Why Some Disney Fans Don't like the last 15 years of the Parks?

[JerrodDRagon]

So I was on another forums were someone was talking about how Disneyland fans complain about Nemo and Buzz being in Tommorrowland and Carsland being build in DCA and I wrote this back.......

I wanted to know if anyone else felt this way about the last Few years in the Parks

Nemo and Buzz to me don't fit cause they are just uninspiring rides....As for Star Tours I want a new ride that is fun but is not just sticking characters in my face every 3 seconds...oh look Vador...oh okk Jar Jar ohhh look Han Solo.....the first ride was more set in the universe and less about the characters, though you did get to see some.

The reason I'm more against Carsland is cause...heck why could they have not just made it "Radiator's Springs" and allow them selves to put other more "original" rides in later based on ghost towns or the gold rush.

I think the reason Disney fans go against Disney is cause for the most part after the park opened most rides were based on just idea's like Pirates, Space, exploring the ocean, Haunted Houses, singing Birds and Bears, and touring the old west..........besides Soarin of CA I can't name a single E/D ticket ride added to the Disneyland Resort that was not connected to a movie or TV show....kinda sad how Unimaginative Imagineers are and how the Disney Owners can't even take any risks like Walt did. This is why I would have any problem with the way Disneyland is being run.

Now saying that the New Carsland Ride looks like great fun and Mermaid will work too...I don't want to go and hate every movie idea but it would be nice to see something original.

[DLFreak71]

I kinda have to agree

[Beatledude64]

I do agree. The new Radiator Springs Racers and Little Mermaid Ride look like fun rides, but I feel they could have been done without movie inspiration. For example, before Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage, there was no movie connected to the ride, it was just an idea. The Little Mermaid ride could have been something similar, going under water and exploring sea creatures and other things. Radiator Springs could have been a simpler racing-themed ride in the desert, along with the other two rides in there. Going back to Tomorrowland, I feel now that Toy Story Midway Mania is up, Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters doesn't need to be there, and I feel it should be replaced with something original, and hopefully something that can actually utilize the 360 theater. If it were up to me, I would switch Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage back to just the Submarine Voyage. However, I don't think every ride should be "movieless," look at Fantasyland. Walt created the Pinocchio ride, Snow White, Peter Pan, Dumbo, etc. Also, Star Tours and Indiana Jones are great rides, and I feel they implemented the movies that they are based on well. Like you said, Star Tours isn't sticking characters in your face every 3 seconds. It's subtle and it works. Now, rides based on movies seem to make sure you know what movie it's based on. I feel that rides like these today are rather a lack of creativity with WDI (I mean in the themeing aspect, not ride design) and/or it's just a way for Disney to make more money on merchandising and advertising. Anyway, my two cents.

[DLFreak71]

Pinocchio wasn't during Walt's time (if my timeline is correct) and snow white didn't join her ride until the 80's refurb (I want to say you were snow white and taking her adventure)

[Beatledude64]

Pinocchio wasn't during Walt's time (if my timeline is correct) and snow white didn't join her ride until the 80's refurb (I want to say you were snow white and taking her adventure)

Regardless, I feel since they are ride-thrus of the actual movie, you can't make it "movieless." That being said, I can see how the Little Mermaid ride is the same basic idea. However, most other movie rides could have been done without the movie in it.

[StevenW]

The reason I'm more against Carsland is cause...heck why could they have not just made it "Radiator's Springs" and allow them selves to put other more "original" rides in later based on ghost towns or the gold rush.

This is exactly why I don't trust the ideas of the Disney "originalists". Sure, its great to have ideas that didn't come from the movies because Disneyland was also based on many of Disney's other properties like television. Aspects of Frontierland and Tomorrowland was featured on television instead of movies. The theme park ideas comes from vast areas of Disney's media empire.

Besides, ghost towns or the gold rush are ideas that are passé. I heard these ideas touted on websites when DCA was tanking. Now that DCA is revived with the new additions added, why are we still stuck with ghost towns and gold rush themes. DCA has moved on. "California" as a theme is deemphasized. California is backdrop instead of its focus. If these people want a ghost town, look back was what was DCA. Or visit Knott's Berry Farm.

[DownwiththeTide]

Character and movie tie-ins aren't the problem. Quality attractions, are quality attractions regardless. Take Indy for example. It's my opinion, that lack of creativity and penny pinching have been the biggest problems in the last 15 years.

Buzz can be a fun little ride, but is just a cheap cardboard video game. Plenty could have been done to make a better ride.

Nemo took the experience of being a passenger in a submarine, and turned it into an experience that pays little attention to the concept of sub travel. It may as well be a typical dark ride, with a simple ride system like WDW.

Star Tours II will probably be great, and I think there is way to much over dramatic speculation on the part of character additions.

Little Mermaid is looking to be a very high quality experience, one that surely won't be ruined because of its being based on a movie.

Carsland is looking like it will be a very high quality land, of a theme that would be impossible to experience anywhere else. People often say they would rather it had a Route 66 theme. But for me, If I wanted the Route 66 experience, I would just road trip Route 66 (many areas are still intact). And I also think the gold rush/ghost town theme has been done enough.

[toonaspie]

I think it comes back to public demand again.

The original conception of Disneyland (featuring every and only the attractions that the park originally opened with) wouldn't have lasted long. People expect to see Disney characters in a park that's named after Disney. And the non-Disney-character attractions that became popular only became so because the technology used when they first came out was considered ahead of it's time. The same logic can be applied to the very few original attractions that are found in Disney parks these days.

Now I have my problems with Disney characters being incorporated into certain attractions shamelessly and stupidly in the past. Pixar has often been a great offender of being incorporated into very low rated and un-Disneylike attractions. But Carslands sounds a helluvalot better than ghost towns and all of that. Plus the guy who wrote that quote got his theming confused. The ghost town/gold rush theme is probably more for the GRR area while the Route 66/California Desert is more what Carsland portrays.

[SpaceMtnAlum94]

This is exactly why I don't trust the ideas of the Disney "originalists". Sure, its great to have ideas that didn't come from the movies because Disneyland was also based on many of Disney's other properties like television. Aspects of Frontierland and Tomorrowland was featured on television instead of movies. The theme park ideas comes from vast areas of Disney's media empire.

Besides, ghost towns or the gold rush are ideas that are passé. I heard these ideas touted on websites when DCA was tanking. Now that DCA is revived with the new additions added, why are we still stuck with ghost towns and gold rush themes. DCA has moved on. "California" as a theme is deemphasized. California is backdrop instead of its focus. If these people want a ghost town, look back was what was DCA. Or visit Knott's Berry Farm.

Oh, yes. Let's change the name of Disneyland to "Disney's Movieland." Where just like Universal Studios, everything is tied to a movie. Nothing else matters, except the synergy of movie, attraction, and merchandise. I'm feeling a thrill go up my leg just thinking about it. I can't wait to see which land will next house a Pixar Movie theme ride telling the exact story that was in the movie. Oh, the thrill. The themes and atmosphere of the different lands don't mean much anyway. They certainly didn't set Disneyland apart from other amusement parks. Better to just do away with them, so we can just put whatever movie ride we want in there.

I sure hope they make Tomorrowland into Star Wars land that would be the coolest. Outstanding! I hope they put the Pixar Snowman in the Matterhorn right away. I just can't stand another moment without him there. And let's theme Space Mountain to be a Tron attraction. They could set up the grid right on the cieling of Space Mountain. How Radical! I don't think Cars characters should be limited to just Cars Land, I think we could station Cars all around Big Thunder Mountain as well. Afterall, radiator springs sort of looks like Big Thunder. People will love it. Let's get rid of the rockets and we can do an Up balloon ride in its place. Fantastic. And let's do the Pirates right. There is a ton of stuff in there that has nothing to do with the movie. Hurry, Let's close it down and do the ride correctly. It should tell the story of Jack Sparrow. And it needs more than just an image of Davey Jones. The whole crew should be in there is what I say. Rivers of America is tired and old. Let's create a Lagoon for Fantasmic and Let's fill in the back side of the river and fill it with new attractions dedicated to Pixar, George Lucas, Steven Spielber, the Muppets, and any other creator that isn't employed by Disney. Hey let's do an ET ride back there. ET played around in a forest for part of the movie, that would fit. Or maybe we could make it into a Wookie Village. I am channeling something here.

There are so many great ideas, I just can't wait for the Disney Executives to do them all. Disneyland is tired and old, let's make it good again.

SMA94

[Druggas]

It all comes down to money. Money from the movie, the ride, and the merchandising.

This is how Disney looks at projects when deciding to go forward with them or not.

Walt didn't try to lose money, but it wasn't his goal to take every dollar he could from the public.

Different times, different philosophies.

[Bob Weaver]

The lack of originality is what dismays me. In the past 30 years, most of the things they've done are either a redesign of an existing or previous attraction, an overlay or "plussing" of an existing attraction, a standard theme-park ride given a Disney look, or in some cases an attraction based on a non-Disney film. Where is the innovation, the creativity, the originality, the imagination that Walt knew was required to keep the park going forever? Basing an attraction on a movie is not in itself bad, but the attraction needs to have something innovative, something never done or seen before, something original about it. Some aspect of the attraction that is totally original... so that you can't get the same experience just by watching the movie, or get the same experience from another theme park.

[StevenW]

Oh, yes. Let's change the name of Disneyland to "Disney's Movieland."

Why change the name? Disneyland already has incorporated many movies into its rides. It is not necessary to relabel what is obviously done.

It's time to stop bashing Pixar. Disney is Pixar. Pixar is Disney. I predict Disney will drop the Pixar name some time in the future, perhaps at another stockholder convention that few attends.

Did you realize that the original DCA had many original ideas that flopped. GRR, Screamin', Golden Dreams, SuperStar Limo, among others had no movie tie-in. Few are using the original DCA as an example to uphold, but they are using the original Disneyland.

I don't think Disney wants to go with pure ideas. Their plain vanilla ideas will fail outright like it did with DCA.

[Bob Weaver]

I hope things like SuperStar Limo and Mulholland Madness are not typical of what the "idea generators" of Disney are capable of thinking up. I would hope they are capable of coming up with better and more imaginative ideas. It's hard to believe that the company that came up with Adventure thru Inner Space, Haunted Mansion, Mine Train thru Nature's Wonderland and Pirates of the Caribbean is the same company that came up with Innoventions, SuperStar Limo, Mulholland Madness and the Light Magic parade.

[SpaceMtnAlum94]

It's a wonder that Disneyland was a success at all. Original ideas, experiences, and attraction always fail. Just look at that marvelous example of DCA and their original ideas of vacationing in California in a psuedo California world. Making a fantastic adventure in the comtemporary real world. And don't forget recreating a Hollywood Studio backstage approximately 1 hour from the real Hollywood.


It certainly doesn't pay to come up with original ideas and adventure. It is so much more certain and reliable to piggy back off a successful movie idea whether it is your company's or not.

As for Pixar, I think we should have more and more new lands dedicated to a single Pixar Movie all over the Disney Theme Parks. Imagination at its best. That's what that is.

SMA94

[StevenW]

Disney had some successes with original ideas, but they are fewer than you think. Most parks have a mixture of original and movie ideas. Animal Kingdom have some unique E-ticket rides like the safari, dinosaur, and everest. DisneySeas have the best unique ideas and least amount of movies. Same with Epcot.

It comes done to money. DCA 1.0 had no money. They could have started over fresh with new ideas, but they didn't. Maybe this decision was based on the high stakes $1 billion budget. They desperately needed a home run. No more guessing about how the public will react.