Why Hollywood Studios is being rebuilt

[BryceM]

I agree to, Marvel and Lucasfilm (even Pixar) have box office records and sell merch extremely well, so every one does extremely well, therefore creating purpose of being represented in parks, but Florida has 0 chance of Marvel because of IOA (which is great on its own).

Yeah, Walt Disney World does not need anything Marvel when there is a perfectly good Marvel themed land at Islands of Adventure.

 

[asianway]

They're afraid they'll be exposed to something better. When you have your head in the sand you can remain blissfully ignorant.

Same discussion taking place in the "D23 Wind down" thread...maybe Wishes do come true, if you believe!!!

 

[GLaDOS]

I'm sure they've had plans, but probably nothing more than blue sky. I would think it would take a while to get them tot eh design phase. Besides, with LucasFilm and Lucas' involvement now, I'm sure they'd be getting much more input from a different perspective

They can start design phase directly after blue sky. If this indeed isn't supposed to open until 2018, there's no reason why they wouldn't be ready to announce it in August. Remember, they don't even have to show you any art work. They didn't for Avatar.

 

[Ignohippo]

I and @lazyboy97o agree that Marvel was a risk. I think it's a risk that is paying off. He seems to disagree on that bit.

I don't know how much of a risk it was but at the time, I thought it was an odd fit with the family values of Disney. Faily-friendlier DC seemed like it would have been a better choice (if they could have pried it out of WB's portfolio). Now, it seems much more palatable.

Pixar and LucasFilm are no brainers IMO. Especially with Lucasfilm at $4 billion.

 

[The Jungle skipper]

Same discussion taking place in the "D23 Wind down" thread...maybe Wishes do come true, if you believe!!!

Exactly, you WDW could be 5,000,000,000x better than any other park in Orlando if they wouldn't do things like Tangled: the restroom and hype it so much although I disagree with the criticism of test track, it deserved that hype.

 

[Ignohippo]

They're afraid they'll be exposed to something better. When you have your head in the sand you can remain blissfully ignorant.

I think it's more a case of such a large percentage of this board being East Coasters and Floridians. With cash hard to comeby these days, it'd be nice of there were a way to get D23 here closer to WDW.

It's simply wishful thinking.

 

[The Jungle skipper]

I don't know how much of a risk it was but at the time, I thought it was an odd fit with the family values of Disney. Faily-friendlier DC seemed like it would have been a better choice (if they could have pried it out of WB's portfolio). Now, it seems much more palatable.

Pixar and LucasFilm are no brainers IMO. Especially with Lucasfilm at $4 billion.

Okay, since when is DC family friendly?

 

[BigThunderMatt]

This is the short sightedness that leads to clones. You want RSR because you know what RSR is. Personally, I want the Imagineers to show us something we haven't seen before. Radiator Springs Racers would be a great addition, but built 5-6 years after the original won't have the same impact.

I disagree. I want RSR because it's quality and I know the ride is good. If we get that we at least know it will be successful. I would rather have successful than some watered down, value-engineered attraction. Yes, the Imagineers will give us something that we haven't seen before, but that does not automatically equate to it being better than RSR. If anything, they will initially blue-sky an immersive dark ride on par with RSR sans racing that will then be value engineered down to the crap standards of TDO which will ultimately lead to an inferior attraction no matter how you look at it.

Fact is, no matter what form the ride takes, it will still exist within Cars Land. And if it is the highlight attraction of said land it will always be compared to its west coast progenitor. If the attraction is anything less than earth-shattering in its new incarnation it will be considered inferior.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I think it's more a case of such a large percentage of this board being East Coasters and Floridians. With cash hard to comeby these days, it'd be nice of there were a way to get D23 here closer to WDW.

It's simply wishful thinking.

I've noticed that. People talk about flying from coast to coast like there is a free shuttle that they could take. A lot of people that can squeeze out enough money to make a trip to Florida (on the east coast) would be unable to do the same thing to get to California. It's like a poster from a different board that was a TDR fan would constantly get upset because everyone didn't just hop on a plane and head for Tokyo. How we were suckered in because we wouldn't make the trip across the Pacific. I had many wasted conversations with him pointing out that the only reason that he was there as often was because he was a flight attendant on an airline and got there for free along, I'm sure, with allowance for hotel accommodations. It is a lot easier that way. It doesn't seem to sink in that not everyone can afford to be jumping from coast to coast unless the are part of the actual or faux 1% or work for an airline.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I and @lazyboy97o agree that Marvel was a risk. I think it's a risk that is paying off. He seems to disagree on that bit.

No, I'm saying it's not paying off the way Disney wanted and with Disney expectations not being met, regardless of how silly those expectations may be. A film expected to make a profit of $105 million only making $100 million can be a disappointment to Disney.

I agree to, Marvel and Lucasfilm (even Pixar) have box office records and sell merch extremely well, so every one does extremely well, therefore creating purpose of being represented in parks, but Florida has 0 chance of Marvel because of IOA (which is great on its own).

Purpose in parks should be based on story, not the financial metrics of other mediums.

 

[Bparso87]

I don't know how much of a risk it was but at the time, I thought it was an odd fit with the family values of Disney. Faily-friendlier DC seemed like it would have been a better choice (if they could have pried it out of WB's portfolio). Now, it seems much more palatable.

Pixar and LucasFilm are no brainers IMO. Especially with Lucasfilm at $4 billion.

Dc is is far from family friendly. I read only dc and the occasional marvel but mainly dc. It is far from it have u played the batman Arkham games r seen the TDK. Even MOS deals with serious issues. Yes there is same tamed kids stuff but as a whole it is not. Maybe we can get Heath ledgers joker running around the parks r green arrow taking down drug dealers.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I disagree. I want RSR because it's quality and I know the ride is good. If we get that we at least know it will be successful. I would rather have successful than some watered down, value-engineered attraction. Yes, the Imagineers will give us something that we haven't seen before, but that does not automatically equate to it being better than RSR. If anything, they will initially blue-sky an immersive dark ride on par with RSR sans racing that will then be value engineered down to the crap standards of TDO which will ultimately lead to an inferior attraction no matter how you look at it.

Fact is, no matter what form the ride takes, it will still exist within Cars Land. And if it is the highlight attraction of said land it will always be compared to its west coast progenitor. If the attraction is anything less than earth-shattering in its new incarnation it will be considered inferior.

You just said it yourself. You want it because you "know" it. It's the same reason fans clamor for things like Beastly Kingdom, Western River Expedition or The Muppet Movie Ride. They've seen concept art, they understand the concept and the "know" it will be good. With Radiator Springs Racers many have even experienced it so they know it's a safe bet.

People loved The Hangover, then when they made The Hangover Part 2 they took the same model and made the same movie in a different location. They went with what people wanted and the movie sucked. Fast forwarded to The Hangover Part 3, they changed the model, kept the characters the same and the result was a movie that was substantially better than the 2nd.

Let's face it, we don't have Imagineers on these boards. We're uninventive and for the most part we lack creativity at the level that Imagineers have creativity. As such, I'll defer to them to "wow" me with something else rather than repeat what they've already done.

As for comparing it to it's west coast counterpart, yes that's inevitable. The safe way to avoid that is to reproduce the exact same thing. However, if that's done then my guess is we would only see Cars Land, and not Star Wars Land. Is that a concession you're also willing to make?

 

[Lord_Vader]

No way. Harry Potter will have every bit as much staying power as, say, gee, I don't know, Star Wars, except arguably even more because its in book form and will thus age better than any film.

Really? Star Wars has well over 100 books with at least 4 to 6 coming out each year. There is an entire book shelf in the local Barnes and Noble, not including any of the graphic novels, etc.

 

[Bparso87]

Really? Star Wars has well over 100 books with at least 4 to 6 coming out each year. There is an entire book shelf in the local Barnes and Noble, not including any of the graphic novels, etc.

Marvel is also taking over the comics from dark horse.

 

[The Jungle skipper]

No, I'm saying it's not paying off the way Disney wanted and with Disney expectations not being met, regardless of how silly those expectations may be. A film expected to make a profit of $105 million only making $100 million can be a disappointment to Disney.


Purpose in parks should be based on story, not the financial metrics of other mediums.

Yes if your thinking from a guests standard, and no if your thinking from a business perspective. think about Avatarland, which along with the guests standard is financial enough to create revenue.

 

[Expo_Seeker40]

The thing is my little chickadees, RSR was never supposed to be a clone when it was first proposed to come to DHS. It was to be a scaled down, I'd even call it a dumbed down approach. Due to a smaller budget, there would be less rock work and more exposed scaffolding. The excuse promoted by Disney would have been that it was supposed to look like a studio set.

Now that they're scrapping the whole concept of the studios once the park is "finished", RSR will be a new indoor concept. CC would be used as part of the experience. (Your car encounters an earthquake sequence during the ride) The pipes, gas, and mechanics are embedded into the ground as it is. Because it is in the back corner of the park, it's rock facade can be covered inside a show building (Think: fire effects inside a building at Backdraft at Uni Hollywood). And relit to be a night time scene.

Or so they tell me.

 

[marni1971]

^ stranger things have happened.

 

[Expo_Seeker40]

^ stranger things have happened.

See: Castle Cake, The Wand, The Hat, and Superstar Limo.

 

[asianway]

I've noticed that. People talk about flying from coast to coast like there is a free shuttle that they could take. A lot of people that can squeeze out enough money to make a trip to Florida (on the east coast) would be unable to do the same thing to get to California. It's like a poster from a different board that was a TDR fan would constantly get upset because everyone didn't just hop on a plane and head for Tokyo. How we were suckered in because we wouldn't make the trip across the Pacific. I had many wasted conversations with him pointing out that the only reason that he was there as often was because he was a flight attendant on an airline and got there for free along, I'm sure, with allowance for hotel accommodations. It is a lot easier that way. It doesn't seem to sink in that not everyone can afford to be jumping from coast to coast unless the are part of the actual or faux 1% or work for an airline.

TDR is indeed a large expense, but a quick search on Kayak shows airfares NY to LA the first week of November to be $350ish, while NY to Orlando $210ish.

If you stay offsite at Disneyland, I think you can make a lot of that up on the hotel room. If not, tighten the belt a little more. I know your position is unique in that you have a fixed income, but many of the people are staying at Deluxe resorts at WDW making that argument

 

[Yensid1974]

No way. Harry Potter will have every bit as much staying power as, say, gee, I don't know, Star Wars, except arguably even more because its in book form and will thus age better than any film.

Realistically, HP will have a better than average shelf life (which could be extended if JKR writes more). But to pretend that something that hit the big time in the last 15+ years is going to eclipse something that has PROVEN staying power for over 35 years is at very best a hope from a fan. Let us talk about HP 20 years from now and we'll see what the answer is.