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

[Deleted member 107043]

The somewhat ugly reality is that if Disneyland is to remain relevant to a new generation of customers the company has no choice but to make bold and sometimes difficult decisions. I can only imagine what this discussion would be like if Universal had acquired the rights to build this thing at one of their parks instead of Disney. As a fan I'm grateful that DL is getting it instead of a competitor.

 

[Phroobar]

Lucasland bad but P.L. Traversland great and J.M. Barrieland great? I'll also assume a Jules Verne land would be acceptable as well. So Disneyland should be composed of IPs that inspired Disney, but not from those Disney inspired (and wholly owns as opposed to adapts) is that it?

Exactly! If Disneyland can only hold things that inspired Walt Disney (the man) and Walt Disney has been dead for fifty years and can no longer BE inspired, then nothing Walt Disney was not inspired by since 1966 can go into Disneyland.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Lucasland bad but P.L. Traversland great and J.M. Barrieland great? I'll also assume a Jules Verne land would be acceptable as well. So Disneyland should be composed of IPs that inspired Disney, but not from those Disney inspired (and wholly owns as opposed to adapts) is that it?

Where did I say a Poppins and/or Barrie land would be great?

I'm against lands in Disneyland being based on ANY IP. I said I would be a little more forgiving of a land based on Disney's Mary Poppins or Never Land (Disney's version), not that it's completely okay. Never even mentioned Travers and Barrie.

 

[Earl Sweatpants]

I'd like to expand on this comment by asking where did Disney's influence really live on after his passing?

To many* of us Disney buying Star Wars felt like a homecoming.

And just to give a few of you nosebleeds I'll also say that when Iger leaves, he'll be leaving the company with the most solid foundation it's ever had at the time of a regime change.

To answer your first question, Walt's influence lived on after his passing in the creation of Epcot. Yes, it was different than his original community plan, but I believe it fully embodied his principles for theme park attraction and inspiration for the future.

*I don't know that I would say many...

What you actually have, is the Mouse head propped up by three pillars of strength that only exist to make the top dog look good. Pixar, Marvel, and Star Wars are the companies "foundation". Apart from a few financially successful animated features, its hard to look back and find a true Disney original success in recent memory. Call it what you want, but that doesn't sound like a great foundation for the future.

 

[BrianLo]

The listing of "positives" people keep posting don't help me look at this project different. Yes, we're getting an E-ticket, but we didn't need SWL for that. Same goes for pretty much everything else people mention (Fantasmic! upgrades, changes coming to the River, etc.).

Agreed, this was exactly the point I was trying to make. It's not that the components of the RoA won't all end up being good, it's that Star Wars is what made them do it.

 

[sedati]

Where did I say a Poppins and/or Barrie land would be great?

I'm against lands in Disneyland being based on ANY IP. I said I would be a little more forgiving of a land based on Disney's Mary Poppins or Never Land (Disney's version), not that it's completely okay. Never even mentioned Travers and Barrie.

I apologize for adding "great." But the lands you describe would be lands based around the creations of others outside of Disney- Barrie and Travers. Yes, they would be the Disney versions, but they are still tied to outside parties and possibly still subject to royalties. Star Wars today is in fact Disney's Star Wars. Like Marvel, they don't put the name right on it, but it's there- wholly owned and operated.

 

[sedati]

Exactly! If Disneyland can only hold things that inspired Walt Disney (the man) and Walt Disney has been dead for fifty years and can no longer BE inspired, then nothing Walt Disney was not inspired by since 1966 can go into Disneyland.

Egads.

 

[Travel Junkie]

Agreed, this was exactly the point I was trying to make. It's not that the components of the RoA won't all end up being good, it's that Star Wars is what made them do it.

This is something that TDA is good at and TDO is terrible at. Adding upgrades and improvements onto existing projects. For example they used some of the money to create Winter Dreams to add infrastructure to WOC that can be used in the regular show after Winter Dreams left. This is why you see a continual plussing of attractions and shows at DLR and not nearly as much at WDW. TDA is able to squeeze those extra dollars out of Burbank to add to ROA, upgrade F! and so on.

