This forum's opinion on IPs?

Indy_UK

Indy_UK

Well-Known Member
I love the IP in the parks. It's Disney at the end of the day.

I think they should just spread the IP out properly.

I think Magic Kingdom should be free of any Pixar, Marvel or Star Wars and just be Disney animation and classic rides which it is except Buzz Lightyear and Laugh Floor if I'm mistaken.

Studios can be Star Wars and Pixar mostly.

Animal kingdom can be a mix as long as it's tied to Animals.

Epcot can be bit of a mix
 
winstongator

winstongator

Well-Known Member
A recent Disney Dish podcast with @lentesta episode touched on this:

disneydish.bandcamp.com

Disney Dish - Why the Disney Parks build so few original attractions these days, by The Jim Hill Media Podcast Network

track by The Jim Hill Media Podcast Network
disneydish.bandcamp.com disneydish.bandcamp.com

They point to the acquisition of Pixar in 2006 as the moment rides needed to be tied to IP, and mentioned driving merch sales.

For me, there are attractions that include IP but are not dependent on it: Tom Sawyer's Island and Splash Mountain. Then there are rides that are simply IP showcases. I think that's the one that got people most bothered. The Wizarding World's success, the purchases of Pixar, Marvel, Lucasfilm and now Fox have really changed things.

I think there are lots of things they could do science & technology wise in Future World without IP. The technology that we use every day is amazing and would have qualified as science fiction 50 years ago. The market for that is much smaller than for something like the Guardians of the Galaxy. Why spend tens to hundreds of millions on a science project pipe dream risky venture when you have the tried and true IPs to lean on?

Replacing Universe of Energy? What is the origin of most of the energy we use today? The Sun. Whether it's directly in solar, or with our plant friends and time and geological pressure intermediaries making fossil fuels, almost all of it comes from photons. I could imagine a cool ride on a photon from the sun to the earth, getting trapped by trees, trees dying and not decaying until another organism evolved, being squeezed into oil and then exploding back on the scene. Throw some facts in there like, 'what percentage of the sun's energy hits the earth?' and voila.
 
Tony the Tigger

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
I love how people think Walt was not about profits, or synergy, or G.E., or Ford, or characters which he grabbed from every which way and Americanized.

The lands are loosely tied together with background theming. They kind of make sense in that regard, it depends on how deep you want to dig. The whole park can be called Fantasy Land, because the whole park is.

How is that jungle cruise river so close to the Caribbean Sea? Why don’t Pirates ever attack those boats? Can we float through a Pirate village with no danger? Bears definitely can’t play the guitar, even if they can a banjo.
Who is playing that background music everywhere you go? How do we have photopass photographers in a land before cameras?

You can poke holes in anything. Resistance to change is real.
 
Heppenheimer

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member
Minnie1986 said:
What does IP mean?
Click to expand...
The way it's used on this forum, intellectual property, refers to characters, stories, or fictional worlds owned by an individual or entertainment company. The term has a modern connotation, because nowadays most fictional material has strict legal and financial attachments on how and when it can be used, but the same concept really goes back a long time. The only difference being that in previous decades, a lot more fictional material was available free-to-use in the public domain. In this way, the Walt Disney Company aquiring and using outside media franchises, like Star Wars and Marvel today, is no different from what Walt did in his time. The major difference now is that the negotiations for the user rights occurs between massive entertainment companies, whereas in Walt's day, he usually only had to negotiate with a single author or artist to aquire the rights (or nobody at all, in the case of public domain material).

Beside now all being familiar to the Disney Company under Walt, what do the Three Little Pigs, Snow White, Pinocchio, the Sorceror's Apprentice, Bambi, Dumbo, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Treasure Island, Old Yeller, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Swiss Family Robinson, Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, Winnie the Pooh, 101 Dalmations, Mary Poppins, The Wind in the Willows, The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, Pecos Bill, the Jungle Book, and probably other examples I'm forgetting have in common? None were original stories or characters dreamed up by the Disney Company. In several cases, the Disney version has become so dominant in pop cultural awareness that they have completely eclipsed their non-Disney origins (Winnie the Pooh and Mary Poppins particularly).

So, nothing new under the sun here. The biggest difference now might be that because the IP aquisitions come in a more ready-made form, the Disney company has less influence in reshaping them to fit the usual company aesthetic. For example, although the look of the Star Wars universe will always continue to evolve, I don't think we'll see it looking like a place where we might find Buzz Lightyear flying around.
 
R

RandySavage

Well-Known Member
The IP mandate issued by Iger/Chapek is self-crippling, creatively. Who wants Disney Parks to evolve solely into "Ride the Movies"? WDI needs to be free to invent (as well as adapt/expand movie IP). Look no further than this:


Mandating IP ("IP" here meaning synergizing with a contemporary film/tv property (e.g., Ratatouille, Tron), not using an old folktale or literary work with no directly-connected Disney film (e.g. Tom Sawyers Island, Tokyo Sinbad)) for everything in the parks is like telling your film-makers: "No more original movie concepts will be considered; only sequels and remakes going forward"... oh wait...
 
Minnie1986

Minnie1986

Well-Known Member
Heppenheimer said:
The way it's used on this forum, intellectual property, refers to characters, stories, or fictional worlds owned by an individual or entertainment company. The term has a modern connotation, because nowadays most fictional material has strict legal and financial attachments on how and when it can be used, but the same concept really goes back a long time. The only difference being that in previous decades, a lot more fictional material was available free-to-use in the public domain. In this way, the Walt Disney Company aquiring and using outside media franchises, like Star Wars and Marvel today, is no different from what Walt did in his time. The major difference now is that the negotiations for the user rights occurs between massive entertainment companies, whereas in Walt's day, he usually only had to negotiate with a single author or artist to aquire the rights (or nobody at all, in the case of public domain material).

Beside now all being familiar to the Disney Company under Walt, what do the Three Little Pigs, Snow White, Pinocchio, the Sorceror's Apprentice, Bambi, Dumbo, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Treasure Island, Old Yeller, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Swiss Family Robinson, Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, Winnie the Pooh, 101 Dalmations, Mary Poppins, The Wind in the Willows, The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, Pecos Bill, the Jungle Book, and probably other examples I'm forgetting have in common? None were original stories or characters dreamed up by the Disney Company. In several cases, the Disney version has become so dominant in pop cultural awareness that they have completely eclipsed their non-Disney origins (Winnie the Pooh and Mary Poppins particularly).

So, nothing new under the sun here. The biggest difference now might be that because the IP aquisitions come in a more ready-made form, the Disney company has less influence in reshaping them to fit the usual company aesthetic. For example, although the look of the Star Wars universe will always continue to evolve, I don't think we'll see it looking like a place where we might find Buzz Lightyear flying around.
Click to expand...
Thanks for clarifying!
 
BoarderPhreak

BoarderPhreak

Well-Known Member
Disney has always been about IP - it's what they do. Naturally it's everywhere in the parks... But it was a little more subdued in the past - while these days, it's popping up everywhere and with increasing frequency. Nobody begrudges Disney this per se, but when it's done for IP's sake (looking at you, Three Caballeros) it gives a lot of people a negative impression around here.

Me? I don't mind IP but don't throw it in my face and put it everywhere just for the heck of it. I happened to like The Maelstrom, and what they did with Frozen... Ugh.
 
FettFan

FettFan

Well-Known Member
The problem with overuse of IP's is that once you put in an IP, you're automatically putting an expiration date for that attraction.

Case in point: Pirates of the Caribbean was a timeless attraction. It was a simple boat ride while a bunch of singing pirates liquored themselves up and then went on a comical raid throughout an entire seaside town. It was so beloved that when WDW was opened, visitors complained that it wasn't included, forcing Disney to build a quickie-version to satisfy the demand.

Years later, in the wake of the successful PotC movies, they add Jack Sparrow to it. Now the pirates are rampaging through the town because Jack Sparrow has their treasure map and they're looking to get it back from him.
BUT....what happens when Jack Sparrow is no more? As you all probably know, Johnny Depp is now fired from the PotC franchise.
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...ooted-from-pirates-of-the-caribbean-franchise



Then there's the infamous Enchanted Tiki Room Under New Management fiasco. The birds would sing timeless songs written by the Sherman Brothers..... until UNM and the Imagineers said "Hey, you know what this needs? GLORIA ESTEFAN!"
Thus we get the birds singing 'Conga', a song that was already 10-12 years old by the time UNM popped up.
 
JIMINYCR

JIMINYCR

Well-Known Member
We go to WDW to have fun, be entertained and enjoy our time away from work & life. We were attracted to WDW first by the Disney characters and films we grew up watching on television. After our first trip we wanted to return more and experience the new attractions as they were introduced, see the changes to the entertaining shows, and take in all the property held. It doesnt matter to me how they do it, as long as they continue to provide a the type of environment that I can enjoy and it continues to thrill me. A well done mixture of old and new, including IP connected attractions/ lands works well as long as they are placed properly.
 
TraderSam

TraderSam

Member
The parks have always had IPs in terms of characters and attractions, but keep in mind that some of the original ideas from the parks turned into Disney IPs as well. POTC being a franchise that came from an original attraction.

I don’t want everything IP-based because some of the best, classic attractions were created by Imagineers from their own minds, not adapting an IP to the parks.

Space Mountain, Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise, Small World, and Tiki Room to name a few.

A mixture is certainly fine, but I don’t want everything to have to be an immersive experience from a movie.
 
NickWilde

NickWilde

Well-Known Member
I honestly don’t care about if an attraction is IP based or not as long as it is high-quality and fits into the land/park it’s placed in nicely. That said, if something is based off an IP I enjoy I’m likely gonna enjoy it more than if it’s one I don’t care for or dislike but that’s only a small percentage. If it’s a bad, poorly-placed attraction utilizing an IP I like I’m still gonna hate it. Also we need to balance all these IP rides with some original ideas too
 
Last edited:

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom