Universal really doesn't have the film and television legacy that Disney does. It doesn't have its own Mickey Mouse, and it never had anything close to a Walt Disney. So it has to bring in outside stuff just to be able to operate, to offer anything to customers. If it had to rely on its film legacy alone, it'd sink. And since it never had an original plan, like Disneyland with its "Adventureland", "Frontierland" and "Magic Kingdom" domains, it doesn't matter so much where it puts its attractions. Maybe that's why it gets away with the stuff you mention.

If I may digress: I have a real fear that WDW and Disneyland will start becoming more like Universal by bringing in stuff the Disney Studio didn't create or adapt, like Marvel or Avatar. The Disney magic is in danger of being diluted by such stuff. And unlike Universal, Disney doesn't NEED it. It has a rich legacy of its own films and TV shows PLUS a legacy of creativity; THAT'S what Disney should be drawing on for new park attractions. I can't wait for Robert Iger to be shown the door; maybe the new CEO, whoever he or she may be, will "get" people's affection for Disney and sustain and enlarge the parks in a way that honors and enhances Walt's original legacy. I can only hope...

one can only hope

 

[Mickey_777]

Insulting people for disagreeing with your point is often considered a sign that there is little substance.

Wait hold up, who did I insult? Besides there is plenty of substance in this topic. It's just people would rather go back and forth like it's a theme park gang fight. My bad I guess. I figured there'd actually be more than a couple of folks wanting to have a conversation as to why Universal isn't criticised for what they do "less than perfect". What's the general fascination with expressing how much one thinks Disney sucks? Mods, that's a wrap. Shut 'er down.

 

[kap91]

Whoops, sorry I did forget about their Hollywood blvd, overall of which is very good except until it somehow inexplicably turns into central park. But since we're supposedly in a movie studio maybe its excusable.

I can see the castle in Adventureland. I can see Splash Mountain in Liberty Square. I can see Japan from America. I can see Mount Everest from Dinoland USA. I can see a tiki hut from Frontierland. I can see Soarin's show building from multiple parts of WS. I can see the Swan and Dolphin towering over WS.

Most of the things you mentioned are weenies that are designed to be seen from transitional areas of the park. I don't have a problem seeing Hogwarts at the front of the park but I do have a problem when it towers over the entrance to Jurassic park. Additionally most of the things I mentioned are show buildings and / or rides from other parks. With the exception of soarin, I can't think of any show building glaringly visible from half the park. Even soarin is only visible in parts of WS. In IOA there's two massive show buildings easily visible from the park entrance of all places. And they continue to be visible in most areas of the park. Same thing with rip ride rocket.

This is the first I've heard of Universal trying to spruce up that corner of the park, which desperately needs it. And just because the past owners didn't have a clue to what they were doing doesn't excuse it. There are numerous things at WDW left over from ex-managers (Journey into Imagination anyone?) and that doesn't stop us from complaining about them. And despite what the map says, in person that whole area functions as one land from the end of central park to MIB. The buildings are all right next to each other and easily visible. Even though the Magic Kingdom map says town square, main street, and the hub are all separate areas - they're all one functional land.

And I will harp on Suessland. While nowhere near as bad as marvel and toon lagoon, all the shops, walk up restaurants etc, are run-of-the mill stores with unthemed glass fronts, queues, ordering windows, etc. wedged inside themed roofs. Not to mention that up until a couple months ago the paint was like 10 years old.

Keep in mind that this isn't to say that Disney is perfect (although I think Disney's issues are different for the most part), but that despite what people have seem to come to believe over the past few years - Universal is far from themed mastery. And as the op said, people seem to ignore these things at Universal, yet something much smaller will get huge criticism at Disney. I will give Universal for trying to turn their parks around, something it seems like they're slowly trying to do, but their parks have been sorely lacking in these areas for over 20 years and just because Harry Potter stepped in doesn't make all the rest of it go away.

 

[TalkingHead]

I was going to ignore this post, but I couldn't help myself, as it really struck a nerve in me. The biased attitude in this post is really unbelievable. Firstly, Universal has been around for much longer than Disney, and they've got a bigger name in film than Disney will ever have. Second of all, the original Universal Studios in Hollywood, CA pretty much relies the WORLDWIDE KNOWN film legacy and it hasn't "sank". Universal has a huge fanbase and it won't ever "sink". Thirdly, Disney's shows nowadays SUCK. They were great years ago, but not now. NBC Universal steadily has had great shows since the beginning, and they continue to make great ones. Fourthly, Disney already has other works in their parks.

