I think it's mostly because SWL is simply going to be huge draws that it is better to split the load between the 2 resorts.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Wookies, & Rebels, & Droids... OH WHY?! The Anti-SWL in Disneyland Thread
- Thread starter Californian Elitist
- Start date
Hatbox Ghostbuster
Well-Known Member
I'm willing to concede that themes of attractions will overlap. POTC for instance could "fit" in Adventureland too. It could also technically be "fantasy" since there are skeletons who steer ships and giant squid headed monsters. Adventure is a broad term, but for whats included in it, it works.
Also, a physical space port doesn't have an adventure theme.
ctrlaltdel
Well-Known Member
For something as universally popular as Star Wars I think that it makes sense why the offerings will be the same. I didn't make it clear in my OP, but I don't think that should be the case for every attraction.
spacemt354
Chili's
SWL itself isn't my issue. As a huge Star Wars fan -- it's going to be an amazing land.
The location in Disneyland and its impact on the surroundings is my main issue. Then followed by the fact that it won't bring me out to DLR from the east coast like Cars Land did, even though it makes sense from a financial standpoint. Then finally followed by the one IP-land argument.
If it wasn't for seeing that picture on Google Earth last night I wouldn't have much of a major issue with it.
True enough, the actual physical port does not have an adventure theme. It is what you will get to do in that port that makes it adventurous.
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
Change the word "especially" to "except" and this would be a more accurate statement.
After Mickey's Toontown, Bear Country, and arguably the old Circus, this is just the latest in a trend, not the start of one.
Hatbox Ghostbuster
Well-Known Member
By Bear Country, do you mean Critter Country? CBJ isn't even around anymore.
I do agree that it sucked that the river had to be shortened for it. Heck, I didn't like the fact that we lost LMA in DHS for it. I'm just thinking about how much better the new areas are going to be, and concentrating on that part, since there is nothing I can do about what is already gone. I guess in that way, I'm more of an optimist than a pessimist. I believe that what we will get in the new land is much better than what it replaced.
spacemt354
Chili's
Mickey's Toontown is an amalgamation of different IPs.
Bear Country was in the 1970s, and in now Critter Country, which is also a mix of different IPs
Hatbox Ghostbuster
Well-Known Member
I just sincerely hope that whoever succeeds Iger sees the value in returning to broader themed lands (with new ORIGINAL attractions) and bucks this IP trend for parks expansion. DL is pretty much going to be maxed out of space, and then the only option is to axe the older stuff.
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
That's why I'm not talking Critter Country.
Bear Country was built as a single-IP land.
Now that, I 100% completely agree with. There should always be a mix of original attractions with some IP themed ones.
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
Toontown is a concept taken directly from Who Framed Roger Rabbit. The idea is that everything in the land exists as part of a single universe, just like Star wars.
spacemt354
Chili's
Not exactly. It was inspired by Roger Rabbit, Hollywoodland, and Mickey's Birthdayland combined together.
Star Wars Land is a singular IP (Star Wars). Mickey's Toontown is not.
Travel Junkie
Well-Known Member
A couple other points:
- Based off new information SWL will be treated differently than the rest of the park. CM's and the whole land will essentially be a big interactive area. In essence it will treated as a separate park. This isn't unprecedented as Diagon Alley and Hogsmeade are treated differently than the rest of USO. This may not be an issue to some while it will be to others. I found it off-putting in USO that the two Harry Potter lands were essentially a completely different park than the rest of the resort. I am not saying it is a bad thing, just takes getting used to that the staff treated people different (they are part of the story) and as guests you basically acted differently in those two lands compared to the rest of the park.
- We don't know yet, but the scale maybe different in SWL than the rest of the park. If it is that is a problem. If not then no worries.
- Based off new information SWL will be treated differently than the rest of the park. CM's and the whole land will essentially be a big interactive area. In essence it will treated as a separate park. This isn't unprecedented as Diagon Alley and Hogsmeade are treated differently than the rest of USO. This may not be an issue to some while it will be to others. I found it off-putting in USO that the two Harry Potter lands were essentially a completely different park than the rest of the resort. I am not saying it is a bad thing, just takes getting used to that the staff treated people different (they are part of the story) and as guests you basically acted differently in those two lands compared to the rest of the park.
- We don't know yet, but the scale maybe different in SWL than the rest of the park. If it is that is a problem. If not then no worries.
ctrlaltdel
Well-Known Member
To your latter point are you talking about sight-line intrusions into other lands, or just the fact that it will be built bigger to better handle the crowds than the rest of the park? I think that it is a necessity to build pathways more in line with the crowds DL receives today, rather than building something that would match the infrastructure of the rest of the park. Especially with how popular this is inevitably going to be. I love how quaint DL can feel when crowds are lower, but it doesn't feel so quaint when it's packed.
Curious Constance
Well-Known Member
Sorry to comment and then run, but I think we just have different levels of what we're comfortable with accepting at Disneyland. I'm sure nothing I think hasn't been said before or would convince either of you I'm right.
I agree this will be the first land at Disneyland based on one IP. I think what it boils down to, is that I'm okay with that, and not everyone else will be.
But to comment on why WDW isn't building behind Frontierland, they have a park that is in trouble and needed to attract more people. I think it's as simple as that.
Travel Junkie
Well-Known Member
The scale of the buildings and mountains. Big Thunder for instance is built in line with the scale of DL while at MK in Florida the spires are built to scale with that park. Will they adhere to the same principles in this case or will both coasts be scaled the same thus throwing off the smaller scale at DL.
Yes the pathways are a concern as well. There are ways around that though if they plan for it. For instance the way pathways are built in Disneyland Paris with two separate pathways which keep the intimacy, but also allow for better crowd flow. It's all in the design. I'm confident they will conceal them in a way that they will accommodate more traffic yet maintain intimacy. We've already seen that with some of artwork showing pathways on multiple levels.
spacemt354
Chili's
It's not about being right, I can understand both sides if there's a level of compatibility between viewpoints, and not the I'm right and you're wrong attitude that others seem to have.Sorry to comment and then run, but I think we just have different levels of what we're comfortable with accepting at Disneyland. I'm sure nothing I think hasn't been said before or would convince either of you I'm right.
I agree this will be the first land at Disneyland based on one IP. I think what it boils down to, is that I'm okay with that, and not everyone else will be.
But to comment on why WDW isn't building behind Frontierland, they have a park that is in trouble and needed to attract more people. I think it's as simple as that.
But this doesn't really answer my question which is more geared towards the thematic elements of SWL behind Frontierland in a Magic Kingdom style park. How does it fit thematically? And if it does fit thematically, does that also mean it would have fit in the Magic Kingdom as well? Magic Kingdom is also in desperate need of an E-Ticket and added capacity. Plus, Disney has plenty of films it could use for attractions to boost DHS. So taking logistics out of the picture and just from a thematic standpoint...that's my main criticism.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
I'll miss the Big Thunder Trail and the atmosphere on the lower level of the Hungry Bear. Both offered a nice balance to the hectic nature of the rest of the park.
As far as the new northern end of the ROA I am going to reserve judgement until I see it finished. It was cool how the old ROA just disappeared into that thick forest. Kind of felt like there was always just a bit of Disneyland you couldn't explore. There was something adventurous/ mysterious about it. Especially to anyone not riding the train or ships. But I'll admit that it was boring and there is probably a reason I have only rodeTwain twice and Columbia once in all my years visiting DL.
Now when I look at the new Rock work / train trestle it doesn't provide that same sense of adventure or mystery to me. Granted it's not finished, the waterfalls aren't running and the trees need to grow in but I don't like the sharp turn and how much of that area is exposed now. I also don't like the red rocks there and was hoping they would stay gray. The Red feels more like Frontierland proper and not like the back country.
I think the new ROA will probably provide more exciting train and boat rides for most guests but I think it did so at the cost of losing some nice atmosphere and place making.
As far as the new northern end of the ROA I am going to reserve judgement until I see it finished. It was cool how the old ROA just disappeared into that thick forest. Kind of felt like there was always just a bit of Disneyland you couldn't explore. There was something adventurous/ mysterious about it. Especially to anyone not riding the train or ships. But I'll admit that it was boring and there is probably a reason I have only rodeTwain twice and Columbia once in all my years visiting DL.
Now when I look at the new Rock work / train trestle it doesn't provide that same sense of adventure or mystery to me. Granted it's not finished, the waterfalls aren't running and the trees need to grow in but I don't like the sharp turn and how much of that area is exposed now. I also don't like the red rocks there and was hoping they would stay gray. The Red feels more like Frontierland proper and not like the back country.
I think the new ROA will probably provide more exciting train and boat rides for most guests but I think it did so at the cost of losing some nice atmosphere and place making.