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

[Phroobar]

Avatar is going in Animal Kingdom last time I checked. Not Disneyland or Magic Kingdom. Same goes for Muppets getting a little area in DHS and Indiana Jones is just one ride, not a land. As has been stated Star Wars Land is perfect for DHS.

But they are still made by imagineers. I guess the idea is that Disneyland is sacred but every other park may have these other IPs. When Indiana Jones was built, Adventureland was rethemed around Indy's time period and referenced in the Jungle Cruise and other smaller parts of the land. To me that makes Adventureland a kind of mini Indiana Jones land but still called Adventureland. Tomorrowland has had Star tours for the past thirty years. Captain EO was there for a long time too. There were plans for a Star Wars roller coaster that never made it off the planning stage. For the Tomorrowland 2055 redo, imagineers planned on an Alien Encounter and an alien circus for the America Sings building. All of which were being created with the help of George Lucas. If those plans when through and budgets weren't cut, Tomorrowland would have been pretty close to being a George Lucas land and that company wasn't even Disney owned.

 

[Californian Elitist]

One historical fact that needs mentioning: everything in that "bizarre collection of components" was developed by the creative imaginations of, shaped by the sensibilities of, and considered as a part of the overall thematic experience of Disneyland by... Walt and his Imagineers. All it was a product of their collective Studio style.

All, that is, except for one. Star Wars was developed by the creative imagination of, shaped by the sensibilities of, and ultimately built into a thematic universe by... George Lucas. Iger and his financier-trained, strategic-planning-sensibilitie'd, consumer-product-promoting executives bought it from George and are currently jamming it like a 14-acre horse pill down the ripped-open gullet of Frontierland.

Now, if that kind of mis-match is okay for fans, that's fine. But they have zero credibility arguing the finer points of theme park theming -- that is, theme parks themselves as thematic experiences -- for the simple fact that they're okay with no overall-park thematic sensibility, much less continuity (and indeed give every evidence of being unable to perceive the difference).

THIS.

 

[BrianLo]

I actually don't like the Star Wars land in MGM Studios, either. But I'm a heck of a complainer. I know they're sort of "reinventing" the park, but it still makes no sense. The park as it has existed until the Star Wars and (*cringe*) Toy Story lands has been themed to Hollywood/SoCal with the Chinese Theater, Sunset Blvd., Echo Lake and backlot. It is and, I guess, was all mostly intricately themed and formed some sort of bizarre cohesive whole. For instance, the Star Tours there is themed like a movie set on the outside and as you enter the building, you're now in the movie. So it wasn't like a Star Wars spaceport was plopped in the middle of Disney's little Los Angeles. These massive alien environments in the back half of the park will surely come out of nowhere and make absolutely no thematic sense.

DHS/MGM is basically just a rip off of USH... Since they threw in a Potter land might as well follow suit.

Seriously though, the park *should* get a rename and re-dedication. It doesn't make sense with current DHS, but that park stopped making sense decades ago.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

One historical fact that needs mentioning: everything in that "bizarre collection of components" was developed by the creative imaginations of, shaped by the sensibilities of, and considered as a part of the overall thematic experience of Disneyland by... Walt and his Imagineers. All it was a product of their collective Studio style.

All, that is, except for one. Star Wars was developed by the creative imagination of, shaped by the sensibilities of, and ultimately built into a thematic universe by... George Lucas. Iger and his financier-trained, strategic-planning-sensibilitie'd, consumer-product-promoting executives bought it from George and are currently jamming it like a 14-acre horse pill down the ripped-open gullet of Frontierland.

Now, if that kind of mis-match is okay for fans, that's fine. But they have zero credibility arguing the finer points of theme park theming -- that is, theme parks themselves as thematic experiences -- for the simple fact that they're okay with no overall-park thematic sensibility, much less continuity (and indeed give every evidence of being unable to perceive the difference).

This is one of the best written comments in the thread thus far. You responded to that post far better than I could've. Well done sir.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

I actually don't like the Star Wars land in MGM Studios, either. But I'm a heck of a complainer. I know they're sort of "reinventing" the park, but it still makes no sense. The park as it has existed until the Star Wars and (*cringe*) Toy Story lands has been themed to Hollywood/SoCal with the Chinese Theater, Sunset Blvd., Echo Lake and backlot. It is and, I guess, was all mostly intricately themed and formed some sort of bizarre cohesive whole. For instance, the Star Tours there is themed like a movie set on the outside and as you enter the building, you're now in the movie. So it wasn't like a Star Wars spaceport was plopped in the middle of Disney's little Los Angeles. These massive alien environments in the back half of the park will surely come out of nowhere and make absolutely no thematic sense.

The Hollywood theme will still make sense since the park is still celebrating the movies. Its just moving away from a working studio theme and into a full on theme park that puts you in them.

 

[Rich T]

One historical fact that needs mentioning: everything in that "bizarre collection of components" was developed by the creative imaginations of, shaped by the sensibilities of, and considered as a part of the overall thematic experience of Disneyland by... Walt and his Imagineers. All it was a product of their collective Studio style.

All, that is, except for one. Star Wars was developed by the creative imagination of, shaped by the sensibilities of, and ultimately built into a thematic universe by... George Lucas. Iger and his financier-trained, strategic-planning-sensibilitie'd, consumer-product-promoting executives bought it from George and are currently jamming it like a 14-acre horse pill down the ripped-open gullet of Frontierland.

Now, if that kind of mis-match is okay for fans, that's fine. But they have zero credibility arguing the finer points of theme park theming -- that is, theme parks themselves as thematic experiences -- for the simple fact that they're okay with no overall-park thematic sensibility, much less continuity (and indeed give every evidence of being unable to perceive the difference).

Just for the record, Star Wars was the collective creation of George Lucas, Ralph McQuarrie, John Dykstra, John Williams and a ton of other talented folks. but I get your point; It's the same reason I'm not looking forward to Pandora... yet.

When I call DL a bizzarre collection of components, I mean it in the most positive and happily awestruck way possible. DL is the world's greatest piece of performance art, where we become part of the show, right down to the existence of these forums. The park is a work of genius. And much if its charm comes from the fact that it is so weird and random at times. It gleefully breaks its own rules. There are dinosaurs between Tomorrowland and Main Street. Why? Because Walt liked them and it was a cost effective recycling. There's a freaking Swiss Mountain looming over everything. Why? Because Walt said so. He knew he was breaking his own themes and he knew it would work, it would be fun, and the public would enjoy it. And he had the people who could pull it off. Much of DL, within its brilliant master layout, is a happy mishmash result of whim, circumstance, necessity, conflicting egos, amazing artistry, corrected misfires and happy accidents. And it's wonderful. And we love it.
So here we are today. Are you saying all future additions must try to exactly emulate, through guesswork, what Walt and Claude and Mark and Rolly and Mary and John and all the rest would have done using only the studio material that was created up to the end of that era? Because that lightning-in-a-bottle time in Disney history is sadly gone and the park needs to keep evolving.

Let me just stop here to say how much I love your horse pill comment. That was awesome. I would personally have not voted to build Star Wars Land in that location. But it's happening.

My point is that Disneyland is resilient. It has a way of absorbing things that shouldn't work and ending up more fun than ever.

I'm optimistic. I don't think it's The End. And I think in a decade everyone will wonder what all the fuss was about.

 

[Filby61]

^ Fair enough, and I do see what you're saying. I agree that it's not The End -- if for no other reason than the current flock of execs will revolve out to Resume Land sooner than later -- but it definitely is an Extended Purgatory.

My view is that the "park" part of "Disney domestic theme park" needs an overall creative head at the top of the hierarchy, peer-level with the business head. Disneyland needs a creative overlord of the land. Disney World needs a creative world builder. Left to the direction of a revolving-door procession of generic media execs whose talents lie in marketing and whose brilliance is in the ways of Wall Street, the best you get is a marketing mall of disconnected brand modules, some of high degrees of tech glitz, but all blatantly IP pitches. Which may work just fine for a lot of Disney Parks fans, but not for me.

 

[Mike S]

DHS/MGM is basically just a rip off of USH... Since they threw in a Potter land might as well follow suit.

Seriously though, the park *should* get a rename and re-dedication. It doesn't make sense with current DHS, but that park stopped making sense decades ago.

The more time has passed the more I don't really think it needs a new name. USJ and USS have no pretense of being a studio and yet there it is in the name. I think DHS could still work as long as it keeps the "Hollywood that never was and always will be" part up front with Hollywood and Sunset Blvd. then transitioning into the world of the movies.

As to USH the studio aspect has always mostly been the actual Studio Tour right? As long as they keep that they're fine. Theme park up front, real working Studio in the back. I do think it would be too much if they got Diagon Alley though. That works best with two parks imo.

 

[wdisney9000]

This thread was created by ego, attachment, fear, anger, delusion. It insults directly and indirectly, members of this board who like the project. It's been openly stared by the OP, little more than a place for them to rant.

Butt hurt much? Your first sentence was an insult to the OP, followed by a complaint that the OP was insulting others. Peddle your SJW style nonsense elsewhere. Nobody is forcing you to read or participate so dont willingly enter a discussion just to victimize yourself.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Butt hurt much? Your first sentence was an insult to the OP, followed by a complaint that the OP was insulting others. Peddle your SJW style nonsense elsewhere. Nobody is forcing you to read or participate so dont willingly enter a discussion just to victimize yourself.

They came out of nowhere, right?

Nothing a little ignore button couldn't fix.

 

[Variable]

Butt hurt much? Your first sentence was an insult to the OP, followed by a complaint that the OP was insulting others. Peddle your SJW style nonsense elsewhere. Nobody is forcing you to read or participate so dont willingly enter a discussion just to victimize yourself.

Read the thread. Raven openly discusses the motivation of this thread.
And I've plainly stated there are points Raven makes I agree with. But the over wrought
over the top posts of pure hatre towards Disney employees is beyond.

A little push back got you down. Sorry about the truth.

 

[wdisney9000]

Read the thread. Raven openly discusses the motivation of this thread.
And I've plainly stated there are points Raven makes I agree with. But the over wrought
over the top posts of pure hatre towards Disney employees is beyond.

A little push back got you down. Sorry about the truth.

Im not the one playing martyr and victimizing myself over persons OPINION of a Disney park theme. For a SJW, "hatred" is such a selective term. Attack the person, instead of discussing the issue....great solution!

 

[dweezil78]

All this talk about Disney IP vs non-Disney IP... Why is everyone so hung up on this? It's the year 2016. Companies aren't run like Disney was in the 20s-50s where employees would stay at one gig throughout their careers. If you're in your 30s or older, chances are one of your parents has just a few jobs their entire lives whereas the generations that followed have a much more varied resume.

Hollywood is incredibly incestuous -- people jump ship from studio to studio wherever the work is and wherever the money is. The idea of "pure" Disney IP hasn't existed in a very long time. Disney acquiring content/other production companies that feel at home at Disney is literally no different than something they develop in-house. It's all the same people. The only difference is in small print in contracts somewhere and maybe the office where it gets done. People forget that Pixar wasn't even acquired by Disney until 2006!

Heck, half the stuff even gets labeled as official Disney IP is still made by outside production companies who work across different studios.

Even in the theme parks, aside from a handful of longtime WDI'ers, they're all doing jobs for several themed attraction companies including Universal and countless other smaller shops you've probably never heard of.

The fact that so many people get hung up on "non-Disney" IP being in the parks is hilarious.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Just for the record, Star Wars was the collective creation of George Lucas, Ralph McQuarrie, John Dykstra, John Williams and a ton of other talented folks. but I get your point; It's the same reason I'm not looking forward to Pandora... yet.

When I call DL a bizzarre collection of components, I mean it in the most positive and happily awestruck way possible. DL is the world's greatest piece of performance art, where we become part of the show, right down to the existence of these forums. The park is a work of genius. And much if its charm comes from the fact that it is so weird and random at times. It gleefully breaks its own rules. There are dinosaurs between Tomorrowland and Main Street. Why? Because Walt liked them and it was a cost effective recycling. There's a freaking Swiss Mountain looming over everything. Why? Because Walt said so. He knew he was breaking his own themes and he knew it would work, it would be fun, and the public would enjoy it. And he had the people who could pull it off. Much of DL, within its brilliant master layout, is a happy mishmash result of whim, circumstance, necessity, conflicting egos, amazing artistry, corrected misfires and happy accidents. And it's wonderful. And we love it.
So here we are today. Are you saying all future additions must try to exactly emulate, through guesswork, what Walt and Claude and Mark and Rolly and Mary and John and all the rest would have done using only the studio material that was created up to the end of that era? Because that lightning-in-a-bottle time in Disney history is sadly gone and the park needs to keep evolving.

Let me just stop here to say how much I love your horse pill comment. That was awesome. I would personally have not voted to build Star Wars Land in that location. But it's happening.

My point is that Disneyland is resiliant. It has a way of absorbing things that shouldn't work and ending up more fun than ever.

I'm optimistic. I don't think it's The End. And I think in a decade everyone will wonder what all the fuss was about.

While I'm in general agreement that some things, like the Primeval World diorama and Matterhorn, are in place just because Walt wanted them there, I feel even those random elements feel do serve thematic purposes. The Primeval world diorama serves as the grand finale to the DLRR and the Matterhorn, even though it was originally listed on the maps as Tomorrowland, has always served a a nice backdrop to Fantasyland and for a long time, the Swiss Skyway. But what I think really ties these and other random elements together is their shared DNA. While I agree Disney shouldn't have to do guesswork on what Walt and the 1st Gen. Imagineers would do, they should try to do what the 2nd Gen. Imagineers and onward have done to enhance the park with additions that keep that DNA in tact.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

All this talk about Disney IP vs non-Disney IP... Why is everyone so hung up on this? It's the year 2016. Companies aren't run like Disney was in the 20s-50s where employees would stay at one gig throughout their careers. If you're in your 30s or older, chances are one of your parents has just a few jobs their entire lives whereas the generations that followed have a much more varied resume.

Hollywood is incredibly incestuous -- people jump ship from studio to studio wherever the work is and wherever the money is. The idea of "pure" Disney IP hasn't existed in a very long time. Disney acquiring content/other production companies that feel at home at Disney is literally no different than something they develop in-house. It's all the same people. The only difference is in small print in contracts somewhere and maybe the office where it gets done. People forget that Pixar wasn't even acquired by Disney until 2006!

Heck, half the stuff even gets labeled as official Disney IP is still made by outside production companies who work across different studios.

Even in the theme parks, aside from a handful of longtime WDI'ers, they're all doing jobs for several themed attraction companies including Universal and countless other smaller shops you've probably never heard of.

The fact that so many people get hung up on "non-Disney" IP being in the parks is hilarious.

We wouldn't want an oringinal Disney IP land in DL either, we just feel that a bought IP land is even worse. Also, while Pixar wasn't always owned by Disney as a studio, their movies were ALWAYS greenlit, distributed, and owned by Disney. If you don't believe that, then do some research on Circle 7 animation.

 

[Rich T]

While I'm in general agreement that some things, like the Primeval World diorama and Matterhorn, are in place just because Walt wanted them there, I feel even those random elements feel do serve thematic purposes. The Primeval world diorama serves as the grand finale to the DLRR and the Matterhorn, even though it was originally listed on the maps as Tomorrowland, has always served a a nice backdrop to Fantasyland and for a long time, the SWISS Skyway. But what I think really ties these and other random elements together is their shared DNA. While I agree Disney shouldn't have to do guesswork on what Walt and the 1st Gen. Imagineers would do, they should try to do what the 2nd Gen. Imagineers and onward have done to enhance the park with additions that keep that DNA in tact.

Well said. And you're absolutely right that Primeval World and the Matterhorn work dramatically. But if somebody today suggested either project, there'd be such internet hollering about them being out of place/potential eyesores/atmosphere crushers/etc.

I'd still rather have something like Discovery Bay or Zootopia going back there. But we're getting Star Wars. I'm hoping, that in the end, we can look at it and say..."Y'know...that works..." or at least "Okay, that's not as intrusive as I feared."

Worst case scenario would be Charlton Heston's last lines in Planet of the Apes...

 

[dweezil78]

Also, while Pixar wasn't always owned by Disney as a studio, their movies were ALWAYS greenlit, distributed, and owned by Disney.

Wasn't arguing that in the slightest... Just the fact that they were, as a company, not owned by Disney and making the point that there is not a ton of difference between Disney and non-Disney IP in the grand scheme of things ..

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Wasn't arguing that in the slightest... Just the fact that they were, as a company, not owned by Disney.

I know, but since we were discussing IP specifically, I thought you were also talking about the movies which were always Disney IP.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Well said. And you're absolutely right that Primeval World and the Matterhorn work dramatically. But if somebody today suggested either project, there'd be such internet hollering about them being out of place/potential eyesores/atmosphere crushers/etc.

I'd still rather have something like Discovery Bay or Zootopia going back there. But we're getting Star Wars. I'm hoping, that in the end, we can look at it and say..."Y'know...that works..." or at least "Okay, that's not as intrusive as I feared."

Worst case scenario would be Charlton Heston's last lines in Planet of the Apes...

You're probably right that some people would complain if they happened today, but I feel a large part of that would be because Disney just isn't as trusted as they once were. To me, SWL is going to be incredibly intrusive no matter how you cut it, but I do hope that it isn't as bad as that concept art looks. I don't care much for that Zootopia idea, but I SO wish we were getting Discovery Bay.

 

[Rich T]

You're probably right that some people would complain if they happened today, but I feel a large part of that would be because Disney just isn't as trusted as they once were. To me, SWL is going to be incredibly intrusive no matter how you cut it, but I do hope that it isn't as bad as that concept art looks. I don't care much for that Zootopia idea, but I SO wish we were getting Discovery Bay.

If the public ever tires of Star Wars, the infrastructure will all be in place for a (relatively) quick conversion to Discovery Bay!