News Walt Disney Company plans to spend $17 billion at Walt Disney World over the next ten years

[BlakeW39]

While I think he does understand it, I truly believe he just doesn't care. None of the executives care about thematic integrity. As long as the gates turn, who cares, is the attitude at Disney right now.

Well yes, Bob is a company politician, he sees no value in creativity, despite his fondness for it as a marketing buzzword. He views creating new IPs, especially in the parks but also the live action films division as being an unnecessary risk and inferior to leveraging existing brands and franchises. He may or may not understand thematic cohesion in theme parks... but he definitely doesn't value it based on his choices. And it probably just doesn't take up a lot of space in his mind or influence his decisions greatly.

I'm not sure they don't care. Right or wrong, I think there's just a mindset that the power of the brand is bound up in IP and that immersive facsimiles of IP are superior to the generic lands of old. The success of things like the Wizarding World has only strengthened this belief.

I agree with this as well...but I wouldn't use the term generic to describe non-IP lands. They aren't generic so much as they are original, Harambe is as much a realized space as Batuu, hell probably moreso. It isn't just, generic Africa place. Rather I would say Bob prefers lands that are strung together using a single IP and its brand power, rather than one strung together using shared themes and ideas thought up by imagineering.

 

[celluloid]

I agree with this as well...but I wouldn't use the term generic to describe non-IP lands. They aren't generic so much as they are original, Harambe is as much a realized space as Batuu, hell probably moreso. It isn't just, generic Africa place. Rather I would say Bob prefers lands that are strung together using a single IP and its brand power, rather than one strung together using shared themes and ideas thought up by imagineering.

Which sadly makes perfect sense as the theme parks' individual identities have been erased, it shows very much that he thinks that way. The parks themselves have become far less individual identities.

 

[UNCgolf]

By comparison, DisneySea has two headliners in Indiana Jones and Journey to the Center of the Earth, and 4 E-tickets in Sinbad, Tower of Terror, Toy Story Mania!, and Soaring, with the theming for all of them being exceptional.

I think the Soarin' at DisneySea is a misfire. The theming around it looks fantastic, but then it's just the exact same ride you get in EPCOT, and it's incongruous with that surrounding theming. It needs a different film like Italy or Europe in general. Ideally they'd really go all out and make it historical Europe moving through different time periods via CGI, but it just needs something else.

I also wouldn't consider Toy Story Mania or Soarin' E tickets (I don't think either are impressive enough or have the necessary scale), but I realize Disney probably would classify them as such.

Anyways, none of that is a knock against DisneySea as a whole (the TSM/Soarin' ticket status applies to WDW just as much as DisneySea). I've just always thought that they should have done something different with the DisneySea Soarin'.

 

[erasure fan1]

He views creating new IPs, especially in the parks but also the live action films division as being an unnecessary risk and inferior to leveraging existing brands and franchises.

Which is funny considering everything is technically a new ip at one point. He's just lazy and creatively bankrupt unfortunately. The company really isn't equipped with the proper talent right now to come up with anything new on their own. And there is zero chance that happens under Iger anyway. It would take a significant investment, and we all know how Bobby like the thought of that.

 

[James Alucobond]

Which is funny considering everything is technically a new ip at one point. He's just lazy and creatively bankrupt unfortunately. The company really isn't equipped with the proper talent right now to come up with anything new on their own. And there is zero chance that happens under Iger anyway. It would take a significant investment, and we all know how Bobby like the thought of that.

To be fair, Pirates of the Caribbean is really the only hyper-successful IP I can think of that has park origins, so if he's looking for multimedia synergies to fuel the rest of his corporate engine, the parks have not traditionally produced much on that front. Figment and Orange Bird are currently only popular in the context of the parks themselves, and films like Jungle Cruise, Haunted Mansion (2003), Tomorrowland, Country Bear Jamboree, etc. are either mediocre or better off forgotten.

 

[Jrb1979]

Which is funny considering everything is technically a new ip at one point. He's just lazy and creatively bankrupt unfortunately. The company really isn't equipped with the proper talent right now to come up with anything new on their own. And there is zero chance that happens under Iger anyway. It would take a significant investment, and we all know how Bobby like the thought of that.

To be fair I would say Disney fans share a small part of the blame. For one IP is major factor for most guests. Meaning the IP is more important then if the ride is any good. I would bet Guardians wouldn't get the same love if it was based on the Big Bang theory as originally planned.

 

[erasure fan1]

To be fair, Pirates of the Caribbean is really the only hyper-successful IP I can think of that has park origins, so if he's looking for multimedia synergies to fuel the rest of his corporate engine, the parks have not traditionally produced much on that front. Figment and Orange Bird are currently only popular in the context of the parks themselves, and films like Jungle Cruise, Haunted Mansion (2003), Tomorrowland, Country Bear Jamboree, etc. are either mediocre or better off forgotten.