I'm very much against SWE in Disneyland but I am looking forward to an improved ROA experience and F!.

 

[Earl Sweatpants]

This is something that TDA is good at and TDO is terrible at. Adding upgrades and improvements onto existing projects. For example they used some of the money to create Winter Dreams to add infrastructure to WOC that can be used in the regular show after Winter Dreams left. This is why you see a continual plussing of attractions and shows at DLR and not nearly as much at WDW. TDA is able to squeeze those extra dollars out of Burbank to add to ROA, upgrade F! and so on.

I'm very much against SWE in Disneyland but I am looking forward to an improved ROA experience and F!.

Can someone help me understand how TDA can be so good at something and TDO so bad? There has to be more logistically behind it. I get that there's more going on at TDO so their attentions might be spread thinner, but still. What's the problem?

 

[flynnibus]

The worst part is all that land is the last of a small amount we have left, and it's being gobbled up for ONE IP.

Funny how people don't complain about how much space Jungle Cruise takes up.. or Autopia.. Main Street.. or even the RoA. All very singular, all very wasteful in that regard. SWL being on the boundary is less intrusive than RoA was for taking up a lot of space.. and isn't that much bigger.

Disneyland wasn't going to continue expanding - its already too big of a single park really in terms of density. The woes about expansion space are overplayed. Disneyland will tear and replace inside the park as they always have, and will continue to expand when needed into that mythical third gate or elsewhere. You can make the case about should SWL have anchor'ed that new spot vs being put in this park.. but 'loss of expansion' is just an excuse IMO. Disney can keep squeezing BoH out of the footprint.. or expand elsewhere as they already should be doing to monetize the growth.

 

[sedati]

To answer your first question, Walt's influence lived on after his passing in the creation of Epcot. Yes, it was different than his original community plan, but I believe it fully embodied his principles for theme park attraction and inspiration for the future.

*I don't know that I would say many...

What you actually have, is the Mouse head propped up by three pillars of strength that only exist to make the top dog look good. Pixar, Marvel, and Star Wars are the companies "foundation". Apart from a few financially successful animated features, its hard to look back and find a true Disney original success in recent memory. Call it what you want, but that doesn't sound like a great foundation for the future.

I stand by the use of many based on my own experiences. Note that I did not say most which would be hard to substantiate.

 

[flynnibus]

Because it is in Walt's park.

The park he made... then remade... then remade again? If anything the man was known for not sitting still and not repeating himself.

When they tear down main st... page me. Until then, I'm pretty sure Walt isn't turning over in his grave for losing the petting zoo that came decades after his death.

 

[BrianLo]

Can someone help me understand how TDA can be so good at something and TDO so bad? There has to be more logistically behind it. I get that there's more going on at TDO so their attentions might be spread thinner, but still. What's the problem?

Probably at its simplistic core: TDO runs much more of a hotel/resort operation for visitors. TDA runs primarily a theme park business for locals. They invest accordingly.

A second reason is that TDO currently lacks a parks champion in the way that TDA currently does. Eisner, despite his flaws, was very invested in Orlando expansion. Chapek is currently very invested in Anaheim (yes, I acknowledge that doesn't mean he makes the right decisions, like Eisner). Some of the senior parks leadership at Anaheim do legitimately care, there is less people that care in Orlando and they run a far bigger operation.

The situation has been reversed in the past and very well could become again.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I apologize for adding "great." But the lands you describe would be lands based around the creations of others outside of Disney- Barrie and Travers. Yes, they would be the Disney versions, but they are still tied to outside parties and possibly still subject to royalties. Star Wars today is in fact Disney's Star Wars. Like Marvel, they don't put the name right on it, but it's there- wholly owned and operated.

You're right, that's why I would prefer to not have any lands in Disneyland based on Star Wars, Peter Pan, Mary Poppins, or any other IP.

The content of Star Wars just doesn't match well with Disneyland, in my opinion. It just doesn't work for me.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Funny how people don't complain about how much space Jungle Cruise takes up.. or Autopia.. Main Street.. or even the RoA. All very singular, all very wasteful in that regard. SWL being on the boundary is less intrusive than RoA was for taking up a lot of space.. and isn't that much bigger.

Disneyland wasn't going to continue expanding - its already too big of a single park really in terms of density. The woes about expansion space are overplayed. Disneyland will tear and replace inside the park as they always have, and will continue to expand when needed into that mythical third gate or elsewhere. You can make the case about should SWL have anchor'ed that new spot vs being put in this park.. but 'loss of expansion' is just an excuse IMO. Disney can keep squeezing BoH out of the footprint.. or expand elsewhere as they already should be doing to monetize the growth.

I see no point in comparing how much space original rides take up in the park to an entire land.

The land bit is just a piece of the puzzle for me, but 12 acres for solely Star Wars doesn't sit well with me, at all. Whether we have more space or not, 12 acres could have been put to better use.

 

[flynnibus]

I see no point in comparing how much space original rides take up in the park to an entire land.

Because if the complaint is space... the project isn't wasteful when it comes to it's effective density compared to many other existing projects that are deemed 'acceptable' to use 4 acres for a single attraction. If you want arguments to be credible, they should be rational and defendable to logically scrutiny.

The 'original' or not criteria I think is another 'pass'. There is little original about Carsland.. and its a crown jewel for a park. Frontierland when built by Walt was largely a stereotypical conversion of the 'county fair' to a western setting. A large swath dedicated to one topic.. the frontier west.... one of the most abused/played out genres of the time.

Whether we have more space or not, 12 acres could have been put to better use.

And I would say its about damn time that quadrant of the park was put to a use of interest.

I know people hold the original themed lands near and dear... but I don't think toontown, NOS, (or as pathetic as it is..) Critter Country destroyed that concept. I don't think a SWL will either if the separation is handled in a successful way.

I mean come on... we're talking about a park where Disney stuffed a Dinosaur diorama along a 1900th century steam train because he wanted to ensure it didn't goto waste and plopped a matterhorn alongside a castle and lagoon. We should let the reins loose on our imagination some and see how the story tellers and artists weave their magic before dismissing things as tragic based on labels alone.

 

[Earl Sweatpants]

Probably at its simplistic core: TDO runs much more of a hotel/resort operation for visitors. TDA runs primarily a theme park business for locals. They invest accordingly.

A second reason is that TDO currently lacks a parks champion in the way that TDA currently does. Eisner, despite his flaws, was very invested in Orlando expansion. Chapek is currently very invested in Anaheim (yes, I acknowledge that doesn't mean he makes the right decisions, like Eisner). Some of the senior parks leadership at Anaheim do legitimately care, there is less people that care in Orlando and they run a far bigger operation.

The situation has been reversed in the past and very well could become again.

Then who is in charge of both that can make those changes?

 

[flynnibus]

Big Thunder Ranch was built with the spirit of Walt and his vision of making people happy

I lol'd

You seriously wrote that to justify one attraction and exclude others? These arguments aren't grounded in anything but emotional outrage and just grasping at straws to try to come up with justifications

 

[BrianLo]

Then who is in charge of both that can make those changes?

Probably the CEO - the next one. Mice Age makes it sound like even Chapek is annoyed with the TDO structure, hence the breakup of One Disney.

Iger has proven extremely apathetic at best towards Orlando. Technically speaking it was one of the few things actually still doing ok when he took over (even though the signs were there it was headed in the wrong direction).

 

[NobodyElse]

I lol'd

You seriously wrote that to justify one attraction and exclude others? These arguments aren't grounded in anything but emotional outrage and just grasping at straws to try to come up with justifications

I think I read somewhere that Walt always hoped that technology would finally catch up with his dream to build a place to pet goats and eat BBQ outdoors. It's sad he didn't live to see Big Thunder Ranch come to life.