Disney's film and television legacy will probably never top Universal's. Universal has been around for exactly one hundred years this year and they're not going ANYWHERE. I'll admit Disney does theme parks better, but to say Disney's legacy in film and television is greater than Universal's is laughable and one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever heard. Downright insulting, actually. Oh and speaking of theme parks, Disney should have went to USH before building DHS so they could have shown them what a real movie studio looks like.

Astonishing, isn't it?

Universal, the studio that created the modern horror film, the studio Hitchcock called home for the last twenty years of his life...

That Universal doesn't have the movie legacy of Disney?

My head's spinning.

EDIT: And the studio responsible for Jaws, the first summer blockbuster.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Wait hold up, who did I insult? Besides there is plenty of substance in this topic. It's just people would rather go back and forth like it's a theme park gang fight. My bad I guess. I figured there'd actually be more than a couple of folks wanting to have a conversation as to why Universal isn't criticised for what they do "less than perfect". What's the general fascination with expressing how much one thinks Disney sucks? Mods, that's a wrap. Shut 'er down.

When you claim the only people reading your post are those who agree with you, yes that is an insult. The implication is that you are right and those who disagree are blinding themselves from the truth and if they would just read instead of react they would see the truth you have so graciously provided. Plenty of people have read your post, not just those who agree.

 

[kap91]

Astonishing, isn't it?

Universal, the studio that created the modern horror film, the studio Hitchcock called home for the last twenty years of his life...

That Universal doesn't have the movie legacy of Disney?

My head's spinning.

i know other people did, but let me be clear at least for my posts that I don't disagree that Universal has the bigger movie legacy at least in popular culture and film history at large. (Me personally, different story - hardly saw a non-disney film until I was like 15).

However in terms of branding and character recognizability Disney has almost everyone beat. I don't have the source of the statistics anymore but studies have been done that show Mickey is more recognizable than Santa Claus. He is the worlds most recognizable figure. The rest of the fab five plus the two golden ages of animation have left a huge swath of characters and stories that could be argued to have had more of an impact in terms of memorability than the Universal films. Millions of kids grow up with disney films and watch them over and over. I'd dare you to find anyone in America that doesn't know at least one Alan Menken song. Universal has had a much larger impact on the film industry past and present, and certainly churns out better live-action films, but I don't know many people who grew up watching Frankenstein, Vertigo, or Rope over and over again. And those who I know that did, don't exactly have fond loving memories of those films. Those movies have tremendous impact on the movie industry but not necessarily on people themselves. Versus Disney's movies which largely haven't affected the industry as a whole but have had an incredible impression on society. The only Universal movies I can think of at the moment that have the same resonance would be Spielburg's and it seems Universal (the park) is trying to distance itself from him.

I hope that all makes sense, just my two cents.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Astonishing, isn't it?

Universal, the studio that created the modern horror film, the studio Hitchcock called home for the last twenty years of his life...

That Universal doesn't have the movie legacy of Disney?

My head's spinning.

EDIT: And the studio responsible for Jaws, the first summer blockbuster.

It's beyond astonishing. It's almost sickening to know that people really believe that.

I swear, I was thinking the same thing. All those classic horror movies Universal made. Frankenstein, Dracula, Creature from the Black Lagoon, etc.. Classic dramas like The Phantom of the Opera. The original King Kong! Not to mention the Alfred Hitchcock films. No one can forget classics like Jaws, E.T. and Back to the Future. Universal is just that; they make every type and genre of film.

As a future film student and a movie buff, I was offended by that post. I just couldn't believe what I was reading. My head is spinning, too.

 

[GLaDOS]

The original King Kong!

While Universal owns Kong's rights now, the original picture was made by RKO Pictures, not Universal.

 

[Californian Elitist]

While Universal owns Kong's rights now, the original picture was made by RKO Pictures, not Universal.

Your are correct, I retract that statement.

 

[kittybubbles]

So was MGM/DHS though? And the point of this thread is to talk about why USO gets slack and DHS doesn't. So in all fairness, you really proved the OP's point. We DO give USO too much slack when it has areas far worse than DHS. Even if USO is the better park, it's themeing nightmare. DHS has had a much better transition.

wasn't MGM/DHS designed to be a theme park? From memories of long ago, I seem to recall MGM suing Disney for using the studio for production as they had agreed to sponsor a theme park and not help build a studio to compete against them.

Anyway, i am not sure why folks would be critical of any theme in a studio setting. I figure a studio is about camera site lines (not actual visual ones). I would think a good studio is a place where you can have many sets to film in front of.

again, going back a lot of years, but I seem to recall USF having 'props' for photo spots to show how the camera can capture an illusion (like standing near the space shuttle and launch pad in a photo you could take in their park).

Anyway, as for the topic, I guess folks expect Disney to be the leader in theme park design so they have a more critical eye when looking at Disney.

For me, I like Disney and UNI and I hope to enjoy both while I can. I only recently started visiting UNI again after an extremely long time and I have been impressed....I guess I could criticize UNI for keeping the AC down so low everywhere, I was thinking how out of theme it seemed to keep these old shops/castles so cold...maybe to match the snow outside.

But then I went into a shop in Disney and could not believe how uncomfortable the temperature was (mouse gears a few weeks ago in the AM). I guess I should give UNI flack for I was actual cold while eating at Mel's diner Sat night (and the nerve of them to have Scareactors wondering into the diner ever now and again while we were trying to eat.

I guess I should complain th

 

[disney fan 13]

For me, I like Disney and UNI and I hope to enjoy both while I can. I only recently started visiting UNI again after an extremely long time and I have been impressed....I guess I could criticize UNI for keeping the AC down so low everywhere, I was thinking how out of theme it seemed to keep these old shops/castles so cold...maybe to match the snow outside.

But then I went into a shop in Disney and could not believe how uncomfortable the temperature was (mouse gears a few weeks ago in the AM). I guess I should give UNI flack for I was actual cold while eating at Mel's diner Sat night (and the nerve of them to have Scareactors wondering into the diner ever now and again while we were trying to eat.

I guess I should complain th

Don't see how you can complain about cool AC...

 

[maxairmike]

A lot of people mention sight lines and the mix of incompatible themes, but I think many also forget that they do actually still film stuff that people actually watch in the park, with or without guests present. There are sections of the park proper (i.e. inside the park gates, not outside them in the sound stages) that are still used for real filming from time to time. It may not be on the level it used to be, but it is still very much a (at least half way) working studio, including the Studios park.

DHS on the other hand...nothing real is produced there anymore unless its Disney promo material, so facades and attractions can have complete free reign without worrying about impacting real production value.

 

[Magenta Panther]

Disney has a larger film legacy than one of the oldest movie studios in Hollywood, which is currently celebrating its centennial? And Disney has a larger television legacy than the oldest network in American TV, NBC, along with USA Network, Syfy, E!, Bravo, Chiller, G4, Telemundo, and a number of other channels?

If you say so.



Or Star Wars, or Indiana Jones, or Muppets, or Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, or...



Eisner was too busy copying from the USF plans he had been shown.

Universal doesn't have the cache that Disney does. It didn't invent the theme park. It didn't invent the sound, color or full-length feature cartoon. It didn't invent audio-animatronics. It doesn't have a central, iconic character like Mickey Mouse or a memorable, personable founder like Walt Disney. It's been playing catch-up with Disney for years in the theme park business, and not even the excellent Potter attraction puts it on equal footing even yet. Its film and television library is vast but its contents don't contain any firsts, as Disney's does. Yeah, I say so.

And all of that stuff you mentioned, like the Muppets and Indy and Star Wars? I wish they were all at Universal. Let Universal have those hodge-podge properties. WDW doesn't need them, because it has its own creations and adaptations that are equal or better than those. Yeah, Eisner and Iger disagree with me. But there'll be a cold snap in Hade's dominions before a corporate types like those two and I agree on anything, that's okay with me. I can live with that.

 

[JT3000]

Universal doesn't have the cache that Disney does. It didn't invent the theme park. It didn't invent audio-animatronics.

What in the world do either of these things have to do with their respective film/television legacies? Universal had the first studio tour, and as a tourist attraction, is nearly half a century older than Disneyland. But these facts are just as irrelevant as yours.

It doesn't have a central, iconic character like Mickey Mouse

A central character is good for branding. It doesn't give you a superior legacy.

or a memorable, personable founder like Walt Disney.

Hmm...

Laemmle remained connected to his home town of Laupheim throughout his life, by financial support and also by sponsoring hundreds of Jews from Laupheim and Württemberg to emigrate from Nazi Germany to the U.S. (which meant paying both emigration and immigration fees), thus saving them from the Holocaust.

I don't know, he sounds okay to me.

It's been playing catch-up with Disney for years in the theme park business, and not even the excellent Potter attraction puts it on equal footing even yet.

Still completely irrelevant to the statement I was replying to.

Its film and television library is vast but its contents don't contain any firsts, as Disney's does. Yeah, I say so.

So Universal didn't lay the foundation for, and popularize, an entire movie genre (horror)... because you say so?
I think most film historians would disagree with you on that, but since you said so, it must be true.

I'd probably be able to find some other firsts in Universal's vast library, but since you said they don't exist, I won't bother with the research.

And all of that stuff you mentioned, like the Muppets and Indy and Star Wars? I wish they were all at Universal.

Well they aren't.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

This thread isn't meant to simply bash Uni .

But it is its fundamental objective. No?

 

[lazyboy97o]

A lot of people mention sight lines and the mix of incompatible themes, but I think many also forget that they do actually still film stuff that people actually watch in the park, with or without guests present. There are sections of the park proper (i.e. inside the park gates, not outside them in the sound stages) that are still used for real filming from time to time. It may not be on the level it used to be, but it is still very much a (at least half way) working studio, including the Studios park.

I do not remember exactly when, but it was in the past year, and part of New York was closed because it was being used for its intended purpose as a backlot.

 

[kittybubbles]

Don't see how you can complain about cool AC...

Poor attempt at sarcasim while trying to say that it is Disney that pushed me down the street and once there, UNI impressed my family.

 

[Magenta Panther]

Don't underestimate the effect that Walt Disney (WD) and Mickey Mouse (MM) have on the modern theme park experience.

WD and MM are iconic characters that hark back to a perceived simpler, romanticized time. Much of the joy experienced at WDW is the nostalgia associated with Walt's "Small Town USA". More joy is derived from MM everything: waffles, ice cream, glitter, balloons, bushes, etc. All these MM shaped objects unify WDW in a way that is lacking at UO.

Don't underestimate the comfort people derive from subconsciously thinking "Walt would have wanted it this way" (whether true or not). It's all about perception. The objective reality is that from an attraction and overall quality perspective, WDW and UO have become more similar than different. The subjective reality is that WDW is "Walt's park"; WDW is where you go to find Mickey Mouse.

UO simply has nothing to compare to WD and MM.

I am convinced many WDW lovers/UO bashers would instantly fall in love with UO if UO were somehow part of the WD/MM mystique.

Yes, but that mystique is exclusive to Disney because of everything Walt and his true descendants (which of course do not include cement-headed CEOs like Iger) accomplished. After all, the main icon of the Disney parks is the Castle. What is the main icon of Universal? The "Psycho" house?

 

[Magenta Panther]

What in the world do either of these things have to do with their respective film/television legacies? Universal had the first studio tour, and as a tourist attraction, is nearly half a century older than Disneyland. But these facts are just as irrelevant as yours.



A central character is good for branding. It doesn't give you a superior legacy.



Hmm...


I don't know, he sounds okay to me.



Still completely irrelevant to the statement I was replying to.



So Universal didn't lay the foundation for, and popularize, an entire movie genre (horror)... because you say so?
I think most film historians would disagree with you on that, but since you said so, it must be true.

I'd probably be able to find some other firsts in Universal's vast library, but since you said they don't exist, I won't bother with the research.



Well they aren't.

Oh, well, okay. Let's put it this way: Disney's film library is more impressive than Universal's. It has a cross-generational appeal that Universal can't touch. The horror film? Kids LAUGH at stuff like Frankenstein today, and Dracula? Please. The guy doesn't even sparkle when he goes out into the sun; he just disintegrates. Alfred Hitchcock? Some fat guy with a stiff British accent. Jaws? Dated. ET? Cute movie, a blockbuster in its time. But when it was re-released to theaters not long ago, it bombed. Also dated. And you aren't seriously comparing Universal's "tourist attraction" to Disneyland, are you? If so, you just blew your cred. Bye!

 

[Californian Elitist]

Oh, well, okay. Let's put it this way: Disney's film library is more impressive than Universal's. It has a cross-generational appeal that Universal can't touch. The horror film? Kids LAUGH at stuff like Frankenstein today, and Dracula? Please. The guy doesn't even sparkle when he goes out into the sun; he just disintegrates. Alfred Hitchcock? Some fat guy with a stiff British accent. Jaws? Dated. ET? Cute movie, a blockbuster in its time. But when it was re-released to theaters not long ago, it bombed. Also dated. And you aren't seriously comparing Universal's "tourist attraction" to Disneyland, are you? If so, you just blew your cred. Bye!

No you did not just disrespect Hitchcock and some of the most classic films ever. Oh my goodness. It's clear you haven't a clue about film, film history... Pretty much anything when it comes to film. No wonder you believe Disney's film legacy is superior to Universal's. It all makes sense now.