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

[spacemt354]

Eh... it's big, but so is Cars Land and to me it's worth the larger footprint if it means being able to provide guests with a completely immersive experience. Modern attractions & storytelling demand more space, bigger show buildings, etc. unlike the more quaint lands of yesteryear. Plus, as others have said, a lot of that space will be devoted to back stage infrastructure and what not.

In the end, less space would have meant one E-ticket vs. two and enough space left over to not accomplish a whole much of anything so why not use it all?

The concerning thing that I see is the encroachment on theme, disrupting the flow of Disneyland. If this was such a good fit and Disney is building SWL on both coasts, then naturally it would go in the same empty plot behind Frontierland in the WDW Magic Kingdom, right? But instead, they're placing it in Hollywood Studios...hmm. Maybe it's because the plot behind Frontierland isn't the greatest fit.

SWL doesn't fit with the lands of Disneyland or any MK theme park. They are very broad themed lands, whereas a singular IP land disrupts that flow. I used to think because Mickey's Toontown was an IP based land, then SWL would be okay, but then I realize that the footprint is so much bigger than Toontown, that it's a bit concerning.

There are so many other unique concepts that you could use for that plot of land. If it was something original, or unique to Disneyland, I wouldn't have a problem with the size. But if this succeeds (and it most likely will), then who knows what they could encroach on next with another IP specific land.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

The concerning thing that I see is the encroachment on theme, disrupting the flow of Disneyland. If this was such a good fit and Disney is building SWL on both coasts, then naturally it would go in the same empty plot behind Frontierland in the WDW Magic Kingdom, right? But instead, they're placing it in Hollywood Studios...hmm. Maybe it's because the plot behind Frontierland isn't the greatest fit.

SWL doesn't fit with the lands of Disneyland or any MK theme park. They are very broad themed lands, whereas a singular IP land disrupts that flow. I used to think because Mickey's Toontown was an IP based land, then SWL would be okay, but then I realize that the footprint is so much bigger than Toontown, that it's a bit concerning.

There are so many other unique concepts that you could use for that plot of land. If it was something original, or unique to Disneyland, I wouldn't have a problem with the size. But if this succeeds (and it most likely will), then who knows what they could encroach on next with another IP specific land.

My issue with all of you that talk about a single IP land is that there are literally billions of people on this planet that have never seen a Star Wars movie. Hard to believe, I know, but not everyone has seen it. YOU know it as a single IP, but a lot of people do not.

If you look at it one way, you have Frontierland, Adventureland, etc. Well, now you have a Spaceland. Just like in Frontierland you are visiting the old west, well, in Spaceland, you are visiting a space port on another planet. Just because they aren't officially calling it that (which would be a dumb name, I agree), doesn't mean it doesn't fit. It's only some people here that have a problem with it, and others are just jumping on the bandwagon.

 

[spacemt354]

My issue with all of you that talk about a single IP land is that there are literally billions of people on this planet that have never seen a Star Wars movie. Hard to believe, I know, but not everyone has seen it. YOU know it as a single IP, but a lot of people do not.

If you look at it one way, you have Frontierland, Adventureland, etc. Well, now you have a Spaceland. Just like in Frontierland you are visiting the old west, well, in Spaceland, you are visiting a space port on another planet. Just because they aren't officially calling it that (which would be a dumb name, I agree), doesn't mean it doesn't fit. It's only some people here that have a problem with it, and others are just jumping on the bandwagon.

To the "billions" of people who have never seen Star Wars...all of a sudden they are going to travel to Disneyland to visit...Star Wars Land? So I guess the same could be said about Cars Land too right? Billions of people haven't seen it, so maybe people are visiting because they like automobiles? Sorry, but your argument doesn't make much sense.

And you have "Spaceland" -- it's called "Tomorrowland"

 

[LuvtheGoof]

To the "billions" of people who have never seen Star Wars...all of a sudden they are going to travel to Disneyland to visit...Star Wars Land? So I guess the same could be said about Cars Land too right? Billions of people haven't seen it, so maybe people are visiting because they like automobiles? Sorry, but your argument doesn't make much sense.

And you have "Spaceland" -- it's called "Tomorrowland"

Neither does yours. It is only opinion, and yours isn't any more right than mine, and mine isn't any more right than yours. Oh, and you do know that Tomorrowland will likely be renamed in the future, don't you?

 

[spacemt354]

Neither does yours. It is only opinion, and yours isn't any more right than mine, and mine isn't any more right than yours. Oh, and you do know that Tomorrowland will likely be renamed in the future, don't you?

Lol gosh...people are really defensive over here, eh?

I never said I was right, nor you were wrong. But I can tell that people have dug in on their sides and aren't going to comprehend that there's another perspective. I guess my change in perspective is a novelty, so this debate isn't worth my time.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Lol gosh...people are really defensive over here, eh?

I never said I was right, nor you were wrong. But I can tell that people have dug in on their sides and aren't going to comprehend that there's another perspective. I guess my change in perspective is a novelty, so this debate isn't worth my time.

I created this thread as a place for those of us who oppose the SWL plan (not that I'm discouraging those who don't oppose to not comment). Feel free to comment and don't let those with ignorant things to say deter you from debate.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

I created this thread as a place for those of us who oppose the SWL plan (not that I'm discouraging those who don't oppose to not comment). Feel free to comment and don't let those with ignorant things to say deter you from debate.

