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

Magenta Panther

Well-Known Member
You seem to want to have your cake and eat it too. Yes, Iger greenlit the restoration (quotes not needed) of Walt's office which was far more than that little sub-section seen on One Man's Dream tucked away in the back of a theme park where it clearly belongs more than its original location, you know, where Walt worked every day. It is multiple rooms -- many of which had to be completely rebuilt and reconstructed. It was a pretty significant project and labor of love for the Archives staff and the public CAN see it.

I'm also very sorry that you are bummed that Bob Iger is not having attractions made for movies that came out in the 40s and 60s (I'm sure the gang at WDI is crushed as well) and that Fantasmic, which operates at three parks around the world, is not enough to satisfy your Fantasia craving.

Again, B.S. Walt's office belongs in WDW, in the building meant as a tribute to him, where people from all over the world can experience it, rather than:
The suite, which opened earlier this month, will be a permanent exhibit of the archives. It will be open to Disney employees, cast members and studio visitors. In 2016, it will be added to a tour of the lot and archives offered to “gold members” of Disney’s D23 fan club.

You can read the rest of the puff piece here: http://www.latimes.com/socal/burban...estored-to-historic-glory-20151224-story.html

Yeah, PLENTY of people can see Walt's office now, IF they can afford the Gold membership and IF they can obtain a studio tour and IF they work for Disney. Big deal. Remember that the Art of Disney Animation was taken over by an Iger purchase, and that Walt's tribute film is now in rotation with ads for new Disney films. How can you look at that and not see a disrespect for the Disney company founder and the art form that built (and still largely sustains) the company?
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
Again, B.S. Walt's office belongs in WDW, in the building meant as a tribute to him, where people from all over the world can experience it, rather than:
The suite, which opened earlier this month, will be a permanent exhibit of the archives. It will be open to Disney employees, cast members and studio visitors. In 2016, it will be added to a tour of the lot and archives offered to “gold members” of Disney’s D23 fan club.

You can read the rest of the puff piece here: http://www.latimes.com/socal/burban...estored-to-historic-glory-20151224-story.html

Yeah, PLENTY of people can see Walt's office now, IF they can afford the Gold membership and IF they can obtain a studio tour and IF they work for Disney. Big deal. Remember that the Art of Disney Animation was taken over by an Iger purchase, and that Walt's tribute film is now in rotation with ads for new Disney films. How can you look at that and not see a disrespect for the Disney company founder and the art form that built (and still largely sustains) the company?
I generally agree but wasn't One Man's Dream supposed to be just as temporary as the Sorcerer's Hat? Imo it should be on Main Street.
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
No, because you take the next logical fallacy that this model of homogenization is the definition of how theme should be measured because it's what has worked in the past. The idea of success, does not infer exclusive or being the pinnacle. The outcome of the product working... does not in itself make any test = true.

My point about FL was in getting this homogenized experience, we actually LOST some things, that if done differently, could be very desirable (example: radiator springs). The idea that FL has been deemed a model of desire does not make it equal any test.. it just means it works as a whole. So when we say its cohesive.. it can be to ITSELF, while not necessarily bringing the value of each of the pieces it includes. TL;DR - when you take the middle, you can lose the edge details. So taking the middle is not the ONLY formula to consider.

What people often forget about the theme park design is success is not always about making two things fit together, but is often about making sure something doesn't DETRACT from the other. Success there, means people willingly accept disparate things together, because their differences were not enough to derail the intended result. Success there does not make those two thing magically 'cohesive' - it just means the design overcame those potential pitfalls that could lead to confusion or distraction.

Let's be honest.. the thing that holds FL together more than anything is that they are all Disney's period fantasy animated films. The rest is making sure we ebb and flow through those different topics without being confused or derailed (too much) by what we see.

Setting up the Dumbo circus in the castle courtyard would not work... but if we avoid those detracting, jarring elements... we achieve a point where people accept Dumbo in the land even tho it really has no real place setting, time, or story connection with it's neighbors.