Yes it's a rare thing for something like pirates to happen. And realistically you can thank Depp for that. Jack Sparrow made that franchise. Disney shouldn't be in the mindset of, new ip for the parks, let's turn that into a new film franchise. Or the other way around. That's why I say they are creatively bankrupt. They need to come up with new IPs and let them organically find there way into other parts of the business. The problem is they aren't equipped in any part of the business to be original. They have become a follower, instead of a market leader that everyone looks to.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Which is funny considering everything is technically a new ip at one point. He's just lazy and creatively bankrupt unfortunately. The company really isn't equipped with the proper talent right now to come up with anything new on their own. And there is zero chance that happens under Iger anyway. It would take a significant investment, and we all know how Bobby like the thought of that.

John Lasseter and Jon Favreau to direct a $200 million Big Thunder Mountain Railroad movie starring Chris Pratt.

 

[erasure fan1]

John Lasseter and Jon Favreau to direct a $200 million Big Thunder Mountain Railroad movie starring Chris Pratt.

Well that would be right on brand for uncle Bobby I.

 

[BlakeW39]

To be fair, Pirates of the Caribbean is really the only hyper-successful IP I can think of that has park origins, so if he's looking for multimedia synergies to fuel the rest of his corporate engine, the parks have not traditionally produced much on that front. Figment and Orange Bird are currently only popular in the context of the parks themselves, and films like Jungle Cruise, Haunted Mansion (2003), Tomorrowland, Country Bear Jamboree, etc. are either mediocre or better off forgotten.

That's because multimedia synergies are not what made TWDC successful. For one, how long is it before people get tired of seeing the same ten or so IPs plastered across every medium of entertainment. How long before they are dilluted, because eventually Bob is just gonna milk them dry.

The parks HAVE produced successful IPs. Just not IPs that are successful in other genres of entertainment. And that's because what makes a good theme park attraction is very different from what makes a good movie. Who would want a Space Mountain film? Or maybe a ride based on Pulp Fiction. You see what I mean.

There are specific advantages to creating new IPs in the parks. However, there is also a greater deal of risk. If the attraction is good, it'll be successful without IP. And it will sell merchandise and garner fans. But if it's bad...it flops. There is no such risk when you use movie IPs that are already popular with large audiences. Of course, there are also disadvantages to this. GOTG:CR will never have the legacy of a Space Mountain. Or Expedition Everest, Tower of Terror, Kilimanjaro Safaris, Journey into Imagination. Because it doesn't have its own identity. It profits off of another IP's likeness.

 

[James Alucobond]

That's because multimedia synergies are not what made TWDC successful. For one, how long is it before people get tired of seeing the same ten or so IPs plastered across every medium of entertainment. How long before they are dilluted, because eventually Bob is just gonna milk them dry.

The parks HAVE produced successful IPs. Just not IPs that are successful in other genres of entertainment. And that's because what makes a good theme park attraction is very different from what makes a good movie. Who would want a Space Mountain film? Or maybe a ride based on Pulp Fiction. You see what I mean.

There are specific advantages to creating new IPs in the parks. However, there is also a greater deal of risk. If the attraction is good, it'll be successful without IP. And it will sell merchandise and garner fans. But if it's bad...it flops. There is no such risk when you use movie IPs that are already popular with large audiences. Of course, there are also disadvantages to this. GOTG:CR will never have the legacy of a Space Mountain. Or Expedition Everest, Tower of Terror, Kilimanjaro Safaris, Journey into Imagination. Because it doesn't have its own identity. It profits off of another IP's likeness.

A perceived lack of creativity at present doesn't invalidate a strategy in which the parks and theatrical releases have a healthy synergistic relationship. That was always part of the parks. Likewise, unintelligent, scattershot use of IP doesn't mean IP can't be used intelligently, or that attractions cannot stand on their own merits if IP is used. Heck, one of your non-IP examples actually uses IP in a very successful way (Tower of Terror).

 

[Andrew25]

I think the Soarin' at DisneySea is a misfire. The theming around it looks fantastic, but then it's just the exact same ride you get in EPCOT, and it's incongruous with that surrounding theming. It needs a different film like Italy or Europe in general. Ideally they'd really go all out and make it historical Europe moving through different time periods via CGI.

I also wouldn't consider Toy Story Mania or Soarin' E tickets (I don't think either are impressive enough or have the necessary scale), but I realize Disney probably would classify them as such.

Anyways, none of that is a knock against DisneySea as a whole (the TSM/Soarin' ticket status applies to WDW just as much as DisneySea). I've just always thought that they should have done something different with the DisneySea Soarin'.

It happens all the time at Disney Parks where a D-Ticket is labeled as an E-ticket due to popularity. Seven Dwarfs Mine Train is a solid D-ticket designed attraction that unfortunately receive E-ticket popularity due to its location and the fact that MK has very few interesting attractions for younger ones.

Same with Slinky Dog, Toy Story Mania, D-ticket attractions that have to operate like an E due to the lack of capacity for the park overall.

 

[BlakeW39]

A perceived lack of creativity at present doesn't invalidate a strategy in which the parks and theatrical releases have a healthy synergistic relationship. That was always part of the parks. Likewise, unintelligent, scattershot use of IP doesn't mean IP can't be used intelligently, or that attractions cannot stand on their own merits if IP is used. Heck, one of your non-IP examples actually uses IP in a very successful way (Tower of Terror).

I wasn't using Tower of Terror as an example of a non-IP ride. While TOT is based on the Twilight Zone, it still has its own identity. GOTG does not.

Additionally, the problem isn't that Bob is creating rides based on IPs. The problem is that he refuses to create original rides when the situation calls for it, and implements IP in the parks in ways which dillute their quality and themes.

Anyways. The parks and film divisions can have a healthy relationship, sure. But...as in ANY healthy relationship..they'll also need some distance.

 

[UNCgolf]

I wasn't using Tower of Terror as an example of a non-IP ride. While TOT is based on the Twilight Zone, it still has its own identity. GOTG does not.

Additionally, the problem isn't that Bob is creating rides based on IPs. The problem is that he refuses to create original rides when the situation calls for it, and implements IP in the parks in ways which dillute their quality and themes.

Anyways. The parks and film divisions can have a healthy relationship, sure. But...as in ANY healthy relationship..they'll also need some distance.

Cosmic Rewind is especially weird because it badly misuses the IP. The Guardians feel like an afterthought rather than something integral to the ride experience, and it doesn't really capture the feeling of the films at all.

 

[BlakeW39]

GotG is actually a doubly bad example of an IP ride because it badly misuses the IP. They feel like an afterthought rather than something integral to the ride experience.

I actually think GOTG is a wonderfully overrated attraction. The plot feels random, the characters are too silly (Drax talking about cake, for example), and it of course doesn't at all belong at EPCOT.

 

[James Alucobond]

Additionally, the problem isn't that Bob is creating rides based on IPs. The problem is that he refuses to create original rides when the situation calls for it, and implements IP in the parks in ways which dillute their quality and themes.

One can see the dilemma, though. They now have so much IP that they know would be lucrative to build out, but they have existing infrastructure tied to themes that don't automatically lend themselves to the things they think their audience wants. It's why they've been pushing for "entering the worlds of your favorite movies" in Hollywood Studios and "cultures and the stories they inspire" in World Showcase.

 

[UNCgolf]

I actually think GOTG is a wonderfully overrated attraction. The plot feels random, the characters are too silly (Drax talking about cake, for example), and it of course doesn't at all belong at EPCOT.

I do too, even ignoring the EPCOT aspect. It's a solid roller coaster with fun music, but that's basically all it is. Everything that was supposed to enhance the coaster experience to elevate it into something more than just a coaster (the theming/plot) is poorly done and doesn't really add anything to the ride.

It's certainly not a bad attraction, but it's not a special one. Disney (and Universal) has done much better.

 

[LSLS]

I do too, even ignoring the EPCOT aspect. It's a solid roller coaster with fun music, but that's basically all it is. Everything that was supposed to enhance the coaster experience to elevate it into something more than just a coaster (the theming/plot) is poorly done and doesn't really add anything to the ride.

I REALLY enjoyed the ride. A lot more than I expected. GotG characters showed up at the end saying something, and that was the first time since the preshow it occurred to me they were the theming. I have no idea what happened during the ride with the characters.

 

[UNCgolf]

I REALLY enjoyed the ride. A lot more than I expected. GotG characters showed up at the end saying something, and that was the first time since the preshow it occurred to me they were the theming. I have no idea what happened during the ride with the characters.

I honestly think it would be a better attraction if it was the exact same ride but as just a trip through space, rather than an incomprehensible story about fighting with a Celestial. That also would have allowed a more educational focus as a nice side effect.

I suppose that would eliminate the music, though, and that might hurt.

 

[LSLS]

I honestly think it would be a better attraction if it was the exact same ride but with as just a trip through space, rather than an incomprehensible story about fighting with a Celestial. That also would have allowed a more educational focus as a nice side effect.

I suppose that would eliminate the music, though, and that might hurt.

Completely agree, but yeah, the music is a good part of it. I still have no idea how we defeated the bad guy (or when). Guess I need to stop enjoying the ride mechanics and pay more attention next time.