Toy Story Land expansion announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios

Brian Swan

Well-Known Member
I can't be the only one who literally couldn't give a damn about the scale right?
No, you're not. I think the whole scale discussion is pretty silly. The fact is that it would be impossible to build that land to the relative scale established in the movies. If you were supposed to be the same size as a green army guy, the Woody and Buzz would be 50 feet (more or less) tall. But kids want a Buzz and Woody M&G. If we were shrunk to the size of Buzz, then the green army men would be less than a foot tall, and the conceit that we could ride "in" a Slinky Dog would be lost. This is just supposed to be a "fun" land, aimed mostly at kids, inspired by the Toy Story franchise, in which you are shrunken down to some arbitrary "toy size" in Andy's back yard. And I predict that it will be wildly popular with the target audience...
 

Timothy_Q

Well-Known Member
Since we don't care, please give me one good reason why they should. And don't say because of the gigantic crowd of people that are upset about scale. All 4 or 5 of them.
Disneyland only exists because Walt Disney aimed higher and did more than what the general public deemed necessary.

If you only aim to please the lowest common denominator, you’ll never be an innovator.
 

shortstop

Well-Known Member
No, you're not. I think the whole scale discussion is pretty silly. The fact is that it would be impossible to build that land to the relative scale established in the movies. If you were supposed to be the same size as a green army guy, the Woody and Buzz would be 50 feet (more or less) tall. But kids want a Buzz and Woody M&G. If we were shrunk to the size of Buzz, then the green army men would be less than a foot tall, and the conceit that we could ride "in" a Slinky Dog would be lost. This is just supposed to be a "fun" land, aimed mostly at kids, inspired by the Toy Story franchise, in which you are shrunken down to some arbitrary "toy size" in Andy's back yard. And I predict that it will be wildly popular with the target audience...
I don’t disagree necessarily, but some would argue that if the scale can’t be executed properly/accurately, then the idea should be abandoned in favor of something else. The lack of consistency in scaling doesn’t bother me in practice but I do think they could have been more ambitious.
 

Pixieish

Well-Known Member
I don’t disagree necessarily, but some would argue that if the scale can’t be executed properly/accurately, then the idea should be abandoned in favor of something else. The lack of consistency in scaling doesn’t bother me in practice but I do think they could have been more ambitious.

From a mom's point of view - I couldn't care less about scale. From an artist's point of view - which I usually try to put on hold for my sons' sake, I agree wholeheartedly with your last sentence.
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Disneyland only exists because Walt Disney aimed higher and did more than what the general public deemed necessary.

If you only aim to please the lowest common denominator, you’ll never be an innovator.
That was the point. Even Walt didn't really get motivated by "being an innovator", he naturally was one simply by pursuing his passions. We are collectively applying that same motivation on others that were not blessed with that same natural instinct. Even if they did, they would not possess his gift of knowing, almost always, what the public wanted. That motivation no longer exists in the organization, however, I think we should be able to express gratitude that they have done as well as they have done in keeping the legacy alive. They still, in spite of uninformed comparisons, have not gone the route of six flags and others. In other words they do indeed still do way more then what the general public deemed necessary. In short, nothing makes this group happy.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom