Why so much hostility towards pixar?

[hpyhnt 1000]

Also, while I agree the movie itself isn't futuristic, you gotta admit the idea of harnessing the power of laughter for electricity can be pretty futuristic

Well, thats where our opinions differ. I see the idea of harnessing laughter for power more fantasical and whimsical than futuristic. Of course, there were those who thought that sending a manned rocket to the moon was pure science fiction, so there you go.

 

[darthjohnny]

That's another issue too,where is at least ONE attraction that is for the fab five that's moderately new?

They were just added to the Playhouse Disney Live On Stage show not too long ago.

 

[Timmay]

Sounds to me like you think guests want the same boring overdone Pixar rides.

You suffer from the illusion that the people who enjoy them think they are "overdone" and "boring". This would obviously not be the case, since they are in fact popular.

All we want here is for Disney to stop focusing on what makes money for them in the movie business and try to make money on something creative in the parks.

Why?? The good of the many outweighs the good of the few.

 

[krankenstein]

I buy it. Aside from Pirates, Princess' and Stitch, what other franchises does Disney have that REALLY works?

An attraction does not have to be based on a popular character to make it successful. Look at Splash Mountain. Song of the South is a lesser known Disney movie, but Disney was able to create a well developed and thought out attraction based on it's characters. The attraction is a huge success because it is a great attraction, not because of the characters used. They certainly can do the same today with characters that are better known than Brer Rabbit and company.

 

[sandicinderelli]

For example, I'm all for Monsters Inc Laugh Floor, but it doesn't fit into the theme of Tomorrowland, no matter how hard Disney tries to make it fit.

Another area would be Nemo going into the former Living Seas pavilion.

For me, it just seems that Disney is so intent on getting all things Pixar into the parks that they are forgetting the basic theming/purpose that made the parks so great in the first place. :shrug:

Good points.

 

[Foolish1]

Why hostility toward Pixar? I guess it isn't so much hostility as disappointment. The Disney parks encompass many topics, and many ideas. They include many viewpoints, and a lot of different emotions coming together. Look at Tomorrowland, Adventureland, Fantasyland, Liberty Square & Frontierland. But when I think about Pixar's films, they seem so limiting.

At one point I tried to think about why I thought they were "so limiting". I think there are several reasons. First, most of their films fall into a narrow focus of ideas. Second, they made what, ten films total? How many films has Disney made? Thousands? And they made animated, computer animated, documentaries (www.disneynature.com), live action in many areas. Third, Disney parks are based on so many different things, and their films are only one aspect. Look at Hall of Presidents, Pirates of the Caribbean, Jungle Cruise, Haunted Mansion, Universe of Energy, Spaceship Earth, American Adventure, Countdown To Extinction, and on and on.

Besides (tongue in cheek), if they only make attractions based on films, where will they ever get ideas for their films again?? :lol:

I guess I truly don't mind some attractions based on Pixar films. But please, let's try some original ideas too. And I have to say, I thought making an attraction based on Meet The Robinsons would have been good too.

 

[MousDad]

I guess I truly don't mind some attractions based on Pixar films. But please, let's try some original ideas too. And I have to say, I thought making an attraction based on Meet The Robinsons would have been good too.

Poor WDFA, they make a pretty good film and they still don't get credit for it. Do you realize how many times I've heard people say "Yeah, Meet the Robinson's was great. That was Pixar, right?"

 

[Timmay]

An attraction does not have to be based on a popular character to make it successful. Look at Splash Mountain. Song of the South is a lesser known Disney movie, but Disney was able to create a well developed and thought out attraction based on it's characters. The attraction is a huge success because it is a great attraction, not because of the characters used. They certainly can do the same today with characters that are better known than Brer Rabbit and company.

No, but in this day and age, it goes a long way to ensuring the success. Things were different 20 years ago with Splash Mountain. People and society were different, entertainment expectations were different. I think if you tried to open Splash Mountain today with unknown characters (besides, Brer Rabbit was fairly well known back in the 80's), it might not fly.

I don't want to turn this into a social commentary, but times and people are a changin', and entertainment is changing with them...it always has.

I guess I truly don't mind some attractions based on Pixar films. But please, let's try some original ideas too.

In the last ten years: Soarin'. Everest. Lights, Motors, Action. Mission:Space. Test Track...

 

[krankenstein]

^I don't pretend to know society's current trends. I do not study them b/c I am not a sociologist. However, I still stand firm on my feeling that Pixar is not the be all end all when it comes to Disney.

BTW Timmay, I love you signature. :lol:

 

[Timmay]

^I don't pretend to know society's current trends. I do not study them b/c I am not a sociologist.

I don't think I know either, but I beleive that Disney probably spends boat loads of money to find out. I don't think their choices are made in a vacuum. I don't like all of the changes or choices they make, but I believe they act on what they believe is good information.