Page 20 of 23 FirstFirst ... 1017181920212223 LastLast
Results 286 to 300 of 340
  1. #286

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,497

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Illusion0fLife View Post
    No, they haven't, but at this point that's what signs are pointing to for a third gate. If they were to put theme first before attractions I would be incredibly surprised and also very happy.
    No, there is no pointing to it yet. I'm sure the third theme park will find a theme and a home for Marvel at minimum, but who knows if it will appear in Tomorrowland first? Actually it did.

    The difference is, Cars (while not technically set in California) has enough to do with California culture and a similar topography to feel Californian and thus contribute to the theme of the park. Monstropolis has nothing that is inherently Californian about it, specifically nothing that contributes to the theme of Hollywood circa 1930.

    On the same token, Avatar is not about the celebration of man's realtionship with animals, both of real life and of legend; instead it's about a race of humanoid aliens who have no basis in real life or myth. In both cases these additions are operating on backwards logic, they're not saying "okay, here's the theme of this area, what can we do to contribute to that theme?" instead they are saying "how can we bend the theme to justify the inclusion of these popular franchises in this space?"

    As I said, backwards logic.
    If you recall the movie, Monsters borrows concepts that are Hollywood-like. It has sets that are like movie sets where the monsters are trained to scare kids.

    Animal Kingdom always left the door open for "fantasy" concepts of animals. The dragons of Avatar fits. It even has a mother tree like Animal Kingdom. There is no backwards logic.

    Besides, the myth is already taken with Everest and that disco ball. A myth of a myth.

  2. #287

    • 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

    What is the difference between an amusement park and a THEME park?

  3. #288

    • 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 CaliforniaAdventurer View Post
    What is the difference between an amusement park and a THEME park?
    One of the best discussions I've read on that score was in this post:

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve DeGaetano
    Disneyland was originally exceedingly well-thought-out in its design, by folks who knew how to tell stories through the medium of film. When they designed the Park, they designed it as a filmmaker would, with a Scene 1, Scene 2, Scene 3, etc. They knew that if they dropped you into Scene 4, it would be jarring. It was a thoroughly masterful--even revolutionary-- concept, and launched Disneyland as a true cultural, if not artistic, icon and masterwork.

    What Disneyland has been doing recently is create jarring areas that don't follow the "format" of the orignal park.

    Just because an area is highly-detailed doesn't mean it contributes to the overall Park experience. No one has disputed the craftsmanship of the work itself--only its concept.

    Busch Gardens Williamsburg features several nicely-detailed themed areas, each based on a European country or region. Some of the details are just wonderful and can be just as lavish and detailed as anyting at a Disney Park. However, I don't know anyone who would call it a "theme park" in the Disney sense.

    In fact, BGW is a wonderful amusement park (which features both merchandise and food themed to the area, and both of which are better quality than what can be found at Disneyland. But that's a discussion for another thread).

    But it's still an amusement park which--in my opinion--is the direction Disneyland has been going for many years now.
    "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. #289

    • Filmmaker
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    West Jordan, UT
    Posts
    285

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

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenW View Post
    If you recall the movie, Monsters borrows concepts that are Hollywood-like. It has sets that are like movie sets where the monsters are trained to scare kids.
    I'm sorry, but that's such a flimsy connection to Hollywood it's hardly worth noting, it's also nothing that is distinctly related to 1930s Hollywood. That's exactly the kind of flimsy excuse used to shoe-horn an attraction into a space where it doesn't fit that I'm talking about.

    Animal Kingdom always left the door open for "fantasy" concepts of animals. The dragons of Avatar fits. It even has a mother tree like Animal Kingdom. There is no backwards logic.
    It's incredibly backwards logic. You're looking at Avatar and trying to find ways to justify its existence in Animal Kingdom, you're not looking at Animal Kingdom and trying to decide what will best benefit the theme of the park. The fact is that Animal Kingdom is about man's relationship with earth and its creatures "real, ancient, and imagined." Avatar, on the other hand, is about an alien world lightyears away from earth and has themes that relate much more to the conflict between white settlers and native americans. Sure, there are animals in it, and a big tree, but that's not really the point. There are animals in Star Wars as well, and the forest moon of Endor has plenty of trees, should we just put Star wars land in Animal Kingdom too?

    That's the problem inherent with looking at it this way. You look at the property and try to find ways to justify its conclusion, and you might be able to find some superficial connections, but you're not really going to find something that directly benefits the overall theme of the park that way. Like I said, it's backwards.

    Besides, the myth is already taken with Everest and that disco ball. A myth of a myth.
    Because there aren't any other creatures that exist in the mythology of earth aside from the yeti

  5. #290

    • 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 Mr Wiggins View Post
    One of the best discussions I've read on that score was in this post:
    It was a rhetorical question but I think even some of Disney's fans haven't learned the difference.

  6. #291

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    72

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

    I'm a bit stumped on the Monsters Inc. mini-land. Disney is looking to increase capacity due to increased demand by converting and combining a high-capacity theater and unused building into a single, lower-capacity ride? Why wouldn't you look for a way to fit a ride into the unused space (perhaps a non-height restricted ride) and refresh the theater with a new show (and seasonal variations, which could be added to the original show for repeatability)? That way you would truly be adding an attraction and adding capacity to existing.

    And for those wanting a Great Muppet Movie Ride, I still would love to see a Great Muppet Ride Ride. I'd like to see a ride where you start off on some non-descript Muppet ride, whereupon something goes wrong, and you bust through a wall, crashing through Muppet versions of Disney rides. Great Moments with Sam the Eagle, Camilla's Chicken (and/or Penguin?) Tiki Room, Pigs in Space Tours, The Fozzie Bear Jamboree...

  7. #292

    • Filmmaker
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    West Jordan, UT
    Posts
    285

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

    Quote Originally Posted by mkeeler View Post
    I'd like to see a ride where you start off on some non-descript Muppet ride, whereupon something goes wrong, and you bust through a wall, crashing through Muppet versions of Disney rides. Great Moments with Sam the Eagle, Camilla's Chicken (and/or Penguin?) Tiki Room, Pigs in Space Tours, The Fozzie Bear Jamboree...
    That's actually sort of brilliant. I would move heaven and earth to be on that attraction opening day if it were ever to happen.

  8. #293

    • враг народа
    • Online

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,036
    Blog Entries
    3

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

    Quote Originally Posted by JerrodDRagon View Post
    especially if it star Marvel and Star Wars...those brands sell even if they are crap
    That is exactly the thinking that let Disney's California Adventure open as it did. It was expected that anything branded Disney would be huge.

    Quote Originally Posted by spacejockey View Post
    I think Monsters fits fine in Hollywood. Monsters made Hollywood famous from the start with classics like Frankenstein and the Creature from the Black Lagoon.
    So the justification is Universal Studios?

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenW View Post
    Animal Kingdom always left the door open for "fantasy" concepts of animals. The dragons of Avatar fits. It even has a mother tree like Animal Kingdom. There is no backwards logic.
    Animal Kingdom anticipated legendary and mythical animals, ones that were once considered to be very real and made an imprint on human cultures. This is seen clearly in the queue for Expedition Everest where we are shown the cultural place of the yeti while being presented with the possibility of the creatures actual existence. There was nothing about purely made up animals.

  9. #294

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Splash Mountain
    Posts
    7,941
    Blog Entries
    5

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

    Quote Originally Posted by lazyboy97O View Post
    That is exactly the thinking that let Disney's California Adventure open as it did. It was expected that anything branded Disney would be huge.


    So the justification is Universal Studios?


    Animal Kingdom anticipated legendary and mythical animals, ones that were once considered to be very real and made an imprint on human cultures. This is seen clearly in the queue for Expedition Everest where we are shown the cultural place of the yeti while being presented with the possibility of the creatures actual existence. There was nothing about purely made up animals.
    Have you seen the Prequels....cause those were not too amazing story wise...movie wise...the only thing they had going for them were the name and how it looked

    As long as Disney puts effect into the third gate and does not cheap out...the third gate will get HUGE amounts of people to the parks

  10. #295

    • New Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2

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

    Let the lands determine the theme and not the name of the park. The Radiator Springs argument is a moot point because the fictional town is in Arizona, according to The Art of Cars.

    The park is loosely themed to California at this point. The company even changed the name to Disney California Adventure, no 's.

    The difficult part for the Imagineers will be finding a way to place Monsters inc. into a Hollywood Land that is supposed to be themed to the 1930's. Of course, if Monstropolus is considered a new land, problem solved.

    I am for it. A door scene thrill ride sounds fun.

  11. #296

    • враг народа
    • Online

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,036
    Blog Entries
    3

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

    Quote Originally Posted by imstillafan View Post
    The park is loosely themed to California at this point. The company even changed the name to Disney California Adventure, no 's.
    This just brought the name of the park in line with Disney's existing naming convention. Disney Tangled. Disney Epic Mickey 2. Disney Oz: The Great and Powerful.

  12. #297

    • New Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by lazyboy97O View Post
    This just brought the name of the park in line with Disney's existing naming convention. Disney Tangled. Disney Epic Mickey 2. Disney Oz: The Great and Powerful.
    The move from Walt Disney to Disney within the films division was more of a marketing decision.

    Disney's California Adventure to Disney California Adventure was the re branding of a major asset within the Parks and Resorts division. The transformation of DCA and its name change was more than marketing. It gave them more creative freedom and a new direction after investing over a billion dollars.

    Yes it creates unison within the company as a whole, but the re branding and money spent on an entire theme park is more significant than dropping Walt from the films division.

  13. #298

    • враг народа
    • Online

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,036
    Blog Entries
    3

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

    Quote Originally Posted by imstillafan View Post
    The move from Walt Disney to Disney within the films division was more of a marketing decision.

    Disney's California Adventure to Disney California Adventure was the re branding of a major asset within the Parks and Resorts division. The transformation of DCA and its name change was more than marketing. It gave them more creative freedom and a new direction after investing over a billion dollars.

    Yes it creates unison within the company as a whole, but the re branding and money spent on an entire theme park is more significant than dropping Walt from the films division.
    I'm not talking about the dropping of "Walt" from the Studio's title card. Titles used to be preceded with "Disney's" but starting a few years ago this began to be switched to "Disney" which is now used on all titles. That is all changing the park's name did. It has nothing to do with a new direction or other such nonsense, especially since the new logo emphasizes "California" and it is still "DCA."

  14. #299

    • Galactic Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    197

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

    Monster's Inc. Door Coaster sounds fun and I like the idea of a monster land in Hollywood land. This has been proposed a while back for other Disney parks. Is there any concept art out there for MIDC?
    Galactic Member

  15. #300

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    753

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

    These rumors are bittersweet. While I really enjoy the idea of Tron in TL, I'm not so thrilled about Monstropolis. Even having to type the name and considering it could be reality saddens me. Why do we need Pixar everywhere in DCA? Lets say in the future they completely demolish a bug's land, it would still be too many unecessary Pixar attractions in DCA. I don't mind TSMM, it fits in an odd way but I can see why some would disagree. After stepping into CL and riding RSR I love that it's presence is in DCA and it adds to the overall theme to the park. Both the Pixar parade and a bug's land can go IMO. But Monsters Inc? Why? It makes me feel like the words "original attraction" is forbidden.

    Hollywood Land has SO MUCH POTENTIAL, I can't stress that enough. I feel like while BVS was built with limited space and constraints, HL is an extension to it and could add so much to the theme of 1930's/40's Los Angeles. I always thought that was there plan for "phase 2". New facades, attractions, but a Pixar movie about monsters in Hollywood Land? I really hope this doesn't go through. Why not a Great Muppet Movie Ride or an original E-Ticket or something that actually contributes to the overall theme of Hollywood Land?

    Even if this coaster is amazing and thrilling, it would feel like a lazy decision to add a ride with no regard to theme. Anyone else think this is a step backwards to DCA? It's sucks because it overshadows my excitement for TL getting something. I'm glad they decided to put Frontierland on hold and work on what's already in the park that needs to be fixed. Funny how the article described TL as the "DCA of Disneyland", if Monstropolis comes into fruition then Hollywood Land will turn into the "Tomorrowland of DCA."

    *long sigh*

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
  •