WDW Parks: New Original Lands or Combine w/Movie Properties?

DisneyJunkie

DisneyJunkie

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Obviously the trend now with theme parks (WDW, Universal, etc) is to start adding in lands or areas based on current (or recently current) popular film properties (Harry Potter, Avatar, and so on). Considering how Disney was always more or less about unique and original attractions based on their own imagineering efforts, do you as a WDW fan feel the new additions to the parks should continue to be a merging of popular film properties as lands or go back to making their own things up? Personally I can see why they'd merge with things like Harry Potter or Avatar because of their popularity, but at the same time I'm always concerned about the longevity of such trendy pop culture things.
 
NiarrNDisney

NiarrNDisney

Well-Known Member
I'm torn but I do see the benefits of both however seeing the way Disney has told the stories of Africa and Asia I'm swaying more to an original concept with attractions geared to specific movies/themes.
 
M

morningstar

Well-Known Member
So hard to decide. I join the communal whine that Disney is doing movie tie-ins too much - almost exclusively. But wow would I like to visit a Lord of the Rings land. And Avatar is a draw for me too. So I guess I'd like to see a little of both.
 
horizons82

horizons82

Well-Known Member
I have a HUGE problem with this because we have an entire park devoted to films--Disney Hollywood Studios--which is in horrible need of new attractions and even new 'lands'. I am even fine with themes and/or characters from Disney movies and other films going into the Magic Kingdom as long as it has something to do with one of the 'lands' there.

What really annoys me is hearing about things like 'Avatar' going into Animal Kingdom, the original The Living Seas being taken over by Nemo, and now possibly Norway's Maelstrom going the way of Frozen.

Even though I will admit to having a sense of nostalgia for attractions like Horizons that are long gone, I also realize many of the original attractions would be outdated if they still existed. That said, WDW could at least replace them or update them with attractions that still represent the original atmosphere, mood and even 'mission' of the original attraction.

It's bad enough when amazing, awe-inspiring and downright incredible attractions are replaced with ones that can't hold a candle to the original, but then to also have movies invading places like Epcot and Animal Kingdom--parks which should transcend and go beyond themes associated with popular or animated movies--is very frustrating.
For me, AK and Epcot should be more about the reality of our animals and planet (Animal Kingdom) and about the world and the potential future we can create (Epcot).

To put things like animated films and their characters into what should be larger-than-life and a little more serious parks like Epcot and AK is truly a step in the wrong direction IMHO.
 
wdwnat

wdwnat

Member
I sit on the fence with this one.

On the one hand, I love movie tie-ins, especially when it's a movie you really love. It's exciting getting to be in that movies little world and see all the hidden gems and references that Disney put in to it.

On the other side, Disney are so good at creating their own stories like others have said, eg Expedition Everest, that I'd love to see them attempt it more often.

One thing I will say however, I do wish that attractions could be either one or the other. Like POC for example, an original which is now a movie tie in.
 
JIMINYCR

JIMINYCR

Well-Known Member
I'd prefer to see the Imagineers develop something entirely new and exciting. Let loose, they can develop a site that will pack the guests in. We could do with a uniquely inspired land that wows us.
While a land tied into a popular film will get peoples attention and draw the crowds why then rely on a film like Avatar which wont have the same draw as the HP series. If they are going to tie in then go with something that really excites the masses and will be drawing long into the future.
 
Beholder

Beholder

Well-Known Member
I'd prefer original ideas. There are about a billion books that are full of great ideas. And I'm not talking about the latest teen series.

The earths/mans history and pre-history is littered with endless scenarios and compelling "stories".

Pirates, exotic jungle expeditions, houses full of ghosts, the story of the automobile, imagination and dinosaurs were and are pretty good stuff. I'm pretty sure there are more stories out there.
 
WondersOfLife

WondersOfLife

Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
DisneyJunkie said:
Obviously the trend now with theme parks (WDW, Universal, etc) is to start adding in lands or areas based on current (or recently current) popular film properties (Harry Potter, Avatar, and so on). Considering how Disney was always more or less about unique and original attractions based on their own imagineering efforts, do you as a WDW fan feel the new additions to the parks should continue to be a merging of popular film properties as lands or go back to making their own things up? Personally I can see why they'd merge with things like Harry Potter or Avatar because of their popularity, but at the same time I'm always concerned about the longevity of such trendy pop culture things.
Click to expand...

Nope. I hate it. Disney gets enough people in their parks to make more than enough money than Universal still gets with Harry Potter. Also, Disney still has a bunch of popular material and characters they can use for new lands.

Even unpopular movies could make GREAT attractions...... If they're a thrill ride. Example: Splash Mountain.

Heck.. IT DOESN'T EVEN NEED TO BE A FLIPPING MOVIE-THEMED ATTRACTION!!

Exaaaampppleesssss: Expedition Everest, Space Mountain, Thunder Mountain, Soarin'...

Disney certainly doesn't have to make everything based on movies. They shouldn't even have to use another company's movie franchise! Especially since they've bought 2 other very popular series! (marvel/star wars) Why the heck is there a need for Avatarland?

I just don't see the point. Disney could do a lot better with their own material and still get more crowds than UNI does. They just have to make some actual decent attractions like little mermaid and 7 dwarves. Fantasyland Expansion was great and all, but I wouldn't consider the additional rides something very big or anything added. Something along the lines of Expedition Everest is definitely a crowd-bringer. Make good rides that causes attention, and people will come.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom