Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 38
  1. #1

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,957

    Exclamation Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    Okay, so being newer to this site there are certain things that really shock me about Disney fans. One of them being how upset some people get with movie themed attractions. Now don't get me wrong, I love Thunder Mountain and Space Mountain, and all those rides just fine. Some of my favs. But if I go to a Disney park, I wanna see Disney represented. I want to see the films I love brought to life. It always bothers me when people call this "marketing". That's ridiculous because it's a park for Disney, therefore the films they produce, which is what they're known for are the main draw for many people. It's like calling a water ride at Sea World marketing. What do you expect them to put? I've even heard some people call WOC marketing because it uses so many films. Like seriously??? Again, I'm all for original rides. I love Pirates, and Soarin, and all that stuff. It's great to have them. But at the end of the day, if I want a virtually baseless park, I'll go to Knott's or Six Flags or Epcot . For me, what I love so much about DCA right now is that it's finally becoming a Disney park. It had no heart before. No nostalgia. WOC, and Electrical Parade are giving it exactly what it needed. A connection to the fans that it was really lacking. This doesn't mean I'm in love with Carsland coming in, I'm really not sold on that yet, especially cause it's Pixar, but films particularly the classics need to be brought to life. This is their home. Family portraits in your hallway are not marketing campaigns. Let's discuss.

  2. #2

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    The original submarines were good. Nothing wrong with the story. But they closed it Just so it could be tied to atlantis, which was coming out at the time. It did bad, so they scrapped it. It came back as a ride where you go by video screens. They Didnt need to do that. They didn't have to close it,but they did, to market the film Atlantis. That's the problem. Taking a ride with nothing wrong with it, and changing it to include characters. Case in point, pirates lair

  3. #3

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Brea, CA
    Posts
    3,640

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    What a lot of people complain about is not tie-ins, but the location of those tie-ins. Lately, every movie tie-in has been forced into a land, with no thematic cohesion.

    For example:

    Finding Nemo in Tomorrowland- How does a talking fish from the present day tie into the future?
    Monster's Inc. in HPB- How does a Monster world from the present day fit into a movie studio backlot?
    Winnie the Pooh in CC- How does a talking, stuffed animal fit into the Deep South that is CC?
    Buzz Lightyear in Tomorrowland- How does a toy from the present day fit into the future?
    Toy Story and The Little Mermaid in PP- How do toys from the present day and a mermaid from Europe fit into a 1920s California Pier?
    Pirates of the Caribbean in Frontierland- I think my case is already proven from what I already said.

    There are tie-ins that work well thematically and that is why they aren't complained about:

    The Song of the South in Critter Country
    Tarzan in Adventureland- some people complain about it because it was "cheaply done" not about thematic cohesion
    All of Fantasyland
    All of Toontown

  4. #4

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,957

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by disneylandfan95 View Post
    What a lot of people complain about is not tie-ins, but the location of those tie-ins. Lately, every movie tie-in has been forced into a land, with no thematic cohesion.

    For example:

    Finding Nemo in Tomorrowland- How does a talking fish from the present day tie into the future?
    Monster's Inc. in HPB- How does a Monster world from the present day fit into a movie studio backlot?
    Winnie the Pooh in CC- How does a talking, stuffed animal fit into the Deep South that is CC?
    Buzz Lightyear in Tomorrowland- How does a toy from the present day fit into the future?
    Toy Story and The Little Mermaid in PP- How do toys from the present day and a mermaid from Europe fit into a 1920s California Pier?
    Pirates of the Caribbean in Frontierland- I think my case is already proven from what I already said.

    There are tie-ins that work well thematically and that is why they aren't complained about:

    The Song of the South in Critter Country
    Tarzan in Adventureland- some people complain about it because it was "cheaply done" not about thematic cohesion
    All of Fantasyland
    All of Toontown

    I hear you, but sometimes people take it a bit too seriously. Buzz in the context of his TV show in the films, which is what the ride is based on certainly fits. Winnie, again I think is being taken too seriously. Woods is woods if you ask me, and again it's not the stuffed bear we're seeing but the a ride with the context of the world that he comes to life in. He certainly doesn't belong in medieval Fantasyland which is where other parks put him.

    I'm with you about Pirates though. They were already established in NOS. That one was tacky!

  5. #5

    • X-S TECH Demonstrator
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Posts
    6,315

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    I agree. I was reading this article about all the new Disney characters on it's a small world and the writer kept accusing Disney of marketing and trying to get more people to buy the stuff with the characters on it and I was just confused. I mean it's Disney's park, they can do what they want. And how are a couple of Disney's best toons all of a sudden marketing. I was reading the comments and one person was explaining the thing that made her child good at learning other countries was reffering to Disney character's countries. People always try to overlook something to find something bad in it.



    Quote Originally Posted by williamtheking View Post
    CaptainEO,ATIS: Have you ever heard that rumor that Elvis is alive, and well, and owns a bakery in Seattle? Yeah, that's total crap. Now if you where to tell me Michael Jackson was alive, and well, and owns a MiceChat account in Las Vegas, that I would believe!

  6. #6

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,949

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    Another factor we need to keep in mind is economics.

    When the price of a new attraction approaches $100 million or more, you've got to get buy off from those in charge of corporate finance. Failure to do so is professional suicide.

    It has to be beyond difficult to pitch a completely new idea for an attraction through the company and past the board, especially one based on an unproven concept. It is infinitely easier, however, to do so when you have it based on an already proven movie or property that has already shown a return on investment.

    Walt was able to take chances--it was, for the most part, his company. Not any more. Too many of us own too many shares.

  7. #7

    • =)
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,290

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    Movie tie-ins aren't inherently an evil thing, and very few people will try to convince you that they are. But some people do have a problem with some or all of these:

    * all new attractions being movie-based, with nothing original on the way
    * attractions being built in areas that they don't thematically support
    * attractions just rehashing movies without offering much in the way of a unique experience
    * animated franchises being placed into lands where they don't fit stylistically

    I sometimes agree and sometimes disagree with specific criticisms, but generally speaking, I think all of these are reasonable things to be concerned about.

    (Also, regarding BLAB, we're supposed to be experiencing the world of toys, not the world of the "real" Buzz Lightyear. Evidence includes the decor in the queue, Zurg being returned to the store at the end, and Disney's official backstory.)


  8. #8

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    4,272

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by DARTH MAUL View Post
    It had no heart before. No nostalgia. WOC, and Electrical Parade are giving it exactly what it needed.
    No nostalgia? What are you talking about.

    Nostalgia is a horribly cheap excuse for not changing something. There are very few things that I believe can't be changed, and that isn't for nostalgic reasons, that is for the sake of those items being an icon (i.e. the Castle, Matterhorn, and Space Mountain).

    But to say that you need nostalgia for a good theme park is ridiculous. Tokyo DisneySea was completely brand new and is spectacular. You don't need nostalgia. You need detail. You need to immerse your guests. You need to take them out of the real world. And that is where DCA fails. That is what gives a Disney Park heart, the immersive factor. Not nostalgia.

  9. #9

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,957

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by ICe101 View Post
    No nostalgia? What are you talking about.

    Nostalgia is a horribly cheap excuse for not changing something. There are very few things that I believe can't be changed, and that isn't for nostalgic reasons, that is for the sake of those items being an icon (i.e. the Castle, Matterhorn, and Space Mountain).

    But to say that you need nostalgia for a good theme park is ridiculous. Tokyo DisneySea was completely brand new and is spectacular. You don't need nostalgia. You need detail. You need to immerse your guests. You need to take them out of the real world. And that is where DCA fails. That is what gives a Disney Park heart, the immersive factor. Not nostalgia.

    Well in that case, it had neither. Happy now?

  10. #10

    • Circle of Ancients
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Paris, France / Los Angeles
    Posts
    38,884
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    Original rides are dead.

    Disney doesn't budget funds any more for attractions that don't sell movie tickets and character merchandise - "they want to see Pirates" doesn't mean anything anymore, an original idea would likely fall on deaf ears, with the possible exception of Tomorrowland.

  11. #11

    • Circle of Ancients
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Paris, France / Los Angeles
    Posts
    38,884
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    The reason WoC may be called marketing dribble, is each of twenty characters who brought in $100 million or more in domestic box office are each given a disjointed cameo to introduce themselves - without really saying much - before we move on to the next one. A unique story tying together popular favorites this is not.

    WoC stands for WouldofCouldve - but it missed the mark in it's 1.0 version.

  12. #12

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Where i want to live: Mickeys house|Where i do live:FAR AWAY FROM THERE D:
    Posts
    407

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    You know, this is the same thing i was thinking about...

    If it is done correctly, not cheaply, its a hit. Honestly, its all about fantasy because we aren't in the real world when we are in a disney park. i think ALL of us, in our house, there is one thing that breaks the feel we want in our living room, dining room, whatever room. We love that little thing that breaks what we are trying to do in that show, so thats why it stays..

    EX: A bachelor with beer cans everywhere and it stinks etc, he might have one nice painting hung.

    So the same might be in place inside a disney park, When it is right, We dont have Trash sitting in the house. We at least have something that looks good, but doesn't fully fit the theme.

    I LOVEE, Toy Story Midway Mania! and honestly i think it fits in quite well. Quite honestly ive seen some people who complain about how they are told a story and cant figure out anything for themselves, then complained that GRR doesn't give enough information to tell the story. why does it seem like disney would reply something like "So, we cant win for losing?"

  13. #13

    • =)
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,290

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    Somehow, I disagree, CaliforniaAdventurer. I certainly didn't at first, but the show has inexplicably grown on me. Immensely so. Although it's fun to have a clearer story (a la Fantasmic), I've grown to really appreciate the more vignette-based approach of WOC. There are only a few spots that don't really do it for me.

    EDIT:

    Quote Originally Posted by Fish_in_water View Post
    I LOVEE, Toy Story Midway Mania! and honestly i think it fits in quite well. Quite honestly ive seen some people who complain about how they are told a story and cant figure out anything for themselves, then complained that GRR doesn't give enough information to tell the story. why does it seem like disney would reply something like "So, we cant win for losing?"
    I think you're talking about two different things here. TSMM tries to give us a rather specific backstory: that we've been shrunk down to the size of the toys from the Toy Story movies, and now they're inviting us to play a toy midway game with them that happens to be in Andy's aunt's office, which happens to be on a boardwalk. But there are mismatches: we're dealing with toys from the 90s on a boardwalk from the 20s...we can be magically and inexplicably shrunk down to the size of toys on what is otherwise a realistic boardwalk of the past...we're dealing with Pixar characters in land that's being dominated more and more by Disney's original animated characters...etc. So we've got a backstory that's clear, but that doesn't make a lot of sense.

    With GRR, I think the only thing people have complained about is how barren some of the scenery is. It's not a "story ride", which I appreciate - it doesn't need any sort of explicit plot or backstory. But it'd be nice if it had a little more to look at, to make you wonder about what might have happened in these places. Other attractions in this vein do that, and the results help you develop a better emotional connection.
    Last edited by Datameister; 07-10-2010 at 11:37 AM.


  14. #14

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    171

    Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    Speaking of "original rides", when was the last time Disneyland got an original E-Ticket attraction with no character tie-in? Correct me if I'm wrong because I can't think too far back being 16, but I would guess in 1979 with the opening of BTMR. Keep in mind that while Splash Mountain and Star Tours can be considered quality attractions, they tie in characters from their respective films, both done beautifully too.
    "I have been up against tough competition all my life. I wouldn't know how to get along without it"
    -Walt Disney

  15. #15

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,957

    Thumbs down Re: Original rides VS Film tie-ins. Let's discuss

    Complaining about WOC not having a story is like complaining about a documentary, because you don't think it's funny. Way to miss the point entirely. All the audiences I've seen the show with were very emotional and awe struck by the beauty of the show. Far more emotional than I've EVER seen anyone get during Fantasmic, (which I've been watching since it opened) with its direct storyline. WOC should be compared to fireworks. Themes and vignettes. If you don't like it, fine, but people should critique it fairly. It's certainly not marketing. That is just almost insulting in its unfairness.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [Chat] Original and Character Rides - What is the right ratio?
    By Ice101 in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-17-2009, 08:46 AM
  2. Original Fantasyland Dark Rides...
    By princedalton in forum Yesterland
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-14-2008, 12:37 PM
  3. Footgae of original Disneyland dark rides?
    By EricMontreal22 in forum Yesterland
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-14-2007, 09:13 PM
  4. Have Fun, Discuss Your Day, and Discuss other Threads!!!
    By Lady_Ivory_Rocks in forum Disney Interactive and Game Industry Discussion
    Replies: 130
    Last Post: 10-10-2006, 06:54 PM
  5. Gay cowboy film rides off with top prize at Venice Film Festival
    By ALIASd in forum MiceChat News Archive
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 11-22-2005, 04:06 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •