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

[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).

 

[Henry Mystic]

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'.

Oh I don’t disagree that they should have used a new film, but my point was the queue and exterior are night and day by comparison. Same with Toy Story Mania.

I would most definitely consider Soarin’ Over California an E-ticket having done it recently.

But honestly the “Around the World” film is so weak by comparison that that’s fair.

I also definitely wouldn’t consider Toy Story Mania an E-ticket in terms of scale, but to me, it’s arguably the best game execution in a ride ever, and brings it up quite a bit for that reason.

Though, both rides at DisneySea frequently get 180 minute waits being by far the most popular rides at the park which is pretty wild.

Regardless, while DisneySea has the best line-up of any Disney non-castle park, it’s not a stellar roster. Islands of Adventure, Tokyo Disneyland, and especially Disneyland Park most definitely have better slates, but Fantasy Springs next year will fix that.

 

[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.

 

[BlakeW39]

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.

Yeah I don't care for it much. It's not a particularly thrilling ride, nor a well themed one. I think all the effects are essentially duds. The room has too much lighting and doesn't allow the rider to feel like they're in space either in my opinion. And the premise of the ride is really contrived. You can tell they were trying to balance the conflicting desires of imagineering to make the ride conform to the themes of EPCOT, and management's desire to have an action-packed superhero ride with Guardians fighting a powerful villain. I'd put it above, say, TRON, but below Expedition Everest, just based on the ride itself and not how it fits into its respective park.

 

[erasure fan1]

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.

I can't really see the dilemma since since they have had a park for years that works perfectly for a very large part of their IPs. The studios. But that is nowhere near the capacity it should be. If they really wanted to build out their IPs, they could in that park. But they would rather shove an IP wherever they need something. It's a lot less work and money. IP can fit into existing lands, it just takes some work and planning.

 

[MisterPenguin]

This is a Cosmic Rewind thread now? Cool.

I really enjoyed the ride. Thought it was great.

 

[James Alucobond]

I can't really see the dilemma since since they have had a park for years that works perfectly for a very large part of their IPs. The studios. But that is nowhere near the capacity it should be. If they really wanted to build out their IPs, they could in that park. But they would rather shove an IP wherever they need something. It's a lot less work and money. IP can fit into existing lands, it just takes some work and planning.

That park’s original charter didn’t work for the currently in-vogue way of handling IP-based lands either, hence the shift. People tend to not care as much about Hollywood Studios’ original mission statement (relative to EPCOT), but it was equally inappropriate as an IP dumping ground as originally envisioned.

 

[BlakeW39]

I can't really see the dilemma since since they have had a park for years that works perfectly for a very large part of their IPs. The studios. But that is nowhere near the capacity it should be. If they really wanted to build out their IPs, they could in that park. But they would rather shove an IP wherever they need something. It's a lot less work and money. IP can fit into existing lands, it just takes some work and planning.

I think turning DHS into IP-land is a big mistake. And this is coming from someone who had almost zero interest in the original themes of the park, back when it was still MGM. Modern DHS has essentially no thematic direction. Visiting facsimiles of your favorite movie locations isn't a theme. It's a premise, not a theme. So what are the themes that underlie DHS as a park? I don't ******* know, and Disney doesn't seem to know either. That, in combination with its small size and attraction variety, makes it easily the weakest WDW park. It's honestly kind of pathetic, and if it wasn't for TOT I don't think I'd ever even need to go back.

Modern DHS imo doesn't even really have a strong identity. Even its weenie, the Tower of Terror, was never meant to be the centerpiece of the park and doesn't really work as such.

 

[UNCgolf]

That park’s original charter didn’t work for the currently in-vogue way of handling IP-based lands either, hence the shift. People tend to not care as much about Hollywood Studios’ original mission statement (relative to EPCOT), but it was equally inappropriate as an IP dumping ground as originally envisioned.

This is one of the reasons I preferred the DHS of 20+ years ago to current DHS. It was a much better theme park, even if the attraction lineup wasn't as impressive (although I personally don't think the current attraction lineup is very good either, and Rise and MMRR are the only truly good additions... but MMRR came at the cost of a better attraction, so it's still not a plus).

The current version is a half day park, and the older version was a half day park, but the older version was a lot more cohesive and interesting.