Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 127
  1. #106

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    812

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    There are no rules or black and white definitions regarding the themes of either of these properties. They are up to your own personal interpretation. If Indiana Jones is about exploration and adventure, why is Thor not about exploration and adventure (he is, after all, a demi-God in a foreign world).
    Marvel is about superheroes--it's patently obvious no matter how much you try to stretch it through rationalization. I can play that game, too, even devil's advocate if you like, but that doesn't make Marvel any more organic to Disneyland than it is, which is not at all, really.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    Iron Man is about technology and he is most definitely not a clear-cut superhero from today.
    Anti-heroes with super abilities of some sort are still superheroes. Even Batman is a superhero of a sort. Everybody innately knows this without having to rationalize it to death.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    His only power, in fact, is his innovation; in a way, you could even say he is the embodiment of Tomorrowland. Iron Man is not only innovative, but he's applying his new future technology to the good of the world.
    I'll agree that Stark specifically is about futuristic technology, as I stated myself earlier, but Marvel on the whole is still about superheroes, which is a universe apart from Disneyland. As Iron Man, however, Stark becomes a superhero, just as intended, and therefore the connection with the theme of Tomorrowland becomes tenuous.

    Tomorrowland is supposed to be about the things we'll be doing in our world, and I doubt that becoming superheroes is the ideal vision. As I've suggested in other threads in the past, Stark can have a place in Tomorrowland under the latter's terms, but an E-ticket Iron Man attraction would be highly dubious. And contrary to what you're saying, the rest of Marvel, on the whole (there may be specific exceptions here and there, such as Stark), clearly does not belong in Disneyland.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    Now if we talk Spider-Man...yeah I'd say maybe the gritty and every-man vibe the Spider-Man stories give off are maybe a bit too realistic to fit into Disneyland (which again, is not a fact but an opinion that may not be shared by everyone, especially 100% of the population that goes to Disneyland). But the Avengers, IMO, embody many of the themes a lot of classic Disney stories do (overcoming obstacles, teamwork, fighting evil, etc.)
    WDI can't even find a place for The Lion King in Disneyland, and rightfully so--it comes from Disney's own feature animation studio and it's very "Disney" but it still doesn't fit. So what hope does Marvel generally have of truly fitting without a huge stretch of rationalization and a corporate mandate based on greed alone? None.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    And even more importantly, they are insanely popular.
    Bad reason, taken on its own, and it is indeed on its own.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    *As a sidenote, Disney did not team up with George Lucas because of his film's ideals. They teamed up with him because he made some of the biggest franchises of all time, and they lent themselves well to cool theme park attractions. A long way down the road, when Disney acquires some other third party property, people will be debating whether or not it fits and look at the inevitable Marvel ride and say 'Iron Man embodies the themes of the future and adventure, X property does or does not' and we will have come full cirlce*
    Nah, Star Wars is still a poor fit for Tomorrowland over two decades later. Relatively speaking, however, it is still a better fit than Marvel, which just tells us what an awful idea the latter really would be.

  2. #107

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    1,399

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by JerrodDRagon View Post
    The mad Hatter is a fiction character from a place called wonderland....how does he fit Main Street USA more?
    Classic Disney characters have always been found on Main Street... Captain America is a great character and he epitomizes America... But to see him on Main Street would just look so awkward. He's a major superhero that would be suited somewhere else. Classic characters like Hatter, Pan, Mickey, etc. on Main Street is a tradition, but Captain America would be weird. That's all I'm saying.
    Princess of Agrabah and Queen of Never Land

  3. #108

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    8,890

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    As a sidenote, Disney did not team up with George Lucas because of his film's ideals. They teamed up with him because he made some of the biggest franchises of all time, and they lent themselves well to cool theme park attractions.
    Disney teamed up with Lucas because Jeffrey and Michael had wanted to do deals with him when they were at Paramount. When they came to Disney they upped the ante by leveraging his love of Disneyland, literally giving him the Park to play in and the Imagineers as playmates. Ditto Jackson & Spielberg with Eo & Indy. Goal: to dominate the kid demographic for franchise merch marketing, which was Michael's M.O. from the day he walked on the lot. They didn't give a rat's behind about theme park attractions, cool or otherwise, other than for how they could be used to promote franchise movie & ancillary sales -- a business model that still dominates Disney Parks today (Lasseter and Carsland, Cameron and Avatarland, et al).


    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post
    Nah, Star Wars is still a poor fit for Tomorrowland over two decades later. Relatively speaking, however, it is still a better fit than Marvel, which just tells us what an awful idea the latter really would be.
    ka-Bingo.
    Last edited by Mr Wiggins; 04-17-2013 at 11:48 AM.
    "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. #109

    • " Planet of Puddingheads"
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    In the TARDIS
    Posts
    1,990

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post
    Marvel is about superheroes--it's patently obvious no matter how much you try to stretch it through rationalization. I can play that game, too, even devil's advocate if you like, but that doesn't make Marvel any more organic to Disneyland than it is, which is not at all, really.



    Anti-heroes with super abilities of some sort are still superheroes. Even Batman is a superhero of a sort. Everybody innately knows this without having to rationalize it to death.



    I'll agree that Stark specifically is about futuristic technology, as I stated myself earlier, but Marvel on the whole is still about superheroes, which is a universe apart from Disneyland. As Iron Man, however, Stark becomes a superhero, just as intended, and therefore the connection with the theme of Tomorrowland becomes tenuous.

    Tomorrowland is supposed to be about the things we'll be doing in our world, and I doubt that becoming superheroes is the ideal vision. As I've suggested in other threads in the past, Stark can have a place in Tomorrowland under the latter's terms, but an E-ticket Iron Man attraction would be highly dubious. And contrary to what you're saying, the rest of Marvel, on the whole (there may be specific exceptions here and there, such as Stark), clearly does not belong in Disneyland.



    WDI can't even find a place for The Lion King in Disneyland, and rightfully so--it comes from Disney's own feature animation studio and it's very "Disney" but it still doesn't fit. So what hope does Marvel generally have of truly fitting without a huge stretch of rationalization and a corporate mandate based on greed alone? None.



    Bad reason, taken on its own, and it is indeed on its own.



    Nah, Star Wars is still a poor fit for Tomorrowland over two decades later. Relatively speaking, however, it is still a better fit than Marvel, which just tells us what an awful idea the latter really would be.
    Nice counter points.
    No worries, stay calm, one question. 
Do you happen to know how to fly this thing?

  5. #110

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Paper St
    Posts
    1,346

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Cook View Post
    Nah, Star Wars is still a poor fit for Tomorrowland over two decades later. Relatively speaking, however, it is still a better fit than Marvel, which just tells us what an awful idea the latter really would be.
    Ok I don't even know where to begin with the rest of your post because it makes no sense--you're spending so much of your time arguing why superheroes don't belong in Disneyland when there is no rule book or guidelines for what fits or doesn't. It's preposterous.

    But the line I singled out is interesting to me--can you honestly tell me that because in YOUR opinion that Star Wars doesn't match YOUR definition of the theme of a particular place built for the MASSES, that you'd think Disneyland would be a better place without Star Tours, one of its headline attractions? Is that what you're saying?

  6. #111

    • враг народа
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,040
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    It's not a stretch at all. To say Indiana Jones has themes of adventure and any of the Marvel movies don't is a stretch. And a hypocritical one at that. Besides that, themes reflected in a franchise are a matter of opinion--would a cop think End of Watch was as thrilling as you or I did (unless of course, you're a cop, but in any case you see my point).
    Adventureland is not about the generic term "adventure." It it a place built on ideas of exploration of the earth and notions of the exotic. This is not a totally subjective matter. Adventureland is about exploring our world, in part shown by its original name, True Life Adventureland. There is no relation to the god-like monarch of another dimension, even if he does go on awesome adventures.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    You're right, popularity has nothing to do with what makes a theme park attraction (sarcasm). You do realize that any theme park, even Disneyland, has to make attractions based on what is popular. Look at the time Haunted Mansion was being planned and built--those were years defined by the horror genre and a fascination with haunted houses. Similarly, the concept of Western River Expedition, the holy grail of un-built Disney experiences, was planned as a substitute for Pirates of the Caribbean because it was thought cowboys would be more popular for Eastern audiences. And of course, look at the lands in Disneyland themselves! Adventureland ties into the tiki craze/Asian exploration sensation following WWII, while Frontierland tied into the Western craze of 1950's television, and Fantasyland reflected the popularity of Walt Disney's own films. To say popularity is a bad reason to place something in a theme park is beyond absurd.
    Like so many, you are confusing Walt Disney's areas of interest with a calculated synergy. In many ways, like Frontierland and the Davy Crocket craze, the popular culture at the time was a direct response to Walt Disney and his work. Walt was leading the cultural trends, not following them after significant financial analysis.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    First off, you're comparing Pulp Fiction and Kevin Smith movies to Star Wars and Indiana Jones...really?? That right there makes me not even care to address this but I'll go ahead anyway:
    They were Disney films, so why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    I addressed your points in Bold.
    And its a rather annoying way to reply for the continuation of dialogue.

  7. #112

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Splash Mountain
    Posts
    7,943
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by jasmineray View Post
    Classic Disney characters have always been found on Main Street... Captain America is a great character and he epitomizes America... But to see him on Main Street would just look so awkward. He's a major superhero that would be suited somewhere else. Classic characters like Hatter, Pan, Mickey, etc. on Main Street is a tradition, but Captain America would be weird. That's all I'm saying.
    So in 50 years....he can be added because Captain America by then will be a classic character?

    If that's really the case then he can be added now because only some older people may not get it...but like Peter Pan or the Hatter..Kids will love it

    Let us not forget...Many Disney Characters were not made by Disney they were from books then a movie about them were made by Disney..then they entered the parks

  8. #113

    • враг народа
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,040
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by JerrodDRagon View Post
    So in 50 years....he can be added because Captain America by then will be a classic character?

    If that's really the case then he can be added now because only some older people may not get it...but like Peter Pan or the Hatter..Kids will love it

    Let us not forget...Many Disney Characters were not made by Disney they were from books then a movie about them were made by Disney..then they entered the parks
    Would kids love them less if they only met these characters in Fantasyland? Entertaining kids is easy and not the model that set Disneyland apart. And at the very least, your examples both existed and were known in the time of Main Street, USA. Steve Rogers wasn't even born yet.

  9. #114

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Paper St
    Posts
    1,346

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by lazyboy97O View Post
    Adventureland is not about the generic term "adventure." It it a place built on ideas of exploration of the earth and notions of the exotic. This is not a totally subjective matter. Adventureland is about exploring our world, in part shown by its original name, True Life Adventureland. There is no relation to the god-like monarch of another dimension, even if he does go on awesome adventures.


    Like so many, you are confusing Walt Disney's areas of interest with a calculated synergy. In many ways, like Frontierland and the Davy Crocket craze, the popular culture at the time was a direct response to Walt Disney and his work. Walt was leading the cultural trends, not following them after significant financial analysis.


    They were Disney films, so why not?


    And its a rather annoying way to reply for the continuation of dialogue.
    Ok first off, your definitions of 'adventure' are subjective--they can mean whatever you want them to mean. Indiana Jones was often about religion, revenge, and honestly Indiana Jones was kind of a jerk sometimes--maybe that's how I view the films, just like you view Marvel superhero films as...well whatever you view them as that makes them somehow not fit in any land at Disneyland.

    Furthermore...Gunsmoke was not a Disney show and that was really the highlight of the Western craze. So that point is just wrong.

    Pulp Fiction and Jay & Silent Bob were technically Disney releases but you are completely missing the point and it's funny how you edited the whole rest of the paragraph that followed the sentence you chose to address because it actually made sense, and I'm guessing you knew that because you decided to ignore it. Well the point still applies and you clearly know that it's still right.

    And sorry my way of response was annoying to you, but frankly I find it annoying that you are picking out certain sentences of my posts (the equivalent of soundbytes if you will) and only responding to those while the bulk of my argument you are choosing to ignore, most likely because you know it's a correct point of view and have no way of addressing it.

  10. #115

    •   
      MiceChat Administrator
    • Working Late
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    9,021
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    I struggle with this thread's definitions of Tomorrowland and Adventureland. Sure Adventureland started off inspired by the True Life Adventures and Tomorrowland started off as a showcase of future innovations but it could be argued (and when you talk to early WED Imagineers they confirm this) that those may have only beeny done that way because of budget constraints. Tomorrowland showed off our glorious future because companies were willing to pay penniless Walt glorious sums to show off their products.

    Regardless of that, I see no issue with the lands changing and shifting over time. Nobody knows what Walt would have done but at the same time I doubt anybody would lock themselves rigidly into what was decided on day one. Expanding from the True Life Adventure roots to incorporate other Adventures seems more than logical. Just keep your roots in mind and check back with them to ensure you aren't completely changing everything.

    With Tomorrowland, I do struggle more with the current proposals. It depends how they are fit into the land as a whole, and I will be very upset if the entire land becomes shrouded by one Franchise. While Adventureland's situation can be justified because it was a relatively small shift, there is no small way to redefine an entire land by a Franchise no matter how many increments you do it in. Excpecially when you have a record of how it began and can see how dramatic the change was.

  11. #116

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Paper St
    Posts
    1,346

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor View Post
    I struggle with this thread's definitions of Tomorrowland and Adventureland. Sure Adventureland started off inspired by the True Life Adventures and Tomorrowland started off as a showcase of future innovations but it could be argued (and when you talk to early WED Imagineers they confirm this) that those may have only beeny done that way because of budget constraints. Tomorrowland showed off our glorious future because companies were willing to pay penniless Walt glorious sums to show off their products.

    Regardless of that, I see no issue with the lands changing and shifting over time. Nobody knows what Walt would have done but at the same time I doubt anybody would lock themselves rigidly into what was decided on day one. Expanding from the True Life Adventure roots to incorporate other Adventures seems more than logical. Just keep your roots in mind and check back with them to ensure you aren't completely changing everything.

    With Tomorrowland, I do struggle more with the current proposals. It depends how they are fit into the land as a whole, and I will be very upset if the entire land becomes shrouded by one Franchise. While Adventureland's situation can be justified because it was a relatively small shift, there is no small way to redefine an entire land by a Franchise no matter how many increments you do it in. Excpecially when you have a record of how it began and can see how dramatic the change was.
    Thank you! I have yet to see a rule book about what can go where and what properties do or don't fit these 'rules'.

  12. #117

    • Hot FIRE!
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tomorrowland
    Posts
    266

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by jasmineray View Post
    Classic Disney characters have always been found on Main Street... Captain America is a great character and he epitomizes America... But to see him on Main Street would just look so awkward. He's a major superhero that would be suited somewhere else. Classic characters like Hatter, Pan, Mickey, etc. on Main Street is a tradition, but Captain America would be weird. That's all I'm saying.
    it's awkward since he wasn't there since day one in the park. put him in back in 1955 and Ironman in the 70's alongside Say Space mountain then and we could see them as classic today. Now simply put, when something is new we oppose it but accept it in time (or for some here, tolerate it but still despise it). Star Wars was despised by many in the 80's but in time we grew to deal with it and like it it not for this current gen of Disney it's now Marvel.

    This argument I see still goes nowhere. Not a single person here has actually been swayed to the other side of either argument and we're going to be butting heads on this issue for years to come whether it's Marvel or something new in the future...And I'm on the side that believe with a good plan, Marvel can fit in Disney.

    ...As I see it

  13. #118

    • враг народа
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,040
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    Ok first off, your definitions of 'adventure' are subjective--they can mean whatever you want them to mean. Indiana Jones was often about religion, revenge, and honestly Indiana Jones was kind of a jerk sometimes--maybe that's how I view the films, just like you view Marvel superhero films as...well whatever you view them as that makes them somehow not fit in any land at Disneyland.
    Just because you claim something is subjective does not make it subjective. The content of Adventureland is right there and has been expanded upon and redefined in four successive versions of the land. There is nothing approaching the world of Thor. None of what you mention regarding Indiana Jones changes that he is an archeologist and that sets up the basis of what we see in the films.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    Furthermore...Gunsmoke was not a Disney show and that was really the highlight of the Western craze. So that point is just wrong.
    "Born on a mountain top in Tennessee / the greatest state in the land of the free..."

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    Pulp Fiction and Jay & Silent Bob were technically Disney releases but you are completely missing the point and it's funny how you edited the whole rest of the paragraph that followed the sentence you chose to address because it actually made sense, and I'm guessing you knew that because you decided to ignore it. Well the point still applies and you clearly know that it's still right.
    Pulp Fiction and the View Askeniverse were not "technically Disney releases." They were made and released when Miramax was a wholly owned subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company, no different than Pixar Animation Studios, Marvel Entertainment or Lucasfilm. If those are all now "Disney" because they are owned by The Walt Disney Company, then that litmus test means Miramax was equally "Disney."

    I ignored the rest because I've already addressed your silly points that themed entertainment is based on a general notion of adventure and profitability of franchises.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    And sorry my way of response was annoying to you, but frankly I find it annoying that you are picking out certain sentences of my posts (the equivalent of soundbytes if you will) and only responding to those while the bulk of my argument you are choosing to ignore, most likely because you know it's a correct point of view and have no way of addressing it.
    If people want to see your entire post, then can easily do so by reading the thread or clicking the arrow icon next to your username in the quote that will take them to the entire post. I am not ignoring anything, just highlighting specific points as to help minimize the total length of the post.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor View Post
    I struggle with this thread's definitions of Tomorrowland and Adventureland. Sure Adventureland started off inspired by the True Life Adventures and Tomorrowland started off as a showcase of future innovations but it could be argued (and when you talk to early WED Imagineers they confirm this) that those may have only beeny done that way because of budget constraints. Tomorrowland showed off our glorious future because companies were willing to pay penniless Walt glorious sums to show off their products.

    Regardless of that, I see no issue with the lands changing and shifting over time. Nobody knows what Walt would have done but at the same time I doubt anybody would lock themselves rigidly into what was decided on day one. Expanding from the True Life Adventure roots to incorporate other Adventures seems more than logical. Just keep your roots in mind and check back with them to ensure you aren't completely changing everything.
    The basis in fact is not an ignoring of the inclusion of the romantic and fantastic. It's about understanding a consistent underland. In Adventureland these are very clearly rooted in notions of the exotic, not the ability to move between dimensions, regardless of the adventurous of such a journey. There is a different between a change and a fundamental shift. If one wishes to argue for something totally new and different, then do so, do not pretend that there is some sort of evolutionary maintenance of what exists.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor View Post
    With Tomorrowland, I do struggle more with the current proposals. It depends how they are fit into the land as a whole, and I will be very upset if the entire land becomes shrouded by one Franchise. While Adventureland's situation can be justified because it was a relatively small shift, there is no small way to redefine an entire land by a Franchise no matter how many increments you do it in. Excpecially when you have a record of how it began and can see how dramatic the change was.
    Tomorrowland at both Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom shows what happens when popularity of the intellectual property is given primacy over the integration with the land as a whole. It disproves the entire notion that the singular attraction is of more important than cohesion with the land. The parkscape is part and parcel to the experiential soul of a theme park.

  14. #119

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Paper St
    Posts
    1,346

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    lazyboy, disregarding your condescending and rude way of speaking to me, I will say that I didn't propose Thor be put in Adventureland, just pointing out that yes themes are subjective. Disneyland and its themes mean something different to everyone else. Did you ever wonder why maybe that's why it's so popular?

    And Disneyland does reflect popularity. Like I've already stated:
    Adventureland=tiki craze post WWII
    Frontierland=advent of the westerns with the invention of television not limited to Davy Crockett
    Fantasyland=evergrowing popularity of Disney animation (Sleeping Beauty Castle being a promotion of Walt Disney's new film)
    Tomorrowland=the growing fascination with the space race.

    It's all about what's hot at the time, and the attractions at Disneyland reflect the culture of the time they were placed. Haunted Mansion came at a time with fascination for haunted houses. Big Thunder Mountain replaced the Mine Train when roller coasters were becoming popular and Disneyland decided it needed a thrill ride. And most of all STAR TOURS, which was put in because of the popularity of the Star Wars franchise. If the addition of Star Tours had anything to do with anything other than franchise popularity, it would be a Star Trek attraction, an attraction that actually fits the theme of Tomorrowland, or they would've just left the beloved Adventures Thru Inner Space.

    Infernoman nailed it on the head IMO. This arrogant way of saying what fits or doesn't fit in a theme park built for millions of people is foolish. People protested the addition of Star Wars and Indy in the parks (albeit less vocally because the Internet wasn't around at the time). But now they're classic staple attractions. The same will happen with the addition of Marvel attractions.

  15. #120

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    1,399

    Re: Iron Man Exhibit at Innoventions

    Quote Originally Posted by Infernoman View Post
    it's awkward since he wasn't there since day one in the park. put him in back in 1955 and Ironman in the 70's alongside Say Space mountain then and we could see them as classic today. Now simply put, when something is new we oppose it but accept it in time (or for some here, tolerate it but still despise it). Star Wars was despised by many in the 80's but in time we grew to deal with it and like it it not for this current gen of Disney it's now Marvel.

    This argument I see still goes nowhere. Not a single person here has actually been swayed to the other side of either argument and we're going to be butting heads on this issue for years to come whether it's Marvel or something new in the future...And I'm on the side that believe with a good plan, Marvel can fit in Disney.

    ...As I see it
    I think Stark Expo would work in Tomorrowland. I'm not against that, but I am against Captain America on Main Street. I don't see why he can't go in Condor.
    Princess of Agrabah and Queen of Never Land

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [News] AP preview for Iron Man Exhibit and extended hours of Tomorrowland April 12th
    By Experiment 626 in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 04-13-2013, 09:56 PM
  2. [News] Iron Man Takes over Innoventions!...sort of
    By ohmyjustin in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 04-06-2013, 09:58 AM
  3. [News] Al Report: Iron Man E-Ticket Thril Ride to Replace Innoventions
    By Right Ear in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 466
    Last Post: 10-30-2012, 08:18 PM

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
  •