You know, you're right. Us ignorant people need to understand that there is no debate, since it is an anti-swl thread. So then, what exactly are you debating?

 

[Californian Elitist]

You know, you're right. Us ignorant people need to understand that there is no debate, since it is an anti-swl thread. So then, what exactly are you debating?

I wasn't referring to you, but to an overall trend here in the DL forum recently (you're not a regular here). But there's some irony in your post. Go back to the page before this one and read through the posts, if you're even interested in what I'm talking about.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

I wasn't referring to you, but to an overall trend here in the DL forum recently (you're not a regular here). But there's some irony in your post. Go back to the page before this one and read through the posts, if you're even interested in what I'm talking about.

OK, so I went back and read the comments. Nothing stated in any of those posts are what I would call - ignorant. So why do you think the comments are ignorant? What statement(s) leads you to that opinion?

 

[Californian Elitist]

OK, so I went back and read the comments. Nothing stated in any of those posts are what I would call - ignorant. So why do you think the comments are ignorant? What statement(s) leads you to that opinion?

I'm assuming you didn't see the comment from the poster who stated that just because they didn't agree with the opposition, there's no argument? There have been other examples here in the DLR forum where people have told those with opposing views to shut up, either because they're tires of hearing from us, or because our opinion doesn't matter. That's ignorance.

Back on topic now.

 

[dweezil78]

If this was such a good fit and Disney is building SWL on both coasts, then naturally it would go in the same empty plot behind Frontierland in the WDW Magic Kingdom, right? But instead, they're placing it in Hollywood Studios...hmm. Maybe it's because the plot behind Frontierland isn't the greatest fi

I don't really get what you're trying to say here. WDW has literally a zillion different places they could put this whereas DLR had none and literally had to move a river and relocate backstage facilities to make room for it. Just because this was the one spot they could chip away at in Anaheim doesn't mean Florida should have had their hands tied and put it in the same exact place when they have the luxury of size and three other parks to choose from.

 

[spacemt354]

I don't really get what you're trying to say here. WDW has literally a zillion different places they could put this whereas DLR had none and literally had to move a river and relocate backstage facilities to make room for it.

Precisely. If there is no place for Star Wars Land in DLR as you just said, then maybe it doesn't belong.

 

[Travel Junkie]

Just because this was the one spot they could chip away at in Anaheim doesn't mean Florida should have had their hands tied and put it in the same exact place when they have the luxury of size and three other parks to choose from.

and there we have it. It went to DL because that is the only place it physically could fit. Not because it fit thematically at all.

I would argue that had they been creative they could make it work. Anaheim has always had space constraints and they have come up plenty of creative solutions in the past. It wasn't important to them in this case.

 

[Curious Constance]

and there we have it. It went to DL because that is the only place it physically could fit. Not because it fit thematically at all.

I would argue that had they been creative they could make it work. Anaheim has always had space constraints and they have come up plenty of creative solutions in the past. It wasn't important to them in this case.

But, even if it was the only place it could physically fit, that still doesn't mean it's not a good fit thematically.

 

[spacemt354]

But, even if it was the only place it could physically fit, that still doesn't mean it's not a good fit thematically.

In what way is it a good fit thematically? Because if it is...then it goes back to my point earlier...why isn't Star Wars Land in WDW being put in the same spot behind Frontierland if it's such a good fit?

 

[dweezil78]

Precisely. If there is no place for Star Wars Land in DLR as you just said, then maybe it doesn't belong.

Lol, that's not at all what I said. All I said was that WDW has the luxury of size and more places to choose from in response to your question about why WDW didn't place it in the same exact spot. I swear, some of y'all are ridiculous with this stuff.

 

[spacemt354]

Lol, that's not at all what I said.

Actually it's exactly what you said.

WDW has literally a zillion different places they could put this whereas DLR had none

If it's such a good fit then why wouldn't it be in the same spot in WDW? Forget about the size argument, if it's a good fit thematically behind Frontierland, then there should be no reason to put it somewhere else, especially when the Magic Kingdom in WDW hasn't gotten an E-Ticket since 1992.

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

The thing that I can't get over about all of this is that it is so very clearly an Iger ego trip.

To alter the park's physical footprint (not to mention its thematic footprint) in such a deliberate and huge way for only ONE IP is nothing short of a power move. Iger could have taken an inch...but instead he got greedy and took 14 acres. Say what you will about Eisner, but even he knew better than to mangle Walt's park to such an extreme.

Iger is literally re-shaping the park to suit himself. DCA is soon to follow...and when its all done in 2019, he gets to jet and leave whoever succeeds him with the mess...

 

[Travel Junkie]

But, even if it was the only place it could physically fit, that still doesn't mean it's not a good fit thematically.

How does Star Wars land fit as designed fit thematically? I'm open to being convinced. I actually think Star Tours fits where it is, because the ride was designed to fit within the construct of TL. IMO Star Wars land does not. WDI is doing the best they can to blend it in which I applaud, but I don't see how it fits.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

How does Star Wars land fit as designed fit thematically? I'm open to being convinced. I actually think Star Tours fits where it is, because the ride was designed to fit within the construct of TL. IMO Star Wars land does not. WDI is doing the best they can to blend it in which I applaud, but I don't see how it fits.

I guess I'm wondering the opposite. What makes you think it doesn't fit thematically? Why does Adventureland fit, but not SWL?