Put me in the camp of without Black Panther any Wakandan representation is a stretch much less an IP based land.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Wakanda joins Coco, Zootopia, and Encanto on Disney Parks' future blue sky expansion list, reveals Josh D'Amaro
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
999th Happy Haunt
Well-Known Member
Could you imagine being a casual Marvel fan planning a trip to WDW because you heard they built a land based on the movie Black Panther and when you get there Black Panther is nowhere to be found?
They did it for Star Wars.
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
And I'm sure they're looking to repeat that amazing success story.They did it for Star Wars.
999th Happy Haunt
Well-Known Member
I’d even give Star Wars more credit, at least there are characters from the new movies there. I don’t know how it’s even conceivable for many posters on here to think they can do a BP land without anyone from the movies.They did it for Star Wars.
JD80
Well-Known Member
What makes an attraction/experience better when it's in the parks first vs. a movie first?
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
I think there’s a few schools of thought on this. One, is that this is a location that is doable under the restrictions of the Universal licensing deal (assuming the BP issue is deftly handled). Two, Wakandan tech and culture is showcased heavily in the MCU films, so it makes an easy fit into the parks. Three, this would be an easy insertion of diversity, so the fan base issue is immaterial.
For me it's a few factors: One, there hasn't been an over saturation of it everywhere! There remains an element of mystery and discovery. Another factor is, when I hear an attraction is going to be based on an IP I love, I dream up all the scenarios it could be and it usually ends up disappointing. See Frozen Ever After. Even the new Mickey shorts are incredible and Railway falls flat for me as it's a jumbled mess that's nowhere near as thought out as those shorts. So, going into something with a blank slate is more rewarding to me personally. I'd love Lion King ride, or Aladdin ride but I doubt they could pull it off with the current leadership and bean counters.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
It’s more about letting WDI create things of their own like they used to over mandating them to merely be a marketing arm of the studios.
JD80
Well-Known Member
So you think WDI can come up with better stories that Disney Studios?
You're confident that the current WDI team can come up with a better setting for a story/ride than very successful movies/franchises? I'm not.
And the Studios ain't what they used to be!
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
And all those European countries?
Incomudro
Well-Known Member
Our nation here in the US is based on Europe.
Our foundation is Eurocentric.
osian
Well-Known Member
It's the wrong question, as that's not a point that's being debated. But I'd answer it by saying look at it the other way around. When a movie has been based on an attraction in recent times, has it been better than the attraction? Can the same story be told either in a similar way or in different way to make it better than the first incarnation of it? I don't think so. I think that probably where it was "first" is where it is better. Is Star Wars Galaxy's Edge better than the Star Wars movies? (Well, I suppose it depends on which one you're looking at lol!)
Sorry to rewrite your question but to make it relevant to the case in hand...
"What makes an attraction/experience better when it's an original idea rather than being based on an existing MCU or Pixar movie?"
My answer is, because it's not targetted to any particular demographic and anyone can be interested in it.
Last edited:
Mike S
Well-Known Member
I’d agree with you there regarding confidence in the current WDI but with the right people it can certainly be done. Who knows, maybe the current team CAN do it if they weren’t shackled down to a franchise mandate. Look at Mystic Manor.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Do you think Frozen would have been a better movie with Mickey Mouse in it? Encanto? Moana? Were you confused when they didn’t have Mickey Mouse? Was it odd that Woody isn’t in Elemental?
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
If the demographics of those who built up the US is what you’re going to invoke to justify the current configuration of World Showcase, then you should be all for sub-Saharan African representation.
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
Attraction only, 100%.
We don't need them to blow half the budget on a fancy restaurant and bathrooms and then give us the equivalent of a web slingers attraction while taking up an extra 6 acres of land for place-setting on an IP a significant chunk of park goers won't even care about.
But I feel this way about their modern direction in general. We don't need new entire lands devoted to 1.5 attractions.
Just think if they'd built out all the parks that way, originally.
Did we need Toy Story Land?
In the end, did we get anything substantial out of Galaxy's Edge or would we have been better off with Rise and a full scale model of the Falcon with all that other budget spent on the lesser ride and the lifeless area around them that could have been used for another e-ticket, instead?
Now we still have all that space being taken and it'll just sit there like that until they slowly need to start chipping away at it to make room for something else they need to fit into the park 15-30 years down the road.
Last edited: