Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18
  1. #1

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Upland, CA
    Posts
    168

    Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    So the discussions on trying to expand Adventureland (infinitesimal possibility, like .0001% chance, but fun to discuss), Frontierland beyond the berm (hasn't been discussed recently mind you, but with Oz and Lone Ranger it's been an occasional topic over the last couple of years), the complete overhaul of Tomorrowland (or not, or yes, or not, it changes every few weeks it seems), and the possibility of a third gate (which has been around for what, 15 years?) all had me considering the film properties of Disney and their possible use towards attractions in the park and where they might go.

    While the ideal for the parks would be to go to the reverse of the current model (instead of building attractions based on films, design attractions to inspire films), I don't see it happening anytime soon. With that in mind, I decided to look over the list of film properties and analyze which (if any) of them had possibility in the DLR. This is not intended for any of the other resorts, as some of the "unused" properties are used in other parks.

    In the DLR, approximately 50 properties are represented, many of which are only represented through shows and parades or very briefly in the character inclusions of Small World. Some of those properties cover multiple attractions (Cars, Bug's Life, Alice) and some properties cover multiple films (Indy, Pirates, Star Wars).

    There are around 250 theatrically released films in the Disney library that have no park presence. The vast majority of these are live action films from the 50's through the 90's. This is not including Lucasfilm, Henson, Marvel, or Studio Ghibli prodcutions. This also does not include Touchstone, Miramax, or Hollywood Pictures productions. This is also based off of theatrical release, not straight to video productions. If you include all of those, the list of unused potential properties rises considerably. Some of the properties were grouped if they had multiple films (Witch Mountain, Narnia, Herbie).

    Of the 250, only about 50 really have any potential of being used. Of those, more than half are animated or feature animation as a considerable portion of their film (Enchanted, Bedknobs and Broomsticks, Reluctant Dragon). A number of the potential live action properties have previously had a presence in the parks that no longer exists (20,000 Leagues, Country Bears [yes, bad movie, but it was theatrically released], Swiss Family).

    DCA: Could take a couple of them (with some creative marketing language to work them in), but really only one fits for the currently themed areas: The Rocketeer. They could also use the Johnny Fedora segment from Make Mine Music, but that property is technically represented by the boardwalk game for Casey at the Bat (which is far too little representation in my mind, but it is representation). The Rocketeer on the other hand is a beloved cult movie that fits the theme of Buena Vista perfectly and has only slight references in the shops (or it did the last time I went, but they keep changing the well built displays, so who knows) which equate in my mind to no representation. Give me a Rocketeer coaster over a door coaster any day (like Tatsu, but milder).

    Adventureland: There are 5 to 9 properties that could be used here (if there were any room): Prince of Persia, Swiss Family Robinson, Treasure Island, Emperor's New Groove, National Treasure 1/2, Oz, Zorro and 20,000 Leagues under the Sea. Many of these have Adventure as a prime aspect of the film but some fit better in other categories (National Treasure, Oz, Zorro all have a better Frontier fit if you ask me). There are also a couple under-represented big features that fit here, Aladdin and the Lion King. If Adventureland were to ever be able to change, it would likely be at the cost of removal or severe alteration of the Jungle Cruise. Should that occur, I see Aladdin and Lion King the most likely properties to be used.

    Frontierland: With the possibility of moving around the back through Thunder Ranch, the expansion possibility beyond the berm gives us about 6 properties: Lone Ranger, National Treasure (more the second movie really, and if they were to ever use the property it would be more likely at one of the other parks where New England is better represented [Florida, Tokyo]), Oz, Zorro, Home on the Range, and Melody Time (specifically Pecos Bill). Honestly, Lone Ranger and Pecos Bill are the only one's I see being possibilities (despite the Lone Ranger's box office), or a new property if they do any other Western stuff. The best fit for the back end was really Cars, which would have been able to link to the outside of Toontown and finally open up that dead end. Hopefully if they ever pursue the beyond the berm expansion they'll just finally give us Western Expedition.

    New Orleans: Granted, not likely to ever occur, but if they take over some of the island, they could use Swiss Family or Treasure Island. They could also use the under used Princess and the Frog as an actual attraction instead of just the little show they do, which could also link very well into Critter Country.

    Critter Country: Outside of Fantasy and Tomorrow, Critter Country has the most possible unused properties to choose from. If Imagineering were to shift things appropriately, you could run around the backside of the berm with original style dark rides (ie: Pan, Snow White, Toad) that have a much smaller profile than newer dark rides (Mermaid, good lord that show building for such little payoff) and could be used to pop up and around to link into the Frontier expansion and or Toontown. Seriously, the dead ends on both of those areas are just brutal. It could also be used to link into a mini-land: the UK. Seriously, look at the unused critter properties, they lead perfectly into UK stuff: Country Bears, Narnia, Brother Bear, Bambi, Bedknobs and Broomsticks, Fox and the Hound, Robin Hood.

    (just for fun) UK land: Robin Hood, Fox and the Hound, Bedknobs, Reluctant Dragon, Lady and the Tramp, 101 Dalmations, Great Mouse Detective, Black Cauldron, Pete's Dragon. See? It even links to Fantasy land really well, where Alice, Peter, and Mr Toad have half the block.

    Toontown: Pretty much only the Chicken Little or the Mickey and the Beanstalk segment of Fun and Fancy Free could fit here, and not really. The Bongo segment of that could fit in Critter country though. Maybe a section for the underused Saludos/Caballeros films. Not really much to say here. Toontown really just needs to not dead end and be taken care of and it would receive so much less hate.

    Fantasyland: This is where the unused properties explode: Enchanted, Pete's Dragon, Black Cauldron, Emperor's New Groove, Hercules, Mulan, Reluctant Dragon, Robin Hood, Narnia, Oz, Atlantis, Chicken Little, 101 Dalmatians, Aristocats, Great Mouse Detective, Lady and the Tramp, Oliver and Company, Ratatouille, and the Rescuers. If you add the underused properties like Beauty and the Beast, Fantasia, Saludos/Caballeros, Sword in the Stone, Cinderella, Hunchback, Tangled and Brave, you could make quite the splash with new attractions in Fantasyland. Eat that section of Autopia back! Build a show building the size of Pan/Toad/Alice along the Small world mall and motor boat area to do three similarly sized dark rides for any of the unused properties. Magic!

    Tomorrowland: The ever present looming threat. Countless threads, so much love and hate for adding, replacing or returning attractions. The amount of text on these forums dedicated to the concept of "fixing" Tomorrowland could put War and Peace to shame. Let's start it off with the unused, and go from there: 20,000 Leagues, Black hole, Honey I (Shrunk, Blew Up) Series, Tron, Bolt, Meet the Robinsons, Treasure Planet, and Wall-E. Then you have Marvel and Lucas, and things go all wonky. Underused at DLR are Lilo and Stitch, the Incredibles, and Wreck-It Ralph (looking more at the sci-fi perspective of where those titles would fit than the tomorrow aspect). Some of these properties have previously had a presence and lost it. Marvel or Star Wars are really more suited to a third gate, and everyone knows it. Disney has shown they want those two in Disney proper, and every rumor seems to indicate that's where we're headed. There are a lot of other options, clearly, but none really have the kind of oomph that comes from Marvel or Star Wars. This is about money, and when it comes to money, Meet the Robinsons or Black Hole really just didn't and wouldn't do it. Again, this is leaving out the ideal of original ideas, just unused and under used film properties.

    Third Gate: Any of the unused film properties, but ideally this is where Marvel and Star Wars would set up shop. There's plenty of room to realize a better vision of these two masses of pop culture in an vast parking lot than replacing things in a current park. Everyone seems to agree that they would much rather see them take a third park. Which is amazing on Micechat: AGREEMENT! Granted, many seem to have come around to the fact that they are in Disney proper and are going to continue to be, but everyone seems to want them to be the third gate (if original concepts are out [yes, I understand, many want original ideas, again, this is unused and under used film properties]).

    So, there we go. Listings, analysis, and now an open floor to discuss. Have at it :-)

  2. #2

    • -
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Uijeongbu
    Posts
    6,609

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    Quote Originally Posted by lightofdarkness View Post
    (just for fun) UK land: … Fox and the Hound, …, Pete's Dragon. See?
    I’m not sure why you are lumping these two into UK Land. They take place in America.
    Quote Originally Posted by lightofdarkness View Post
    Marvel or Star Wars are really more suited to a third gate, and everyone knows it.
    There are plenty of ways that Star Wars and Marvel work in the current parks as evidenced by their placement currently.
    "You can cut me off from the civilized world. You can incarcerate me with two moronic cellmates. You can torture me with your thrice daily swill, but you cannot break the spirit of a Winchester. My voice shall be heard from this wilderness and I shall be delivered from this fetid and festering sewer."

  3. #3

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Upland, CA
    Posts
    168

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    Quote Originally Posted by calsig31 View Post
    Iím not sure why you are lumping these two into UK Land. They take place in America.
    They've always just felt very British to me, I didn't really look into it :-P

    Quote Originally Posted by calsig31 View Post
    There are plenty of ways that Star Wars and Marvel work in the current parks as evidenced by their placement currently.
    As I said, many have come to accept them in the parks, but most agree that they are much better suited (based off of their considerable size of respective universes) to an alternate park.

  4. #4

    • New Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    13

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    They aren't going to spend time/money/space on films that aren't as familiar to guests as the newer films that are being endlessly (and shamelessly) promoted on TV, merchandise, and fast food kids' meals. Marketing is everything if a new ride/land is going to bring in more guests.

    Also, theming after an older movie can make things feel dated. "Hey kids, this ride is based on the forgotten 1991 classic, The Rocketeer!" isn't likely to bring the crowds. Gadget's Go-Coaster (though the Rescue Rangers can hardly be considered a timeless classic) is exactly what DL needs to avoid.

    It's sad, but that's why the Swiss Family Robinson had to move over for Tarzan (the attraction was timed with the release of the film, and rode the wave of 2 sequels and an animated TV show). Also see: BLAB, Pooh, Indy, Star Wars, Nemo, etc.- all built around franchises that are (or were) still in development.

    Isn't Splash Mountain the only attraction built around a classic film rather the coinciding with a film's launch/relaunch? All the rumors we hear about plans for new attractions or film presence (Lone Ranger!) get scrapped if the film doesn't perform well. Why? Because they're not going to be able to milk it for sequels and spinoffs that would keep the attraction feeling relevant.

    So I guess I'm just saying that Disney will not use any old properties as long as there are new ones doing the advertising for them.

  5. #5

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    1,562 Miles East of DisneyLand
    Posts
    762

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    Quote Originally Posted by Caleb View Post
    They aren't going to spend time/money/space on films that aren't as familiar to guests as the newer films that are being endlessly (and shamelessly) promoted on TV, merchandise, and fast food kids' meals. Marketing is everything if a new ride/land is going to bring in more guests.

    Also, theming after an older movie can make things feel dated. "Hey kids, this ride is based on the forgotten 1991 classic, The Rocketeer!" isn't likely to bring the crowds. Gadget's Go-Coaster (though the Rescue Rangers can hardly be considered a timeless classic) is exactly what DL needs to avoid.

    It's sad, but that's why the Swiss Family Robinson had to move over for Tarzan (the attraction was timed with the release of the film, and rode the wave of 2 sequels and an animated TV show). Also see: BLAB, Pooh, Indy, Star Wars, Nemo, etc.- all built around franchises that are (or were) still in development.

    Isn't Splash Mountain the only attraction built around a classic film rather the coinciding with a film's launch/relaunch? All the rumors we hear about plans for new attractions or film presence (Lone Ranger!) get scrapped if the film doesn't perform well. Why? Because they're not going to be able to milk it for sequels and spinoffs that would keep the attraction feeling relevant.

    So I guess I'm just saying that Disney will not use any old properties as long as there are new ones doing the advertising for them.

    Almost all Fantasyland attractions were built well after their respective film's release.

    Also, Fantasy Faire is a perfect example of their use of an old license (majority of the Princesses) as the draw for an entire sub-land.

    I would also like to point out that Gadget's Go Coaster opened when the cartoon was still in production. I don't think I understand the point being made with your comment on this attraction.

    I think it's fair to say that they have absolutely no problems with using an older license to bring something new into the parks. Oswald the Lucky Rabbit is another example. A very, very small percentage of people even knew that this character existed. It didn't stop them from using him in DCA.





    "I do not like to repeat successes. I like to go on to other things." - Walt Disney


  6. #6

    • -
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Uijeongbu
    Posts
    6,609

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    Quote Originally Posted by Caleb View Post
    They aren't going to spend time/money/space on films that aren't as familiar to guests as the newer films that are being endlessly (and shamelessly) promoted on TV, merchandise, and fast food kids' meals. Marketing is everything if a new ride/land is going to bring in more guests.

    Also, theming after an older movie can make things feel dated. "Hey kids, this ride is based on the forgotten 1991 classic, The Rocketeer!" isn't likely to bring the crowds. Gadget's Go-Coaster (though the Rescue Rangers can hardly be considered a timeless classic) is exactly what DL needs to avoid.

    It's sad, but that's why the Swiss Family Robinson had to move over for Tarzan (the attraction was timed with the release of the film, and rode the wave of 2 sequels and an animated TV show). Also see: BLAB, Pooh, Indy, Star Wars, Nemo, etc.- all built around franchises that are (or were) still in development.

    Isn't Splash Mountain the only attraction built around a classic film rather the coinciding with a film's launch/relaunch? All the rumors we hear about plans for new attractions or film presence (Lone Ranger!) get scrapped if the film doesn't perform well. Why? Because they're not going to be able to milk it for sequels and spinoffs that would keep the attraction feeling relevant.

    So I guess I'm just saying that Disney will not use any old properties as long as there are new ones doing the advertising for them.
    The mermaid ride was based on a 20 year old film.
    "You can cut me off from the civilized world. You can incarcerate me with two moronic cellmates. You can torture me with your thrice daily swill, but you cannot break the spirit of a Winchester. My voice shall be heard from this wilderness and I shall be delivered from this fetid and festering sewer."

  7. #7

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Upland, CA
    Posts
    168

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    Quote Originally Posted by Caleb View Post
    They aren't going to spend time/money/space on films that aren't as familiar to guests as the newer films that are being endlessly (and shamelessly) promoted on TV, merchandise, and fast food kids' meals. Marketing is everything if a new ride/land is going to bring in more guests... So I guess I'm just saying that Disney will not use any old properties as long as there are new ones doing the advertising for them.
    I disagree on a couple of the older properties, namely the 90's core group which are mostly only represented in shows currently (Beauty and Beast, Aladdin, Lion King) because of how big they were. The same can be said for why Song of the South was used for Splash, it was HUGE at the box office for it's time. If you adjust it for inflation, it comes out to well over $350 million (weird right?). Also, I feel like with the Princess lines continuing to smash the merchandise, a ride or attraction for Cinderella is a distinct possibility in my mind. The Little Mermaid ride, while not viewed as very successful by micechatters (yes, it typically has a 5 minute wait, but that's only because of it's MASSIVE capacity, it's not a failure people), is built from a 24 year old property, not exactly current stock. Same can be said at Magic Kingdom with the new Fantasyland. New attractions for Mermaid (again, 24 years old), Beauty and the Beast (22 years old), and Snow White (76 years old!), to me, say that age is of no consequence.

  8. #8

    • Heavy Breather
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    A Galaxy Far Far Away
    Posts
    831

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    I think if a franchise has longevity to it, then it could suit well in whatever land it thematically fits into.


    What is thy bidding, my Mouseter?

    Check out my tumblr: http://dvader2015.tumblr.com/









  9. #9

    • The doctor is in
    • Online

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    1,014 miles away
    Posts
    2,581

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    I think a Robin Hood attraction in Critter Country would be fun but let's be honest... how many kids these days have seen the movie?
    I wish Frozen would have never been made.












  10. #10

    • A Happy Haunt
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    136

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    Disneyland does have the rocketeer. In tomorrowland...

    he's really small, but seems to work all day.


    Name:  SunBrunchPopcornCartMarch13-7.jpg
Views: 173
Size:  56.6 KB

  11. #11

    • Heavy Breather
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    A Galaxy Far Far Away
    Posts
    831

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkwingdolt View Post
    Disneyland does have the rocketeer. In tomorrowland...

    he's really small, but seems to work all day.

    Name:  SunBrunchPopcornCartMarch13-7.jpg
Views: 173
Size:  56.6 KB
    So that's how Disney uses their unused properties....


    What is thy bidding, my Mouseter?

    Check out my tumblr: http://dvader2015.tumblr.com/









  12. #12

    • Mickey icecream sammiches
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    San Franpsycho
    Posts
    893

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    Quote Originally Posted by lightofdarkness View Post
    DCA: Could take a couple of them (with some creative marketing language to work them in), but really only one fits for the currently themed areas: The Rocketeer. They could also use the Johnny Fedora segment from Make Mine Music, but that property is technically represented by the boardwalk game for Casey at the Bat (which is far too little representation in my mind, but it is representation). The Rocketeer on the other hand is a beloved cult movie that fits the theme of Buena Vista perfectly and has only slight references in the shops (or it did the last time I went, but they keep changing the well built displays, so who knows) which equate in my mind to no representation. Give me a Rocketeer coaster over a door coaster any day (like Tatsu, but milder).
    I LOVE the Rocketeer and love your idea of bringing in some Rocketeer presence in DCA. It fits perfectly with the time period and location of Buena Vista Street and Hollywoodland. I miss the days when MGM Studios had a lot of Rocketeer stuff around, granted that was pretty much around the time the film just came out.

    I mentioned in another thread I started that I would love to see the Ink & Paint Club from Roger Rabbit recreated in Hollywoodland as a signature dining experience. I think the South Seas Club from Rocketeer would be another excellent idea for Hollywoodland. And COMPLETELY AGREE with the sentiment that a Rocketeer rollercoaster would be infinitely better and more appropriate for the park than a Monster's themed coaster. They could make it an indoor coaster with elaborate scenes recreating scenes from the film SUPREME AWESOMENESS.

  13. #13

    • Mickey icecream sammiches
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    San Franpsycho
    Posts
    893

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    In another thread I posted this with regard for a ride at Third Gate. I would love to see it happen, though don't suspect they'll even consider the Story for any attractions.

    I would LOVE to have a Legend of Sleepy Hollow dark ride incorporating the most up to date animatronics technology with a thrilling Headless Horseman finale.

  14. #14

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Upland, CA
    Posts
    168

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    Quote Originally Posted by DrFink View Post
    I think a Robin Hood attraction in Critter Country would be fun but let's be honest... how many kids these days have seen the movie?
    And how many have seen Mr Toad? :-)

  15. #15

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Upland, CA
    Posts
    168

    Re: Expansion / Replacement attraction analysis of unused film properties

    Quote Originally Posted by Mondo Mouse View Post
    In another thread I posted this with regard for a ride at Third Gate. I would love to see it happen, though don't suspect they'll even consider the Story for any attractions.

    I would LOVE to have a Legend of Sleepy Hollow dark ride incorporating the most up to date animatronics technology with a thrilling Headless Horseman finale.
    An Ichabod overlay would be a fun Halloween takeover of another dark ride, but I'm not sure it would fly as a year round experience. I like the mindset though :-)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [Idea] A replacement attraction in the Captain EO/Starcade area?
    By Disneylandfan85 in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 04-08-2013, 01:00 PM
  2. [Chat] Movie Properties In Disneyland: An Analysis of Changing Execution
    By RegionsBeyond in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 12-05-2010, 01:27 PM
  3. Wall-E Ticket Attraction For Innoventions ~ Video Clip of Film
    By Ride Warrior in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 06-29-2007, 02:00 AM
  4. Why Isn't the Attraction's Theme Song Used in the Film's Score?
    By PragmaticIdealist in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 07-12-2006, 11:36 AM
  5. Replies: 37
    Last Post: 07-10-2005, 07:49 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
  •