Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 42 of 42
  1. #31

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Autobot Base
    Posts
    2,128

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wren View Post
    Interesting they have a Theme Park division now. Implies more than just Star Tours these days
    It'd be great if that implies more then just STAR WARS AND INDY RIDES FOREVER AND EVER A HUNDRED YEARS.

    Give me a Monkey Island attraction in some park.
    M-I-C-K-E-Y P-R-I-M-E

    Flickr
    Lend a hand at Disney Wiki

  2. #32

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    142

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blake View Post
    I agree, and the more I think about it, I wouldn't mind if Tomorrowland just became Star Wars Land. (Blasphemy, I know.)

    Look, I love Tomorrowland. It was my favorite as a kid, and in some ways it still is. But the things that really made it Tomorrowland are largely long gone, and many of those would be horribly outdated if they were still around anyway. No more Adventure Thru Inner Space. No more Mission to Mars. The subs aren't really "Tomorrow" anymore, not the original version and certainly not the Nemo version. There's the Monorail, but that's not really futuristic anymore. The PeopleMover is gone (and the Rocket Rods had little to do with "Tomorrow"). Innoventions isn't particularly futuristic and seems to be more about promoting the Marvel franchise lately than anything else (and let's face it: It's not a star attraction, and few would shed a tear if it left). Space Mountain still fits to the same extent it ever did, but it was always a stretch in that a space-themed roller coaster isn't really about "Tomorrow" as much as it is about playing with a motif. Same for the Astro Orbitor. BLAB is great fun, but it's not about "Tomorrow" in the slightest way (not that the Circle-Vision Theater really was either).

    Tomorrowland has actually been Science Fiction Land for well over a decade at least, and even before that it was losing its "Tomorrow" flavor just by virtue of how dated some attractions were getting. And ever since the 1998 "retro future" re-theme, "Tomorrow" hasn't been a big part of the land at all. They haven't changed the name, but they've changed the meaning.

    Don't get me wrong; I'd be thrilled to see the PeopleMover back, the Astro Orbitor back on its original platform, etc., but I don't think that's happening, and I doubt any of you do, either. A complete Tomorrowland revamp to put it back on course with its original concept would be great, but that doesn't seem to be on the horizon. At least as Star Wars Land it could have some sense of coherence again. Or I guess they could just rename it SciFi Land and be done with it. (I hope not.)

    "Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong."
    <opinion> I'm 100% with you on this. I have the DEEPEST respect for nostalgia and the ideas that Walt had when Tomorrowland was built. But it was an idea for a different time and nostalgia cannot live on forever. The truth of the matter is that at the end of the day, it's about money. If there was a Star Wars Land, (or a SciFi Land with Star Wars rides in it) I guarantee you every 8-12 year old boy around the country (if not world) would be begging their parents to take them there.......and honestly, at 38 year old, I'd probably be the first in line. </opinion> <--- These tags mean "Don't shoot me please!"

  3. #33

    • Former Churro Jockey
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Westminster, CA
    Posts
    1,491

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Look, as soon as Disney signed the check I assumed that a lot more Star Wars was coming to the parks. No way they spend that kind of money and don't try to leverage it in every way possible. So of course it's coming in one form or another. The best I am hoping for is a land added to Hollywood Studios in the next few years, and then eventually replicated as part of a 3rd park here. I still think that building a Hollywood Studios park here with a Marvel Land, Avatar Land, and Star Wars Land (and a few others like Narnia, The Mermaid Lagoon from DisneySea, etc.) is the best possible scenario.
    Disneyland Cast Member
    Outdoor Vending
    1996 - 1999

    My interview with MiceAge about working at Disneyland:
    http://micechat.com/blogs/mouth-of-t...ding-crew.html

  4. #34

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mission Viejo
    Posts
    1,159

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Quote Originally Posted by chadwpalm View Post
    <opinion> I'm 100% with you on this. I have the DEEPEST respect for nostalgia and the ideas that Walt had when Tomorrowland was built. But it was an idea for a different time and nostalgia cannot live on forever. The truth of the matter is that at the end of the day, it's about money. If there was a Star Wars Land, (or a SciFi Land with Star Wars rides in it) I guarantee you every 8-12 year old boy around the country (if not world) would be begging their parents to take them there.......and honestly, at 38 year old, I'd probably be the first in line. </opinion> <--- These tags mean "Don't shoot me please!"
    I do think there is a lot of truth in this. The things we experienced were innovative for their time. But they didn't all have to do with a movie, especially in Tomorrowland.

    Walt certainly had his share of movie-based attractions, but there was also a blending of other elements, as well, that made Disneyland so unique. Certainly his movies were at the crux of the original draw. The movies, and his television show which he was promoting. But when the guests got there they saw much more. So much more. And Tomorrowland was the perfect area to move away from the movie thing. And it mostly did (exception Subs).

    But times change, I know.

    I saw an interview with Alice Davis where she noted that she and Marc never went on Splash. She also mentioned how upset he was when Sings closed. It was one of his babies.
    But she admitted that every generation has to have its time. And I agree with her.

    IMO, kids today have been programmed toward instant gratification. And with the technology they see every day, it has been easy to take them there.

    It's the difference between a generation that took trips in a car, looked out the window, and talked to their family.....and a generation that has a movie set up in the headrest of the cars, and a multitude of hand-held video games as back up in the back seat.

    I do believe that adding a bunch of movie tie-ins with thrills will peak their interest over something that makes them think (edutainment). Movies are something recognizable. They don't have to put much effort into it.

    I do think, however, that Walt's vision could still be there if it was really desired by the powers that be. I think people respond to what they're given. And how fantastic would it be for kids to have that excitement that we had. Considering the tech we have available now, I know they would respond. Then some day they would look back nostalgically at what they experienced at kids. It would be especially neat if it was an experience that wasn't always having to do with a movie.

    The park though, I believe, has programed itself now where you have to have a tie-in to a movie to capture the interest of the guest. I'm not sure there is any going back now.

    I still wonder, had they put a flight simulator into Tomorrowland that had the same visual motion, and show effects as Star Tours, but taught you about space while you were on it, would that have been as popular as putting in the same ride system with a movie like Star Wars behind it?

    IMO, yesterday's generation would have been intrigued by it, even without a movie tie-in. Had I seen that on a billboard along the I-5 freeway as a kid, I would have wanted to check that out. It wouldn't have had to say Star Wars on it.

    I'm not so sure the kids of today would. But this is not so much about them, but what they're given.

    Especially now that the precedent has been set at Disney. It's pretty much about movies now, and nothing else. The generic might not appeal to the kids of today.

    I believe if done right it could, but that takes a lot of imagination and creativity. Disney seems to be more about purchasing things now and building from there though. Rather than being the innovator. And this seems to derive from movies as of late. The guest (especially the younger set) has come to expect this from Disney now.

  5. #35

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    142

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Quote Originally Posted by CASurfer65 View Post
    I do think there is a lot of truth in this. The things we experienced were innovative for their time. But they didn't all have to do with a movie, especially in Tomorrowland.

    Walt certainly had his share of movie-based attractions, but there was also a blending of other elements, as well, that made Disneyland so unique. Certainly his movies were at the crux of the original draw. The movies, and his television show which he was promoting. But when the guests got there they saw much more. So much more. And Tomorrowland was the perfect area to move away from the movie thing. And it mostly did (exception Subs).

    But times change, I know.

    I saw an interview with Alice Davis where she noted that she and Marc never went on Splash. She also mentioned how upset he was when Sings closed. It was one of his babies.
    But she admitted that every generation has to have its time. And I agree with her.

    IMO, kids today have been programmed toward instant gratification. And with the technology they see every day, it has been easy to take them there.

    It's the difference between a generation that took trips in a car, looked out the window, and talked to their family.....and a generation that has a movie set up in the headrest of the cars, and a multitude of hand-held video games as back up in the back seat.

    I do believe that adding a bunch of movie tie-ins with thrills will peak their interest over something that makes them think (edutainment). Movies are something recognizable. They don't have to put much effort into it.

    I do think, however, that Walt's vision could still be there if it was really desired by the powers that be. I think people respond to what they're given. And how fantastic would it be for kids to have that excitement that we had. Considering the tech we have available now, I know they would respond. Then some day they would look back nostalgically at what they experienced at kids. It would be especially neat if it was an experience that wasn't always having to do with a movie.

    The park though, I believe, has programed itself now where you have to have a tie-in to a movie to capture the interest of the guest. I'm not sure there is any going back now.

    I still wonder, had they put a flight simulator into Tomorrowland that had the same visual motion, and show effects as Star Tours, but taught you about space while you were on it, would that have been as popular as putting in the same ride system with a movie like Star Wars behind it?

    IMO, yesterday's generation would have been intrigued by it, even without a movie tie-in. Had I seen that on a billboard along the I-5 freeway as a kid, I would have wanted to check that out. It wouldn't have had to say Star Wars on it.

    I'm not so sure the kids of today would. But this is not so much about them, but what they're given.

    Especially now that the precedent has been set at Disney. It's pretty much about movies now, and nothing else. The generic might not appeal to the kids of today.

    I believe if done right it could, but that takes a lot of imagination and creativity. Disney seems to be more about purchasing things now and building from there though. Rather than being the innovator. And this seems to derive from movies as of late. The guest (especially the younger set) has come to expect this from Disney now.
    I think what you've written sums it up. Each generation is different than the next and Disney has to keep up with that to survive in the long run. Kids now are very movie driven. I don't know a kid around that can't sing Let It Go from Frozen. It's how they identify to Disney because it's easily accessible. Like you said, more generic/learning type attractions appealed to kids in the 50's and 60's, but it's so different now. Kids want to go to Disneyland and see the characters they see in the movies they watch every day. That's what Disney is to them. That's why the submarine ride was re-themed to a movie tie-in. I'd have to do a tally among all the DL and DCA rides....now I'm rather curious as to what the ratio is between rides based on movies, and rides that aren't.

  6. #36

    • Down Pluto!
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Altered State
    Posts
    4,179

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Quote Originally Posted by CASurfer65 View Post
    The attraction, even though it's been "revamped," has been there since the mid 80s. Star Tours has been there a long time.
    A very long time ago...in a Tomorrowland getting farther and farther away...

    [cue music]


    Listen, not every Disney property needs a presence in the park. They own ABC and ESPN. Don't they need just as much of a chance to be in Tomorrowland as Marvel and Star Wars?

    Makes just a much sense.







    I am Sambo, and I endorse this signature.

  7. #37

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    109

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sambo View Post
    They own ABC and ESPN. Don't they need just as much of a chance to be in Tomorrowland as Marvel and Star Wars?

    Makes just a much sense.
    Only if they all have equal drawing power.

  8. #38

    • -
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Uijeongbu
    Posts
    6,609

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Quote Originally Posted by CASurfer65 View Post
    The attraction, even though it's been "revamped," has been there since the mid 80s. Star Tours has been there a long time.
    Of course it’s been there since the 80’s. However the original attraction is gone. It has been completely redone. The only thing that is the same is that it is still a motion simulator. Other than that, there are totally new destinations, random plot details, and even a different pilot and pre-show. In light of that, the claim by the other poster that it is “getting up there in age” doesn’t really hold much water. The new ride is only 3 years old.
    "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."

  9. #39

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    109

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Quote Originally Posted by calsig31 View Post
    In light of that, the claim by the other poster that it is “getting up there in age” doesn’t really hold much water. The new ride is only 3 years old.
    I would add that the new version also doesn't feel dated. The old one, with its scratched, jittery film running through a projector, was starting to feel old fashioned and a bit too worn. The new version feels modern and not at all like an "old" attraction.

  10. #40

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mission Viejo
    Posts
    1,159

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Of course the "new ride" is only three years old. If you want to consider it a "new ride."

    It's still a flight simulator, with a Star Wars theme, called Star Tours. May have a different film, with 3D glasses. But it's still Star Tours. To say Star Tours has only been there a few years is a little misleading. The attraction has been there a long time.

    Circlevision wasn't a new attraction just because it changed the movie that showed there.
    Pirates wasn't a new attraction just because it put Johnny Depp in there all over the place and changed the "story" line.
    World wasn't a new attraction just because they put a bunch of Disney characters in there.

    At the crux they're the same attractions. They may be modified by additions or overlays. And the experience might be a little different, but the attraction itself isn't new.

  11. #41

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Notre Dame
    Posts
    2,805

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Quote Originally Posted by CASurfer65 View Post
    At the crux they're the same attractions. They may be modified by additions or overlays. And the experience might be a little different, but the attraction itself isn't new.
    A little different? Star Tours 2.0 is way different from the original imo.




  12. #42

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mission Viejo
    Posts
    1,159

    Re: Meet Patti Burke, head of Lucasfilm's...Theme Park Division?

    Quote Originally Posted by frollofan View Post
    A little different? Star Tours 2.0 is way different from the original imo.

    Is the ride experience different? Maybe. But it's still Star Tours. It's still a flight simulator.

    Plussing it might change the ride experience, but it doesn't make it a "new" attraction. And that was my point. Star Tours, plussed or not, has been there a LONG time.

    I remember years ago, suggesting how cool it would have been to plus ATIS. This way we keep an original attraction that isn't MOVIE BASED....and maintain some educational integrity to Tomorrowland.

    Everyone jumped on my case about rehashing an old attraction that had been there forever.
    And had I tried to say it would have been a "new" attraction, everyone who critiqued my idea would have disagreed, saying it was still ATIS.

    Personally I never would have called it a new attraction anyway. It would still have been ATIS, but modernized.

    Likewise, Star Tours may have been modernized, but it's still Star Tours. And it's been there a long time.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. [News] [Mickey and Minnie Meet and Greet Moved] MK no longer a THEME park
    By JCSkipr79 in forum Walt Disney World Resort
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 02-09-2011, 12:18 PM
  2. New Theme Park near Queen Mary ?
    By Barbossa in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-15-2005, 09:58 PM
  3. Disney Theme Park Music
    By StevenSokulski in forum MiceAge Discussions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-17-2005, 08:30 PM
  4. 2005 SoCal Theme Park Pricing
    By Darkbeer in forum MiceChat News Archive
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-31-2005, 01:35 PM
  5. Third Theme Park
    By mouseketeer_2 in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-19-2005, 09:23 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
  •