Wookies, & Rebels, & Droids... OH WHY?! The Anti-SWL in Disneyland Thread

[Stevek]

Wow. Really? To me that petting zoo is the worst thing I have seen in any of the three Disney resorts I have visited. At least from what comes to mind.

Fans scream for expansion of the park, we haven't gotten an new e-ticket in decades...but we want to sacrifice expansion to keep a petting zoo and a BBQ? This is where it becomes very challenging with Disney Parks fandom. We want to get...but we don't want to give away those things that people feel are special...and everything is somehow special whether it's a river, petting zoo, unused festival arena, staircase/courtyard, save the rainforest, etc. What's special to some, isn't to others and inability to agree makes you an idiot, delusional, unreasonable, don't understand Walt's dream, blah blah blah. Like I've said before, thank goodness the internet wasn't around when ATIS, Country Bears, Mine Train, Skyway, Keel Boats, FL Autopia, Motorboat Cruise, etc were all closed. This discussion would have seemed like a party by comparison.

At the end of the day, Disney had to take advantage of SW now, waiting for a third park (which may not happen for decades) or adding to DCA (no space per se, other Marvel plans there) were not options. You have arguably the most famous IP in the world, sitting on it would be the biggest mistake that Disney could make. People hoped that Potter would spur Disney into building. It has, and the investment is massive but now it's not the right investment for the "hardcore" fans. It was really the only option Disney had if you really look at it, they had to build SW and putting it where they are really made the most sense given the options available. Losing a small amount of the river. Didn't require shutting down an entire Tomorrowland and still allows Disney to plus that land up someday. It's at the very back of the park and 70-90% of the land it utilizes was facilities.

And yes, Superstar Limo is easily the worst thing Disney has ever created.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Fans scream for expansion of the park, we haven't gotten an new e-ticket in decades...but we want to sacrifice expansion to keep a petting zoo and a BBQ? This is where it becomes very challenging with Disney Parks fandom. We want to get...but we don't want to give away those things that people feel are special...and everything is somehow special whether it's a river, petting zoo, unused festival arena, staircase/courtyard, save the rainforest, etc. What's special to some, isn't to others and inability to agree makes you an idiot, delusional, unreasonable, don't understand Walt's dream, blah blah blah. Like I've said before, thank goodness the internet wasn't around when ATIS, Country Bears, Mine Train, Skyway, Keel Boats, FL Autopia, Motorboat Cruise, etc were all closed. This discussion would have seemed like a party by comparison.

At the end of the day, Disney had to take advantage of SW now, waiting for a third park (which may not happen for decades) or adding to DCA (no space per se, other Marvel plans there) were not options. You have arguably the most famous IP in the world, sitting on it would be the biggest mistake that Disney could make. People hoped that Potter would spur Disney into building. It has, and the investment is massive but now it's not the right investment for the "hardcore" fans. It was really the only option Disney had if you really look at it, they had to build SW and putting it where they are really made the most sense given the options available. Losing a small amount of the river. Didn't require shutting down an entire Tomorrowland and still allows Disney to plus that land up someday. It's at the very back of the park and 70-90% of the land it utilizes was facilities.

And yes, Superstar Limo is easily the worst thing Disney has ever created.

Its not really about replacing a petting zoo/BBQ on a plot of land that was always intended for expansion, its about the park's thematic integrity. Disneyland or any other Magic Kingdom (not counting SDL since that's kind of a different thing) are not acceptable places for IP lands in general, let alone ones that are based on bought or liscensed IP that have little to no Disney DNA in them.

 

[Stevek]

I really haven't seen much of this creativity that supposedly exists at WDI in the parks. Not recently, at least.

It can't be denied Iger and his IP-obsessed attitude has taken over the parks.

All of the original and current Fantasyland was based on IP, the Matterhorn is IP, Toontown IP, every character in the park is IP...Walt and every other person that has run Disney has believed that tying parts of the park to IP is critical to the visitors experience. It's a mix, always has been and that mix will likely continue. BUT, it's definitely shifted much more to where everything they are now adding to US parks is tied to an IP. That is very unlikely to ever change, it's the new model and it's driving guests to these new IP based experiences in droves. We aren't going to change that because for every one of us on the boards that doesn't like something like SW land, there are probably 1000 guests that do and will flock to SW land.

And I'm really perplexed on your creativity comments. Do you really think that there aren't creative folks or creative ideas being floated out there? I think it's the exact opposite but folks in WDI are tasked with making things work within a budget or IP that limits the non-IP out of the box opportunities that existed 20, 30, 40 years ago. Many of the things they've built recently (Buena Vista Street, Cars Land, the New FL at WDW) are incredibly creative within the parameters they've been given and I believe SW land will be the same.

 

[Stevek]

Its not really about replacing a petting zoo/BBQ on a plot of land that was always intended for expansion, its about the park's thematic integrity. Disneyland or any other Magic Kingdom (not counting SDL since that's kind of a different thing) are not acceptable places for IP lands in general, let alone ones that are based on bought or liscensed IP that have little to no Disney DNA in them.

Snow White, Peter Pan, Pinocchio, Sleeping Beauty, Alice in Wonderland, The Little Mermaid, Mr Toad...all things that were other peoples DNA and Disney used to tell stores on screen and eventually in their parks and now things we consider distinctly Disney. We basically have an entire land in Fantasyland based on things that started with zero Disney DNA. 40 years from now, SW, Pixar, Marvel...the public will consider those things to be as much Disney as we do the things I mentioned above.

 

[Rich T]

Its not really about replacing a petting zoo/BBQ on a plot of land that was always intended for expansion, its about the park's thematic integrity. Disneyland or any other Magic Kingdom (not counting SDL since that's kind of a different thing) are not acceptable places for IP lands in general, let alone ones that are based on bought or liscensed IP that have little to no Disney DNA in them.

As much as I love classic Disney at Disneyland, they can't keep the park confined to properties solely originated or adapted by the previous version of the studio. Lucas's people have been working with Disneyland since, what...1984 (assuming that's when EO went into preproduction)? More than half the park's life. And now Disney owns it all and will be producing a zillion movies and tv shows based on Star Wars and eventually Indiana Jones. Star Wars is now a HUGE part of what Disney is. To ignore it all going forward into the park's future would look increasingly weird and unbalanced with each passing year. This is something they have to do. And I'm not saying that as a huge SW fan--I think the original New Hope film that started it all is a work of genius, but that's about it for me aside from certain characters here and there.

This is not too far removed from seeing ABC TV banners all over the property when Disney bought the network...and it's a lot more fun.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Snow White, Peter Pan, Pinocchio, Sleeping Beauty, Alice in Wonderland, The Little Mermaid, Mr Toad...all things that were other peoples DNA and Disney used to tell stores on screen and eventually in their parks and now things we consider distinctly Disney. We basically have an entire land in Fantasyland based on things that started with zero Disney DNA. 40 years from now, SW, Pixar, Marvel...the public will consider those things to be as much Disney as we do the things I mentioned above.

The reason those fairytales have Disney DNA is because Disney adapted them into their own stylings. I also feel that Disney DNA exudes through Pixar and their storytelling. The IP from Lucasfilm and Marvel have the same DNA as before they were bought by Disney. Personally, I think that's a great thing because those companies have such rich legacies that should be respected individually. I believe that there's room for their legacies in the parks. However, they have to integrate Lucasfilm, Marvel, or whatever IP they buy next in ways that feel organic and not forced. Ironically enough, SWL in DHS is a perfect example of organic integration while SWL in DL is the perfect example of forced integration. The legacies of both Disney and these companies should not be muddled together in a way that was never intended because that's a blight on all their legacies.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Do you mean creativity in terms of original concepts, because I feel they have done a great job on a lot of rides over the past 5-6 years despite most being movie based. Don't forget about Mystic Manor in HKDL.

Yes, I'm specifically referring to concepts. Ride technology, they're definitely innovative. That can't be denied.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

As much as I love classic Disney at Disneyland, they can't keep the park confined to properties solely originated or adapted by the previous version of the studio. Lucas's people have been working with Disneyland since, what...1984 (assuming that's when EO went into preproduction)? More than half the park's life. And now Disney owns it all and will be producing a zillion movies and tv shows based on Star Wars and eventually Indiana Jones. Star Wars is now a HUGE part of what Disney is. To ignore it all going forward into the park's future would look increasingly weird and unbalanced with each passing year. This is something they have to do. And I'm not saying that as a huge SW fan--I think the original New Hope film that started it all is a work of genius, but that's about it for me aside from certain characters here and there.

This is not too far removed from seeing ABC TV banners all over the property when Disney bought the network...and it's a lot more fun.

As I said in the post above, there are places for these IP's in the parks. Disneyland and parks of its ilk should be the shining examples of classic Disney in its purest form. If you muddle things up, then the individual legacies are lost on future generations. Whether your a Disney fan, a Star Wars fan, or both like myself, that's something no one wants to see on either side of the coin.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Yes, I'm specifically referring to concepts. Ride technology, they're definitely innovative. That can't be denied.

Ok, just wanted to make things clear. I think we can blame the concepts more on Iger rather than WDI.

 

[Californian Elitist]

All of the original and current Fantasyland was based on IP, the Matterhorn is IP, Toontown IP, every character in the park is IP...Walt and every other person that has run Disney has believed that tying parts of the park to IP is critical to the visitors experience. It's a mix, always has been and that mix will likely continue. BUT, it's definitely shifted much more to where everything they are now adding to US parks is tied to an IP. That is very unlikely to ever change, it's the new model and it's driving guests to these new IP based experiences in droves. We aren't going to change that because for every one of us on the boards that doesn't like something like SW land, there are probably 1000 guests that do and will flock to SW land.

And I'm really perplexed on your creativity comments. Do you really think that there aren't creative folks or creative ideas being floated out there? I think it's the exact opposite but folks in WDI are tasked with making things work within a budget or IP that limits the non-IP out of the box opportunities that existed 20, 30, 40 years ago. Many of the things they've built recently (Buena Vista Street, Cars Land, the New FL at WDW) are incredibly creative within the parameters they've been given and I believe SW land will be the same.

The Fantasyland example is moot in terms of my argument. I've said this before, Fantasyland had multiple rides based on movies, but they were their own, separate entities. Fantasyland isn't Snow White Land, or Peter Pan Land, or Mr. Toad Land. All of the attractions are based on individual IPs. That is completely different from Star Wars Land, for reasons I'm sure I won't have to explain. This won't be just a ride, like Star Tours, this will be an entire land dedicated to nothing but Star Wars. There is a difference.

The purpose of my ranting is not to hopefully change the minds at Disney. I'm ranting because I want to, and I would like to express my feelings. Clearly there will be people who enjoy it. I know that, and I know I'm not going to change their minds. Can't a girl rant just because?

I didn't say creative thoughts aren't being floated around, although I can bet there are plenty of Imagineers without one hint of imagination in them. What I did say was Disney doesn't give creativity a chance, and I find it to be a rare occurrence. Keep in mind, I'm specifically talking about concepts. I don't find Cars Land to be creative. Radiator Springs was taken straight from a film. Have you seen the original plans for what is now Cars Land? Those plans were pretty creative, in my opinion. I can't speak on NFL. Buena Vista Street, I can give you that.

I remember asking a similar question in another thread. Which project would allow for more creativity and room for a variety of different ride/attraction concepts, a land based on space exploration, or a land based on Star Wars?

 

[Californian Elitist]

Its not really about replacing a petting zoo/BBQ on a plot of land that was always intended for expansion, its about the park's thematic integrity.

My gosh, exactly. I would like a new car, but I'm not just going to take anything I can get.

 

[Variable]

"The purpose of my ranting is not to hopefully change the minds at Disney. I'm ranting because I want to, and I would like to express my feelings"

So this is a purely ego driven, personal thread that serves no purpose other than to post, promote, even encourage, anger at Disney and its people.

I'd say it's time to lock this thread.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

The Fantasyland example is moot in terms of my argument. I've said this before, Fantasyland had multiple rides based on movies, but they were their own, separate entities. Fantasyland isn't Snow White Land, or Peter Pan Land, or Mr. Toad Land. All of the attractions are based on individual IPs. That is completely different from Star Wars Land, for reasons I'm sure I won't have to explain. This won't be just a ride, like Star Tours, this will be an entire land dedicated to nothing but Star Wars. There is a difference.

The purpose of my ranting is not to hopefully change the minds at Disney. I'm ranting because I want to, and I would like to express my feelings. Clearly there will be people who enjoy it. I know that, and I know I'm not going to change their minds. Can't a girl rant just because?

I didn't say creative thoughts aren't being floated around, although I can bet there are plenty of Imagineers without one hint of imagination in them. What I did say was Disney doesn't give creativity a chance, and I find it to be a rare occurrence. Keep in mind, I'm specifically talking about concepts. I don't find Cars Land to be creative. Radiator Springs was taken straight from a film. Have you seen the original plans for what is now Cars Land? Those plans were pretty creative, in my opinion. I can't speak on NFL. Buena Vista Street, I can give you that.

I remember asking a similar question in another thread. Which project would allow for more creativity and room for a variety of different ride/attraction concepts, a land based on space exploration, or a land based on Star Wars?

Perfectly stated. Putting your rants out on the Internet for any random person who wants to read it is very therapeutic.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

And yes, Superstar Limo is easily the worst thing Disney has ever created

Certainly not worse than the Motorboat Cruise or If You Had Wings.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Perfectly stated. Putting your rants out on the Internet for any random person who wants to read it is very therapeutic.

Exactly.

I always talk about these sorts of things with my friend, but I haven't seen him in close to a year. I express my feelings here.

I'm seeing my friend tomorrow...let the ranting continue. LOL.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

And I'm really perplexed on your creativity comments. Do you really think that there aren't creative folks or creative ideas being floated out there?

I think what's happening here is that people are confusing creativity with innovation. Just because a project, say Cars Land, was based on an existing idea or story, doesn't automatically mean that it lacked creativity. So I agree with you that Disney is filled with some of the most creative talent and output in the entertainment industry. On the other hand, was Cars Land innovative? Not sure, and I think that's up for debate because it's something that is much harder to define in this context.

 

[Stevek]

The reason those fairytales have Disney DNA is because Disney adapted them into their own stylings. I also feel that Disney DNA exudes through Pixar and their storytelling. The IP from Lucasfilm and Marvel have the same DNA as before they were bought by Disney. Personally, I think that's a great thing because those companies have such rich legacies that should be respected individually. I believe that there's room for their legacies in the parks. However, they have to integrate Lucasfilm, Marvel, or whatever IP they buy next in ways that feel organic and not forced. Ironically enough, SWL in DHS is a perfect example of organic integration while SWL in DL is the perfect example of forced integration. The legacies of both Disney and these companies should not be muddled together in a way that was never intended because that's a blight on all their legacies.

Star Wars, Indy, Pixar...all feel very much come off as very Disneyesque, even when they weren't officially Disney i.e. great, imaginative storytelling.

 

[Stevek]

I think what's happening here is that people are confusing creativity with innovation. Just because a project, say Cars Land, was based on an existing idea or story, doesn't automatically mean that it lacked creativity. So I agree with you that Disney is filled with some of the most creative talent and output in the entertainment industry. On the other hand, was Cars Land innovative? Not sure, and I think that's up for debate because it's something that is much harder to define in this context.

True, are flat rides or the usage of an existing "Test Track" technology innovative? No. But the presentation or adaptation of those technologies is pretty creative and tweaks might be seen as innovative.

 

[shortstop]

I think what's happening here is that people are confusing creativity with innovation. Just because a project, say Cars Land, was based on an existing idea or story, doesn't automatically mean that it lacked creativity. So I agree with you that Disney is filled with some of the most creative talent and output in the entertainment industry. On the other hand, was Cars Land innovative? Not sure, and I think that's up for debate because it's something that is much harder to define in this context.

I would most definitely say RSR is innovative. Took a ride system that has only been used a couple times before to a whole new level of immersion in every sense of the word.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Exactly.

I always talk about these sorts of things with my friend, but I haven't seen him in close to a year. I express my feelings here.

I'm seeing my friend tomorrow...let the ranting continue. LOL.

That's good. Having an actual person in your life to talk to is even more theraputic.