Page 12 of 23 FirstFirst ... 2910111213141522 ... LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 340
  1. #166

    • 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

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomorrowland_1967 View Post
    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!

  2. #167

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,605

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ManaByte View Post
    It's 2013, and "original, non-franchise based imagineering" does not put people through the turnstyles anymore.
    And that's why Soarin' is the most popular attraction in Epcot...

    They could have just as easily said, "It's 1989, and nobody's interested in Song of the South anymore! Let's make this attraction based on the movie Splash! That was a huge hit!" (In fact, they almost did.)

    Or how about, "1t's 1989, and nobody wants a Disney animated musical. They want an action-packed Don Bluth-style animated movie!" (Actually, they did that too. See: Rescuers Down Under. But Mermaid was the hit.)

    Or how about, "It's 1955, and nobody wants to drive all the way out to Anaheim to throw balls at a target!" (Somebody said that too).



    Quote Originally Posted by Wren View Post
    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.

    No art was created in a vacuum. Obviously everything was inspired by something. When we say "original" on here, it's usually a less-clunky way of saying "non-movie-based."

    The point is: VARIETY. Tom Sawyer Island was inspired directly by a book, not a Disney movie. The Mark Twain was about the experience of riding on a steamboat in the frontier. It was simply named to honor Mark Twain.

    Even when it comes to the rides that were based directly on movies in the early days, not all of the movies were huge hits. Alice in Wonderland supposedly lost the company a million dollars at the box office and it still got two attractions by 1956.

    I'd like to see a Rocketeer attraction in either Hollywoodland or Condor Flats, but I doubt that would get much further with the execs. than an "original."

    If you want to get down to it, Monsters Inc. wasn't an original concept. The TV show Tiny Toon Adventures had an episode where a baby followed a monster through a closet door portal into a work-like environment, and the baby chased the terrified monster around. But I would still call Monsters Inc. an original movie, because it isn't directly based on another property. The creatives at Pixar were free to do with it as they pleased. Why can't Imagineers have the same opportunity once in a while?
    Last edited by animagusurreal; 04-10-2013 at 05:33 PM.
    "Happy Working Song" parody for DCA remodel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-TYESfNTP8&feature=plcp

    Retro Rant Review of "The Hunchback of Notre Dame II" (comedy review of direct-to-video
    Disney sequel):
    Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/user/animagus.../1/q1j7FU8QXu0
    Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/user/animagus.../0/sasNTMDRBLU

    Retro Rant Review of "Home on the Range" (comedy review of Disney movie):
    Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7mC-...feature=relmfu
    Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoUie...feature=relmfu
    Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3Vea...feature=relmfu


    Visit my site: http://www.vividgroovy.com



    Pratfall the albatross superheroine visits the Carthay Circle Theatre.

  3. #168

    • 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 animagusurreal View Post
    And that's why Soarin' is the most popular attraction in Epcot...

    They could have just as easily said, "It's 1989, and nobody's interested in Song of the South anymore! Let's make this attraction based on the movie Splash! That was a huge hit." (In fact, they almost did.)

    Or how about "1t's 1989, and nobody wants a Disney animated musical. They want an action packed Don Bluth-style animated movie." (Actually, they did that too. See: Rescuers Down Under. But Mermaid was the hit.)

    Or how about, "It's 1955, and nobody wants to drive all the way out to Anaheim to throw balls at a target." (Somebody also said that too)
    ka-Bingo.


    Quote Originally Posted by choco choco View Post
    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.
    ...Make that ka-Bingo x 2.

    An absolutely brilliant post that totally nails what Disneyland was all about, before it became "all about turning movies into rides."
    Last edited by Mr Wiggins; 04-10-2013 at 05:50 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


  4. #169

    • "I don't like the color"
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    In the TARDIS
    Posts
    1,957

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

    Quote Originally Posted by choco choco View Post
    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.



    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.
    Fantastic post!
    No worries, stay calm, one question. 
Do you happen to know how to fly this thing?

  5. #170

    • Senior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,764

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

    I'm generally kind of bored by the rides that simply retell the original movie they're based on. Mermaid works for me because of that big room with all kinds of variety and characters doing things.

    Nemo emphatically does *not*, in spite of the tech complexity, which had potential to be really cool, because all it does is retell a movie I've already seen. The volcano is kind of cool, but overall, it's boring.

    I guess my stance is if they bring something new from the theme, then I'm good. Give me something imaginative.

    Love Pirates and the Mansion- they are immersive environments, rather than retelling one single story. Lots of possible stories! It's fantastic. But it takes more work than following a movie storyline.
    I pledge allegiance to the Earth, one planet, many gods, and to the universe in which she spins.

  6. #171

    •   
    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area, California, United States
    Posts
    2,558

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

    One common theme I see in the responses is that movie tie ins are lazy. I really disagree with that statement. Star Tours, RsR, Indiana Jones, Transformers, Harry Potter The Forbidden Journey and Spiderman all tell a different story than the movies they are from and they are all fricken awesome attractions in my opinion. Those are just a couple I can think of real quick.

    My point being is they have the same amount of charm and imagination as a original attraction like POTC (pre Johnny Depp) the difference is Jack sparrow was added to a classic therefore altering an attraction that didn't need it. Monster's inc and Tron will be built from scratch so whose to say they can't be as thought provoking as other attractions that have come before it?

    Tron defientely fits into TL and would look awesome at night. The daytime we will have to see what they have planned for it. As far as Monster's INC placement who knows they could tie it into the land we have no idea what they are thinking.

  7. #172

    • Senior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,764

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

    Telling a different story, or even a different point of view, from the movie would fly just fine by me. The examples you give do indeed tell it differently, and they're fantastic.

    Nemo follows the same storyline. With the same dialogue. And it's boring. Even the old classics, Snow White, Peter Pan, and the like, have kind of the same problem.
    I pledge allegiance to the Earth, one planet, many gods, and to the universe in which she spins.

  8. #173

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

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,887

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

    Quote Originally Posted by biggsworth View Post
    One common theme I see in the responses is that movie tie ins are lazy. I really disagree with that statement. Star Tours, RsR, Indiana Jones, Transformers, Harry Potter The Forbidden Journey and Spiderman all tell a different story than the movies they are from and they are all fricken awesome attractions in my opinion. Those are just a couple I can think of real quick.
    I haven't seen many saying this. People have stated some movie property based additions are lazy and non-compelling (Little Mermaid dark ride, Nemo subs, Bugs Land rides, etc etc.) They also acknowledge there are good ones out there based on films, which of course there are. Skeptical thought arises when people realize it takes more than putting a movie story directly into a theme park to make a solid attraction, which sometimes, is all Disney tries to do. Those are the dull ones by and large, instead of ones that mix and match prime elements to create a adventure with the feel of a movie franchise (Star Tours, Indy, Harry Potter and the Forbidden Journey, Mr. Toad's Wild Ride to go back a long ways). Nemo and other modern rides fail dismally at that.

  9. #174

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    435

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

    As I alluded to in my earlier post, it's not as simple as movie tie ins or original ideas. It's more about quality and immersion. Disney parks are different and so popular because, for the most part, you're immersed in a quality environment where the rides are super immersive. People like thrills too, but Disney excels at themes. Also a major reason CA Adv. was not successful for so long.

    It doesn't matter if it is from a film or not. But the consumer is different now than they were in 1955. Seems like more movie tie ins are what people want.

  10. #175

    • 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 loungefly97 View Post
    Seems like more movie tie ins are what people want.
    I don't see how it can be claimed that movie tie-in attractions at Disneyland are the only thing people want, when so many non-movie Disneyland attractions from the pre-Eisner years continue to pack 'em in. "People only want movie tie-ins" seems to be a poor reason why there hasn't been a high quality NON-movie attraction since Big Thunder, 34 years ago.

    Not only has there not been one, it's doubtful that Disney could build one now even if they wanted to. The creative leadership, vision, dedication and depth of expertise that choco choco described in his post above doesn't exist any more among their senior management. The closest they had was VP Tony Baxter (who proudly called the Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage an "E-Ticket" and went on record that putting the poster of Miley Cyrus in the exit to Mr. Lincoln was his idea), and he's retired.

    I don't think it's a matter of "what people want." It's a matter of what Disney management will greenlight for Disneyland. And these days, when it comes to originality, innovation and creativity, it ain't much. If they don't have a movie's script, characters and settings to copy and a ride system to clone, they're lost in the woods -- and even when they do have a paint-by-numbers set to follow, they nickle-and-dime the budget and hamstring the imagineers until the final product delivers less than classic-Disneyland quality.

    Based on their track record of the last two decades, there's no reason to believe that Tron in TL and Monsterland in DCA would be anything more than fair-to-meh. You just aren't going to get brilliance of vision from a beancounter-driven management that from the top down is risk-averse, creatively lazy, and locked in the Eisner mindset of "turning movies into rides."
    Last edited by Mr Wiggins; 04-10-2013 at 08:30 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


  11. #176

    • Insomniac
    • Offline

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    The Wonderful World of Utah?
    Posts
    1,968

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

    I thought the whole DCA remodel was about giving the park more direction design wise, and now some imagineers are thinking about throwing that out the window? Classic recent Disney behavior. Do a brilliant job and slowly erode all your hard work with rash decisions.

    They went through all the work of retheming the entrance to fit golden age Hollywood, change Hollywoodland's name, and had plans to fix the rest of the land. Now that they found success with DCA 2.0, they throw all those well thought out plans and new park direction out the window for another out of theme movie tie in. Although I don't personally feel these plans are that absolute, just the fact that they are being talked about at WDI makes me a little upset. Why make plans and make everyone think the park finally has a sensible direction, if you are just going to throw them out the window?
    Check out my Disney inspired creations.

    https://picasaweb.google.com/110319393135337100862

  12. #177

    •   
    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    84

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

    personally i love it! it would be a good way to get rid of muppets 3-D(which i enjoy but i undserstand that its time) and tron would be awsome and a great way to utilize the old people mover track!!!!!

  13. #178

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    541

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Fernando Mendez View Post
    personally i love it! it would be a good way to get rid of muppets 3-D(which i enjoy but i undserstand that its time) and tron would be awsome and a great way to utilize the old people mover track!!!!!
    Me too!
    For the love of Disney....

  14. #179

    • Member of Baxter's Army
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Haunted Mansion
    Posts
    2,389

    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.
    I think the reason is that over the past decade or so Film-based attractions have been of a lesser quality and feel like glorified commercials for movies.
    I personally believe that a truly quality attraction will stand with or without a movie tie-in.

  15. #180

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    843

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

    Lands based on single, large, and popular franchises is the future plain and simple. Actually, forget popular, I should have said LOVED. That is why CL and WWoHP work and this won't. Those lands were built to satisfy a desire to visit a place that we wouldn't otherwise get to see, yet want to. I don't see that happening with Monsters inc. I don't think many people were thinking, "gee, I'd really love to visit monstropolis!"

    These sorts of lands are unique because they evoke a feeling in many of the people who enter them...I believe it is the closest thing to feeling like Walt did when walking down MS. Being able to experience something physical that once only existed in your imagination...but the downside to this sort of experience is that it only works for those who are fans of the franchise. When I walk through CL, I feel like I've come home. I imagine the people who walked through WWoHP and Walt through MS felt the same.
    In the quest for quality, I have no problem with the characters footing the bill.

Page 12 of 23 FirstFirst ... 2910111213141522 ... 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
  •