Page 11 of 23 FirstFirst ... 89101112131421 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 340
  1. #151

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    8,890

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    Quote Originally Posted by ManaByte View Post
    Not true. Everest isn't based on any specific franchise and that was a huge E-Ticket. But the ride didn't exactly draw the crowds Disney was hoping and Harry Potter came along and hurt the Florida resort's ego so badly that Disney has to do what they need to in order to compete.
    There's no demonstrable cause-and-effect connection between Everest and anything else. In any event, I'm talking about Disneyland, not WDW.


    Quote Originally Posted by ManaByte View Post
    Snow White
    Peter Pan
    Pinocchio
    Wind in the Willows
    Sleeping Beauty
    Dumbo x2
    Alice in Wonderland x2

    Every single one of those are based on a specific Disney movie and every single one was in the park prior to Walt's death.
    In Disneyland's first 30 years, the number of movie-brand attractions was 'way in the minority, and mostly confined to Fantasyland. Tomorrowland '55 and '67, New Orleans Square, Tom Sawyer Island and Bear Country had no movie brand attractions or movie brand tie-in restaurants. All the world-famous "Disneyland big icon" attractions (Jungle Cruise, Tiki Room, Pirates, Haunted Mansion, Mr. Lincoln, Submarines, Monorail, Mark Twain, Space Mountain, Autopia, PeopleMover, Adventure thru Inner Space, Small World, the Railroad) were non-movie brand; even the Matterhorn had no tie-in to the movie Third Man on the Mountain.

    In the 30 years before Eisner, Disneyland was its own brand, and its movie-based attractions were 'way in the minority. In the 29 years since Eisner, Disneyland has become a marketing platform for whatever currently hot brand Disney wants to promote. Other than Captain Eo and Rocket Rods, every new ride and update has been a promotion for brands, brands and more brands.

    Eisner's mandate was that Disneyland's purpose was to promote movie brands, period. It's a creatively lazy, risk-averse mandate that his protege and former lieutenant, his chief financial officer and his strategic planning executives are faithfully following.
    Last edited by Mr Wiggins; 04-10-2013 at 12:27 PM.
    "With the acquisition of Marvel and now of Lucasfilm,
    Disney may have finally found the grail. You don't need
    imagination or art. All you need is a brand."

    - Neil Gabler


  2. #152

    • Sorcerer Supreme Bean
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,080

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Wiggins View Post
    In Disneyland's first 30 years, the number of movie-brand attractions was 'way in the minority, and mostly confined to Fantasyland. Tomorrowland '55 and '67, New Orleans Square, Tom Sawyer Island and Bear Country had no movie brand attractions or movie brand tie-in restaurants. All the world-famous "Disneyland big icon" attractions (Jungle Cruise, Tiki Room, Pirates, Haunted Mansion, Mr. Lincoln, Submarines, Monorail, Mark Twain, Space Mountain, Autopia, PeopleMover, Adventure thru Inner Space, Small World, the Railroad) were non-movie brand; even the Matterhorn had no tie-in to the movie Third Man on the Mountain.

    In the 30 years before Eisner, Disneyland was its own brand, and its movie-based attractions were 'way in the minority. In the 29 years since Eisner, Disneyland has become a marketing platform for whatever currently hot brand Disney wants to promote.
    Tom Sawyer island itself, by virtue of only its name, is a 'tie-in' to a non original, 'property' brand, along with the Mark Twain boat; both are tie ins to the other and his properties and not purely 'original'. Lincoln is not original, biographies of him have existed for years, Fronteirland had Davey Crocket and Zorro face characters wandering around. Jungle cruise was inspired by the film The African Queen. Even if they weren't purely Disney property inspired rides, they were inspired by other intellectual properties.

    They weren't truly 'original' ideas, although they were presented in 'original' ways.

    I mean if you look at it "Disneyland" isnt an original idea, people had been asking a way to tour Disney for years, though the way they presented the park was an 'original' idea that many others have often tried to replicate.

    At least thats how I look at it.

    Anyways to get back on topic, I wonder a bout the capacity of the Tron ride, if its a light cycle ride, that would imply 1 person per bike? That would be a pretty low capacity system unless its a multi person 'bike', or something of the sorts.

    Perhaps 'light runners', the 4 wheel vehicle from the most recent movie would serve better?
    Last edited by Wren; 04-10-2013 at 12:44 PM.
    There is no right or wrong in this debate. It is simply a matter of perspective.
    -Dr. Strange

  3. #153

    • I'm from Canada eh!
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,068

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    Not really sure how I feel about the Monster Inc ride. On one hand the ride could be very cool if based on the Door Chase from the movie, but I really hope that they do not close down the Muppets. Sure, Muppets 3D is tired, but a new show could be easily done and would refresh that attraction. Besides the new movie did very well and it would help keep the Muppets in Pop Culture.

    I'm also all in for the Tron ride.

  4. #154

    • MiceChat Administrator
    • Man of mystery and
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Temple of the Forbidden Eye
    Posts
    13,756
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    ADMIN NOTE

    Folks,

    Please refrain from taking discussions off topic. If you have a side tangent that you want to explore, please start a separate thread for it.

    Thank you!

    Dusty
    Find us on Facebook:

    .

    How do you support MiceChat? Join MiceChat GOLD!,



  5. #155

    • MiceChat Administrator
    • Man of mystery and
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Temple of the Forbidden Eye
    Posts
    13,756
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    As for me, I like both concepts. But it is the Tron concept which I think is most needed.

    Regardless of how you feel about the last movie, the franchise has a rich visual texture that will lend itself VERY well to Tomorrowland. The fact that it will evoke a bit of the old PeopleMover action high above the land is welcome.

    I believe that the Tron project should be put on the fast track before Monsters and they should do whatever they can to get the project open during Disneyland's 60th anniversary celebration.
    Find us on Facebook:

    .

    How do you support MiceChat? Join MiceChat GOLD!,



  6. #156

    • Sorcerer Supreme Bean
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,080

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    Quote Originally Posted by Dustysage View Post
    As for me, I like both concepts. But it is the Tron concept which I think is most needed.

    Regardless of how you feel about the last movie, the franchise has a rich visual texture that will lend itself VERY well to Tomorrowland. The fact that it will evoke a bit of the old PeopleMover action high above the land is welcome.

    I believe that the Tron project should be put on the fast track before Monsters and they should do whatever they can to get the project open during Disneyland's 60th anniversary celebration.
    Agreed, Tomorrowland needs some more life breathed into it, Star Tours redone helped but that sad empty track all around the land needs something done, and why not something big for the 60th?
    There is no right or wrong in this debate. It is simply a matter of perspective.
    -Dr. Strange

  7. #157

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    437

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    Can someone explain to me why it bothers them so much if an attraction has a franchise or movie tie in to it? I'm realy curious about, honestly, because I don't understand that feeling.
    Indiana Jones and Dino at AK have the same ride vehicle and the exact same track layout. I think everyone would agree that Indy is a vastly superior attraction and it is the one with a movie franchise tie in. I have never been on Indy and felt like it would be a much better experience if it was based on some generic archeologist.
    Lets take Goofys Sky School at DCA for an example. I hated both attractions, but I don't understand the psyche that would cause someone to enjoy IT more without a Goofy overlay than with.
    I just want GREAT adventures, be it Soarin with no tie in or Indy with.

    Of the, what I consider 5 e-tickets at DCA, only 2 have tie ins. RSR and ToT. I don't even consider ToT much of a tie in as the actual ride is realy an experience unto itself.

    Most people who visit Disney parks are people who love Entertainment and specifically Disney entertainment. Is it realy sooooo bad to cater to them instead of trying to prove some intillectual point that realy doesn't evin exist?

  8. #158

    •   
      MiceChat Round-Up Crew
      MiceChat Moderator
    • Unnatural and dreadful
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,932

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    I don't have a problem if a new ride is movie-based in general: the Star Tours relaunch is fantastic and a lot of fun, even if the prequel trilogy it borrows a lot from aren't very good movies by most standards. The attraction is high quality, gags and texture all the way through the queue even, and lots of repeatability. They did an excellent job.

    Cars Land, overall, just as an area to walk around in, has a lot of charm. Being based on a mediocre (to me) film series doesn't hurt the area existing. I don't love RSR, but it's fun.

    However, accepting they can do movie-based rides and areas well (the above examples, Splash Mountain, Peter Pan, Mr. Toad, Snow White, etc), something being based on a movie is no guarantee of broad appeal or successful conversion to theme park attraction either.

    Little Mermaid as a dark ride is bland and not very memorable, and they could have done more with it. Same with the Monsters, Inc. dark ride, and Pooh at Disneyland. The new Fantasy Fair area flat out doesn't appeal to me, regardless of general construction quality. Avatar coming to Disney Animal Kingdom sounds flat out ridiculous.

    So, it's not a matter of movie based attractions can never be good or enjoyable - they clearly can. It's a matter of adding too many and level of execution not always being highest quality or appealing to more than one group of guests, or matching the area or park it's being added to. The proposed door vault coaster could be a lot of fun - but how does it relate to anything about old Hollywood? In a similar vein, how does hearing JACK SPARROW yelled at you loudly and replacing classic, endearing characters and dialogue improve Pirates as an attraction? In what universe do the neon-cartoon characters of Nightmare Before Christmas (a film I enjoy quite a lot, but which should not be forced into the HM) benefit the 'realistic' styled Haunted Mansion as an overlay?

    I'd welcome TRON's stylistic flourishes to Tomorrowland, provided they don't just slap another outside zooming vehicle on the track and do a very light interior theme on the tunnels. It needs to be more than that, else it's Rocket Rods with a different name. They could do something ambitious and awesome if combine it with more interior space, dark ride elements, show scenes, etc - the question is if they actually end up doing that, or just the bare minimum.

    The reason there is hesitation about seeing more modern movies added to the parks comes from things like a Bug's Land, Little Mermaid at DCA, Pooh's dark ride - they don't fascinate or enthrall. Feels like kind of a bare minimum experience. Just having a movie name to hang on something doesn't cut it because it's new or popular - the experience has to deliver on it's own merits. And with Disney parks in the states, movie-based attractions fall on both sides of the quality divide.

  9. #159

    • Circle of Ancients
    • Offline

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

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    Movie based or not, please don't build attractions or lands that don't fit the theme of the park they're in. Don't knee jerk and throw everything based on a movie into Studios and DCA.

  10. #160

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    If they want to use the cycle concept, don't use Tron, use Star Wars Episode 6. The indoor Tomorrowland portion can be a slow dark ride with a storyline from Episode 6. After exiting Innoventions, the fast portion has the cycles zooming through the forest of Endor (replacing Autopia). Upon the cycles return, you go through the Buzz Lightyear building and back to the Rocket Jet platform.

  11. #161

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Riverside Ca
    Posts
    1,445

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    The problem is movie based attractions often feel lazy. They recreate scenes from the movie and don't bother working to tell a story. If you're going to do film inspired attractions, at least make them original experiences like Roger Rabbit or Indy, I'm tired of riding the highlights of a film.

  12. #162

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    450

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    The actual concept of California Adventure always seemed strange to me. I mean, I get that it's meant to be a tourist destination that is inspired by what California has to offer. But the concept seems very limiting, and it seems to ignore a large part of their attendance base--locals--who live in California already. So any move away from the initial idea is fine by me.

    As far as Tron in Tomorrowland goes, we all know something needs to be done there. Al's sources even say that the thematics do not resonate with attendees even if the rides do. Space, Star Tours, Buzz, and the Rockets are all popular. Nemo is too, if you still consider it part of Tomorrowland. But part of what sets Disney apart is immersion. Universal had to base a whole area after a book/film series to finally compete at Disney's level, and in some ways it was a bit of a game changer, in a build-it-and-they-will-come type of way. Carsland just further proves that immersion is what is brings people in, whether its a general theme--New Orleans Square, for example--or putting you in a film, animated or not, like Harry Potter and Carsland.

    It's important, I think, not to ignore what Al actually said. The idea would utilize "much," not all, of the People Mover "route," not it's track. This could mean many things. It seems reasonable that it would not enter other buildings like the PM did, and that any real estate it uses of the former PM track would be rebuilt and reworked.

    This makes sense because he also said that it's "borrowing a new ride system and theme to be used in Shanghai's Tomorrowland." By all accounts, this is replacing Space Mountain in that park, so we can probably assume that much of the ride there is indoors. We cannot assume, with what Al reported, that this will be the same here, since its not being cloned, but "borrowed".

    I think the key here, though, as Al reported, is the news that this is also an excuse for an aesthetic renovation of the whole area. This means that we may not even be able to recognize the PM "route" in this redesign. At least that's what I get out of it. It almost makes it sound like--and I admit this is an inference by me--that the Tron exterior would serve as the backbone of this redesign, if it's using "much" of the old "route," some of which is right near the main entrance.

    Also, I could be very, very wrong.

  13. #163

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    225

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    Quote Originally Posted by planodisney View Post
    Can someone explain to me why it bothers them so much if an attraction has a franchise or movie tie in to it? I'm realy curious about, honestly, because I don't understand that feeling.
    Because if you are a theme park fan, you admire the original inventors of the theme park, who did scrupulous amounts of research and used their copious imaginations to invent immersive worlds and playgrounds that people can play in. It is among the finest examples of the blending of art, science, architecture, theatre, urban planning, botany and storytelling; perhaps the only field of its kind to exist.

    So it is a huge disappointment when they aren't allowed to push the boundaries of their art. Everyone suffers for it, the Imagineers who feel they are being held back, and the audiences who aren't allowed to know how pleasurable it can be should the possibilities of themed entertainment be unleashed.

    Marc Davis spent months researching pirates. Claude Coates spent months researching Caribbean towns. They fine-tuned all this knowledge to its essence, and designed an eight minute experience of it for you. That vision and that world became so iconic that its become ubiquitous when the subject of "seafaring scallywags" comes up at all.

    That's what you want to do when you go into themed entertainment, and how discouraging it must be when Imagineers constantly get a screenshot of some animated film and are just simply told, "build that exactly how it looks." Where's the research? Where's the challenge? Does he get to design the characters? No, just copy what it looks like in the film. Does he get to craft a storyline? No, just pick the most popular parts of the movie.

    And many o'Imagineers have left over this, and how much the lesser we are for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by planodisney View Post
    Most people who visit Disney parks are people who love Entertainment and specifically Disney entertainment. Is it realy sooooo bad to cater to them instead of trying to prove some intillectual point that realy doesn't evin exist?
    I don't give a hair on my chinny chin chin that the characters are Disney. I'd readily visit any company that offers me unique experiences, but seeing as they're the ones who invented this art form, they have quite a legacy to uphold.

  14. #164

    • The one, the only...
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    2,846

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    I do like the Tron concept but I also know that it can be done poorly. Rocket Rods were too short a ride when you go that fast on that track. I am really hoping that the designers understand that a short ride after a really long wait would kill the enthusiasm for the ride.

    DCA still needs work. My concern about the Monster's area is two fold. First, they are trying to re-utilize the existing buidlings which were poorly laid out by the idiots who designed DCA in the first place. Second, because it has no flow and is a dead end, I fear that it will become like Critter Country in its popularity.
    Jiminy Cricket Fan
    .................................

    Love Disneyland and Walt Disney World!

  15. #165

    • Artistic integrity
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Orange County
    Posts
    3,503

    Re: Disneyland Debate Thread: Monsters Invade Hollywoodland and Tron to rise TL again

    Quote Originally Posted by Professortango View Post
    The problem is movie based attractions often feel lazy.
    In PotC (pre Jack Sparrow) and the Haunted Mansion .... It's abouit rich BACKstories .... while you get to create your OWN story in your head.

    It's that subtle type of story telling ... that many today take for granted .. and don't realize it.

    The act ... where your mind is involved in your own world, that you create, as you ride. It's a form of stimulation to the senses ... that I clearly understood as far back as I can remember.

    When Disney tells a specific story ... straight out of any one of their films (Little Mermaid in DCA) ... You just take "backseat" while Disney tells you the story of someone else's world/journey/experience.

    When YOU play central character ... That's "interaction" at it's best!
    MY SIGNATURE:
    Dear Peoplemover Fans, If you want to see a new attraction that at least mimics the 1967 Peoplemover in a future Tomorrowland remodel, you need to write to the powers-that-be, and let them know. If you don't - Then the next time Tomorrowland is remodeled, you will see a land barren of any "Peoplemover" type attraction.

Page 11 of 23 FirstFirst ... 89101112131421 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [Question] Could Disneyland close for the day (again) due to the rain?
    By JesterMn in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-20-2010, 06:06 PM
  2. Replies: 73
    Last Post: 11-15-2007, 10:21 PM
  3. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 12-23-2005, 06:09 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-06-2005, 04:14 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-05-2005, 11:12 AM

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
  •