You achieve a point where the element doesn't really fit strict definitions of place, time, setting, etc.. but people don't care. The manipulation of the guest experience is not about getting every point to be 100% accurate, but to manipulate to get them into the groove and focus on what you want them to focus on. We can ignore that black tile ceiling because we got them not just looking where we want, but THINKING about what we want and controlling their focus, not just line of sight.

All of this is a long way of saying.. just because FL works, doesn't necessarily mean all of its elements are cohesive.. or some other test.. simply that we achieved a tipping point to people being in favor of the result.

It's why most people don't care about the matterhorn dominating TL's skyline, or the lagoon itself... the sum results where they are happy with it.
I totally agree with you that making sure something does not detract is very important part of themed design. As far as cohessisiveness goes, I think it depends on what angle you view it from. You seem to view it by judging how similar the content of the individual components are while I view it judging by how seemlessly the individual elements come towards a whole. While I do think that neither viewpoints are technically incorrect, the reason I see it the way I do is because whatever differences there are between the individual pieces is subconscious at most if done properly. Like you said, people can accept disparate parts if they don't noticeably detract from the whole.

Speaking from my perspective, I'd say that DL as a whole is a mostly cohesive park and that is largely due to a general sense of what you call homogenization. Keeping homogenization doesn't mean that Disney shouldn't try new things, but rather that they should try their best to maintain the existing identity in all ways possible. That's literally my whole argument against SWL. It just doesn't homogenize with the rest of the park neither under broad or specific examination. In the end, I feel that relative homogenization is big part of what sets apart a theme park or a product of any medium stand out from the rest and should not be forsaken for nothing more than monetary gain.
 

George Lucas on a Bench

Well-Known Member
Yeah and there's no undoing it. Disney now = Star Wars and Marvel funny books, Disneyland is almost completely landlocked because of a gigantic Star Wars land that outsizes everything else. That's just the subject of this thread. Don't get me started on everything else because it literally drives me to drink. You know why? Everyone else celebrates this guy and everything he's done. They love him.
 

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
Disney now = Star Wars and Marvel funny books

I'm not sure if you are just referring to the parks or the movie side. The one slight inarguable thing (in my mind at least) is that the film slate is a million, million times better than when Iger took the reigns. The company is no longer banking on aging princess franchises and Pixar alone. They have legitimate boy-centric properties (maybe that's the true root of the problem everyone seems to have with their recent choices...)

Even if all five of their main studio arms have their formulas down to an art form, they largely have been producing consistently well reviewed money makers. The aggregate opinions on Rotten Tomatoes and Meta Critic have been ranking Disney leaps and bounds beyond any other major studio for a number of years now.
 

Rich T

Well-Known Member
Yeah and there's no undoing it. Disney now = Star Wars and Marvel funny books, Disneyland is almost completely landlocked because of a gigantic Star Wars land that outsizes everything else. That's just the subject of this thread. Don't get me started on everything else because it literally drives me to drink. You know why? Everyone else celebrates this guy and everything he's done. They love him.
A worse alternate fate for Disneyland happened in a parallel universe where CEO's did little to keep Disney popular, mega-successful and in the news. I miss the more classic Disneyland, but the current outlook beats the heck out of Six Flags Over Toontown.
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
The company is no longer banking on aging princess franchises and Pixar alone. They have legitimate boy-centric properties (maybe that's the true root of the problem everyone seems to have with their recent choices...)
I always wonder why people argue that Disney needed to buy the IP it did due to a perceived lack of boy friendliness when Cars alone has raked in billions upon billions in merchandising.
 

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
I always wonder why people argue that Disney needed to buy the IP it did due to a perceived lack of boy friendliness when Cars alone has raked in billions upon billions in merchandising.

Cars is decidedly a toddler franchise. It rapidly falls off in the school age years.

Iger very successfully (for better or worse) has made Disney into a multi-faceted company for literally every demo. I think many here do not identify with those new demos and thus feel abandoned.

Lucasfilm is honestly a no brainer to me, it is so rooted in Disney to begin with. From its multiple collaborative park's projects from the 80s to the spawning of Pixar, which has completely revived WDAS. Is Marvel really "Disney" though? I'd also posit - is ESPN? On the other hand they are amazingly smart and powerful acquisitions, they certainly make the Dis business side of things a lot stronger.

That is the one thing I will defend Iger on, he has made amazingly intelligent acquisitions and has been savvy enough to keep the talent firmly rooted where it belongs. Whether that be John Lassiter, Kevin Feige or Kathleen Kennedy. More than IP, they acquired ridiculous amounts of talent. Eisner's Disney felt the need to "Disney-fy" (aka pixie dust) nearly everything it touched. Iger's has weirdly become the fanboi safe haven where beloved properties are treated with mostly dignity.

We are seeing that now spill over to the parks. At the behest of Disneyland, they are weirdly doing right by Star Wars, Marvel and Frozen. They (the Bob's) are doing right by those few things... but clearly not the ones most fans of Disneyland identify with.


I do want Iger to leave though, he was good for the Disney business, but a creative needs to now take the reigns and course correct.
 

George Lucas on a Bench

Well-Known Member
I always wonder why people argue that Disney needed to buy the IP it did due to a perceived lack of boy friendliness when Cars alone has raked in billions upon billions in merchandising.

They'll probably reference the flops that Disney somehow spent hundreds of millions of dollars on, such as John Carter and The Lone Ranger before they fell back on established sure-bet moneymaking blockbusters such as Marvel funny book and Star War movies.
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
Cars is decidedly a toddler franchise. It rapidly falls off in the school age years.

Iger very successfully (for better or worse) has made Disney into a multi-faceted company for literally every demo. I think many here do not identify with those new demos and thus feel abandoned.

Lucasfilm is honestly a no brainer to me, it is so rooted in Disney to begin with. From its multiple collaborative park's projects from the 80s to the spawning of Pixar, which has completely revived WDAS. Is Marvel really "Disney" though? I'd also posit - is ESPN? On the other hand they are amazingly smart and powerful acquisitions, they certainly make the Dis business side of things a lot stronger.

That is the one thing I will defend Iger on, he has made amazingly intelligent acquisitions and has been savvy enough to keep the talent firmly rooted where it belongs. Whether that be John Lassiter, Kevin Feige or Kathleen Kennedy. More than IP, they acquired ridiculous amounts of talent. Eisner's Disney felt the need to "Disney-fy" (aka pixie dust) nearly everything it touched. Iger's has weirdly become the fanboi safe haven where beloved properties are treated with mostly dignity.

We are seeing that now spill over to the parks. At the behest of Disneyland, they are weirdly doing right by Star Wars, Marvel and Frozen. They (the Bob's) are doing right by those few things... but clearly not the ones most fans of Disneyland identify with.


I do want Iger to leave though, he was good for the Disney business, but a creative needs to now take the reigns and course correct.
While it's true that most Cars merchandise is geared towards early elementary school aged boys and under, but then again, so are the Princesses. I'd say they're largely comparable to Hot Wheels and Barbie from a purely merchandising perspective. I can agree that they needed Lucasfilm and Marvel were necessary to sell merchandise to broader and more "mature" audience, not necessarily a specific gender. I also agree that it's smart of Iger to let the creatives have proper control, but as I made clear earlier in the thread, it probably has more to do with statistical success rather than a true understanding of the creative process. Its great that they're doing right for Star Wars and Marvel, but they should also do right by Disney and not de-expand it to expand on the other IP.
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
They'll probably reference the flops that Disney somehow spent hundreds of millions of dollars on, such as John Carter and The Lone Ranger before they fell back on established sure-bet moneymaking blockbusters such as Marvel funny book and Star War movies.
While I must say that the MCU has been revolutionary and that Star Wars is looking like its going to have a great track record as well, they should totally do way more original movies under the main studio. John Carter and The Lone Ranger are also the reason why we're stuck with an endless onslaught of live action remakes to Disney classics.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom