Page 13 of 23 FirstFirst ... 310111213141516 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 195 of 340
  1. #181

    • 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

    I don't doubt Monstropolis would transport me to another world but the problem remains it doesn't fit the theme of the theme park.

  2. #182

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    321

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

    Instead of getting a Star Wars land we are getting a Monsters Inc Land? All I can say is, lame!!!

  3. #183

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    5,454

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

    Many off the reasons why I don't really like the Monster's idea have already been expressed in this thread so I won't repeat those comments. One thing that I do want to say is that my opinion has little basis in not wanting film-based attractions. I don't mind them, but I think they need to be carefully done within the context of the park. What I will say in regard to the argument of original vs film-based attractions is that in order for a film-based attraction to be good, it has to be an attraction that would be good without the tie-in.

    There are a few things that I don't feel have really been expressed about the Monster's concept that I did want to add to the conversation. Mainly the impact on the physical and thematic design of the park. Obviously a door coaster sounds like it would be fun and popular, and the area is lame now. But that alone should not justify this design choice.

    This would result in so many mini-lands right next to each other. It just a little weird to go though six or seven themes in such a short distance with no rational for their locations at all. It would make Hollywood Land into a mini-land with just one ride (ToT) that doesn't cater to a large amount of guests. It would detract from the potential of expanding on the Hollywood theme. Now we'd have a single street land basically, even if they did a Hollywood expansion in the remaining parking lot it leaves a very odd and disjointed feeling land.

    The new land itself would be even more absurdly small. A tiny street would be the whole land. Just two rides and a restaurant is pathetic in terms of supporting a land of its own. There is also no rational for connecting the two areas other than they both look like cities on the outside, though Monstropolis doesn't even look like a California city much at all. Basically, it would create two lands too small to ever really immerse you in their themes that have no relationship at all with each other such that they should be so completely connected physically. Not to mention the fact that the land would do absolutely nothing but damage the overall theme of the park.
    The Mickey audience is not made up of people; it has no racial, national, political, religious or social differences or affiliations; the Mickey audience is made up of parts of people, of that deathless, precious, ageless, absolutely primitive remnant of something in every world-wracked human being which makes us play with children’s toys and laugh without self-consciousness at silly things, and sing in bathtubs, and dream and believe that our babies are uniquely beautiful. You know…the Mickey in us.
    -Walt Disney

  4. #184

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,605

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

    ^

    Brilliant!
    "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.

  5. #185

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Splash Mountain
    Posts
    7,929
    Blog Entries
    5

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JediPrincess View Post
    Instead of getting a Star Wars land we are getting a Monsters Inc Land? All I can say is, lame!!!
    Ohh you wait.....Star Wars and Marvel lands are coming...but in a third theme park...where they'll have a big budget and even more land to really make use of these idea's and characters

  6. #186

    • New Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Penny Arcade, Main Street USA
    Posts
    264

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

    After recently visiting the suddenly amazing California Adventure, I would have to agree that Monstropolis just isn't a good fit. I would much prefer a re-imagined Hollywoodland. Oh, and update the current Monster's ride to make it like Tokyo's Ride & Go Seek!

    As for Tron, I'm not a fan, but would love to see something done to make the Peoplemover track come back to life!
    Drop another coin in slot and I will tell you more.

  7. #187

    • New Member Goes Forth
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Cambridge, UK (So far away from DCA...)
    Posts
    535

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

    The tron ride will be fantastic, but Monstropolis will be too samll to feel like you are part of the Pixar film. Personally, they should have the area as more Hollywood streets, but keep the rides, and retheme the entrances
    The new Star Wars plot summery:

    Episode 7: Luke discovers that Darth Vader is not his father, and goes on a search for his real father

    Episode 8: Darth Vader is resurrected and goes on Jerry Springer, claiming he is Luke and Leia's father

    Episode 9: Princes Leia is not Luke's sister, making him furious (we all know why...).

  8. #188

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    England
    Posts
    91

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JerrodDRagon View Post
    Ohh you wait.....Star Wars and Marvel lands are coming...but in a third theme park...where they'll have a big budget and even more land to really make use of these idea's and characters
    I wonder when the 3rd theme park might be made, have they set a date to start? I heard that they were thinking of a water park awhile ago, I hope they don't go in that direction.

  9. #189

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Calif
    Posts
    278

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

    Forgive me but I haven't read all the posts yet. Just wanted to chime in about the Tron ride, personally {yawn} Tron riders are so less exciting that say Star Wars Pod racers..I would much rather see this then Tron and yes I know they already have a Star Wars ride but I guess I just can't that excited about Tron.

  10. #190

    • Sorcerer Supreme Bean
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,080

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

    Uncle Bob summed up my feelings about it. Its not that Monstropolis is another movie tie in (Which can be done right [indy, cars, star tours[), its that it makes no sense in that section of the park and fragments the California 'theme', (which could be argued ad infinitum about cars lan), since nothing in the movie indicated it was in California.
    There is no right or wrong in this debate. It is simply a matter of perspective.
    -Dr. Strange

  11. #191

    • враг народа
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    13,999
    Blog Entries
    3

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ManaByte View Post
    Disney was spending upwards of $1 million a month in maintenance with the Rocket Rods, as the speed of the cars was wearing out the tires too quickly. Both the belts on the track and the tires on the cars would need to be replaced so often that the cost of maintaining the ride was just too much for the Pressler-era murderers.
    Motorbike Launch Coaster

    Quote Originally Posted by CaliforniaAdventurer View Post
    That just doesn't make sense, look at Six Flags, Knott's or any other So Cal theme park that has tracks in the sky.
    Those are gravity powered so the chances of being stuck in the air is reduced.

    Quote Originally Posted by Disneymike View Post
    Yes, and if I were to go to Arizona would I see talking cars? It's all fantasy.
    All good fiction has rules and internal consistencies.

    Quote Originally Posted by HMF View Post
    You mean like the numerous California themed attractions that opened with DCA and failed miserably.
    That's just as bad as saying that Disney's California Adventure failed because it lacked "Disney" rides. Lousy attractions are just lousy attractions.

    Quote Originally Posted by planodisney View Post
    I love how the rabid fans on here are ecstatic about a themed ride for Tomorrowland based on a movie than nobody in America, and I mean nobody gives a crap about, yet despise the thought, upon the grounds of their superior creative knowledge, of a spectacular attraction based on a movie that lies in the collection of virtually every family in America and which we are all familiar with these characters.
    There is absolutely no correlation between the popularity and financial success of a film and its derivative theme park attraction. It's the same creative bankruptcy that results in lousy sequels and reboots.

    Quote Originally Posted by imaginashton View Post
    Since monstropolis doesn't seem to fit very well, what property would you add instead. Not that I prefer films...just asking. I could see who framed roger rabbit.
    Something based in 1940s Hollywood?

    Quote Originally Posted by ManaByte View Post
    It's 2013, and "original, non-franchise based imagineering" does not put people through the turnstyles anymore.
    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.
    Simple not true. There was a sizable jump in attendance to Disney's Animal Kingdom which has been sustained since then. It's a big part of why the park is no longer the least visited of the four.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wren View Post
    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.
    People wanted to visit the Animation Studio and that is what the Mickey Mouse Park was supposed to sort of address. None of that happens in Disneyland. There is no conceit of the park being a filming location or series of film sets.

    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.
    Motivation. Story is the last factor considered in these decisions at Disney. They look at financial results from the box office and merchandise sales and then decide the franchise must be further exploited. The Wizarding World of Harry Potter was supposed to be expanded into the rest of Lost Continent, but is instead expanding in a different park. Yes, Universal now gets to sell more two park tickets, but a very big reason was because Hogsmeade is not located next to London and it makes no sense to walk right into one from the other. Yes, it is all fantasy in a theme park, but part of the story is that you take a train between these locations and that is exactly what will happen in the theme park. People are applauding Tron because while set today its concepts at least have some sense of futurism whereas the biggest thing going for Monstropolis is box office success and familiarity, not an immediate connection to 1940s Hollywood (remember, Hollywood Pictures Backlot is now Hollywoodland).

    Then there is Disney's long tradition of not doing franchise based attractions. The power of themed entertainment as its own medium meant that different stories could be told than those being told on film and television. Today, Disney and many fans of theme parks deny that creative power. They do not think the Imagineers (or anybody else) is actually creative enough to create a compelling enough experience that stands on its own.

  12. #192

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Upland, CA
    Posts
    138

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

    Quote Originally Posted by animagusurreal View Post
    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."


    There's no reason why you couldn't use the same mechanics as a "door coaster" into a Rocketeer ride, this is a fantastic idea and would truly fit the the Hollywoodland theme. Way better than Monstropolis. Love it.

  13. #193

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,105

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

    I don’t really post anymore but this news has dragged me back into the never ending discussion of “Brands”.

    First i’d like to say this isn’t directed any specific poster but rather the overall opinion about using “brands”. – While I personally would love to see original attractions return, the average Disneyland (who’ve I talked with) do not have a preference and when planning trips to Disneyland are more motivated by “brands” due to an established interest. There are numerous arguments and counterpoints but the bottom line is that Disney is a business and selling brands in the form of attractions/lands/merchandise is almost a guarantee that it will generate initial (but not always lasting) revenue. Due to sequels, spin-offs and fan-generated material Disney has control over keeping popular “brands” relevant which from a business perspective is perfect for theme park popularity for the foreseeable future. Everest is a perfect example (despite being in WDW and not Disneyland) of a quality, original attraction failing to attract guest and generate revenue. The detail and effort to craft an original experience was top notch, yet with the velvet rope dropped, theme park guests in Florida overwhelming choose to visit either pre-established or franchise/brand-based lands/attractions. Several years later, similar time and effort was put into building Carsland (maintaining if not exceeding Disney quality in planning/construction/storytelling) and it has destroyed expectations both in generating revenue AND drawing guests. While these two attractions/lands were filled with detail and quality it would be a mistake to underestimate the draw and contribution of the Cars “brand” to the success of Carsland compared to the apparent failure of Everest.

    Second, I want to address the creative ability of WDI. – WDI has their ups and downs, expected highs and lows from any department, but they continue to show an unmatched passion and inventiveness despite, corporate politics, ever changing economy, and feasible interest in projects. There was several years in which quality was apparently dropped in favor of quick cheap prodjects, but under Iger and the return of Roy we’ve seen a return to the quality we all know and love. WDI still is creative and brilliant, but I do think that the market has changed, and the so sadly named “bean-counters” are making the tough decision to choose “brand” over “originality”, limiting perceived creativity. I would totally agree with the lack of creativity if these “brands” which were being used weren’t creative, but they are, especially Pixar. These films/settings/characters are researched and flushed out equally as HM or Pirates if not more. Also the amount of creativity it takes to convert something from film into our three dimensional world, fully realized is jaw-dropping. I’ve seen a prevailing attitude or opinion that seems to believe that it’s just simple to transplant a film idea to the real world….but I’m not sure that’s giving credit where credit is due. After watching the WDI films of creating Carsland I was blown away at the effort and passion those Imagineers put into it. I think it’s incredibly unfair to strip those Imagineers of accomplishments.

    Going forward I’ve accepted where the Disney company is headed. I’m more concerned with the quality of product that they are putting out, rather than what it’s based on. I personally didn’t care much for Cars but Carsland actually completely won me over and now Cars is one of my favorite.

    Concerning Monsters in DCA, I’m bummed that thematically it doesn’t seem to fit, but we still don’t have concrete details so I’m hoping that if it does happen it is better tied into the theme. Other than that I love Monsters and it would be amazing to see it realized in Land form.

    The Tron attraction is interesting but I’m actually more interested in what Tomorrowland overall is going to look like. I’d be sooo freaking stoked to see and entire overhaul and get something fresh in Disneyland. It’s been stagnate in overall layout for so long, it would be cool to see something new. Pixie Hallow and the new princess area are some of the biggest changes we’ve seen and really they’re very minor.

    Anyways that’s my two cents. I’m always excited to see new/changing development at the place I love so I can’t wait.

  14. #194

    •   
    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area, California, United States
    Posts
    2,569

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Dirton View Post
    Going forward I’ve accepted where the Disney company is headed. I’m more concerned with the quality of product that they are putting out, rather than what it’s based on. I personally didn’t care much for Cars but Carsland actually completely won me over and now Cars is one of my favorite.
    This is pretty much how I feel. I have accepted this as well. The time I stop supporting Disneyland is when I stop having fun there. All I ask for is immersive experiences and to me they deliver better than anyone still in my opinion.

  15. #195

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    437

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

    I think what you dont figure in to ANY of this lazyboy970, are the marketing aspects to all of this.

    You do understand Disney is a corporation that is allowed, and deserve, to be able to make a profit, even a substantial profit.

    You do understand that when a company allocates 100-150 million to build a ride, they need to factor in what the marketing potential and potential profit gain might be.

    Do you think that Disney would have an easier time marketing, to the entire country and not to just theme park fanatic historian purists, a ride based upon an already popular, or even wildly popular character, story or franchise like Cars, Star Wars or Harry Potter over some generic attraction.
    Most definitely they would.
    Not to say that you cant generate public excitement about an attraction like Everest, obviously they did, but it is MUCH more risky and requires an INSANE amount of marketing spending, like they did for Everest.

    I dont think you realy give credible thought to the fact that it isnt the same world as when walt built DL, PotC or haunted Mansion, and consumers dont have the same tastes.
    And please dont argue that Pirates and Mansion are still popular today so that proves EVERYTHING we need to know.
    yes, those rides are popular and beloved, but they generate more nostalgia than excitement.
    people want more excitement now days. be it stepping into the world of a favorite movie, or experiencing a thrill they will only get at a theme park.
    I know there are ALOT of people on Disney fan sites who feel COMPLETELY different than most Americans and it might possibly be that it is true what most of you believe about yourselve, that you just have a superior taste and sophistication when it comes to theme parks and attractions.
    But, the problem is that it doesnt matter. You dont matter, in the idividulistic sense.

    When you are spending Billions of dollars, sometimes you DO have to go with what you feel would generate the most buzz, revenue and widespread interest or excitement over any kind of PURIST decision.

    If they can take an extremely popular franchise, character or movie, make a realy great attraction out of it and then find a way to LOOSELY tie it in to an existing land if need be, then they almost have the RESPONSIBILITY to practice business this way over the way many of you on here would prefer.

    Im not in any way saying that it creates a deeper, more intillectual or even more enjoyable experience, but we arent a deeper or more intillectual society than we were 25-50 years ago either. Disney would be STUPID not to take this into account and they cant affort to spend billions hoping to educate people about what they SHOULD appreciate and LIKE.
    It isnt just about what people enjoy when they are in the parks, but it is also about actually GETTING them there.

    You have to stop projecting your likes and dislikes upon the rest of society and then insisting Disney run their business off of that.

    let me ask a question here.

    Do you think Disney could better market to big spending destination tourists a new monstropolis land with an exciting hanging coaster and being able to step into the world of the monsters, maybe eat at Harry Housans, or a new rocketeer coaster and we have rethemed our backlot to be more period appropriate.

    Im not saying that they should make their decision based upon that assessment every time, but i am saying that some of you cant even respect the fact that they have to AT LEAST ponder that aspect with EVERY new investment.
    They have a responsibility to the rest of the company and to shareholders.
    I get wishing that they would do things differently sometimes. For me personally, my issue is the toonification of tDLR. The last 6 rides added to DCA have all been toon based. That annoys me and I surely hope the next addition moves away from that.
    But, I sit back and look and the thousands flocking to the park to ride Toy Story mania and RSR and I cant argue with the results too much.
    This creates more revenue for the resort, TDA and will bring more investment to the resort. making it an overal better vacation for me and my family. And, eventually something will come along that absolutely knocks me off my feet they way i was the first time i rode Indy and Star Tours.
    Last edited by planodisney; 04-11-2013 at 10:42 AM.

Page 13 of 23 FirstFirst ... 310111213141516 ... 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
  •