Wizard of Oz attraction

[clockworkmonkey]

I've always thought that The Wizard of Oz section in The Great Movie Ride was a waste of a potential major draw. While the majority of the movies in the GMR would have trouble carrying a whole attraction on their own, the Wizard of Oz is a beloved by generation after generation, has a variety of a colorful scenes, recognizable characters, and lots of songs. I can't understand why, having presumably paid for the theme park rights, Disney didn't give the Wizard of Oz a full-blown attraction of its own.

Not that it's too late, of course. I doubt they ever would, but I think it would be a great idea to replace the big Oz scene in GMR (we can discuss with that elsewhere), and give the Wizard of Oz a dark ride all of its own.

Heck, with all Oz has to offer, it could practically sustain it's own land, attractions, eateries, meet-and-greets and all.

[nicoleloveswalt]

As far as I know, when MGM opened, Disney did not have unlimited Oz rights, in fact they could only have a certain amount of time devoted to it. I've read somewhere that the current Fantasia scene on the GMR was originally meant to be the 'Twister' scene from Wizard of Oz, which is why you feel the wind effects. Eisner pushed the GMR to operate on a larger capacity per hour and the extra trams caused the Oz scene to be longer than intended and over the time limit originally put in place.

If Disney can somehow obtain full rights, I completely agree, Oz would fit right in with Disney.

[flynnibus]

I agree.. the Oz sequence in the Great Movie Ride is fantastic... but alas the MGM licensing wasn't all full bore. So it's not like Disney has free reign to do anything they want with the library. And of course now that the relationship has basically gone belly up, I doubt we'll see anything here.

But who knows... Iger's first things he did when he came into power was mend bridges. Maybe at some point he'll try to mend those bridges... but with MGM so f'd up lately who knows who'd to even deal with Turner owns the rights to the old film library now (including Oz).

[clockworkmonkey]

That would explain it. Though it seems like a strange arrangement to allow a property to appear in a park a little bit, but not a lot. It seems like it would benefit both parties to dive in all the way.

Seems like it would be smart for Disney to go whole hog after the Oz park rights. It's an evergreen property that's a good fit for the Disney vibe, but would still bring some different people to the parks.

[nicoleloveswalt]

Maybe I'm wrong, but there's an Oz land at one of the Asian Universal Studios, perhaps that too is also holding them back?

What would be your ideal Oz-theme thing, though?

[flynnibus]

That would explain it. Though it seems like a strange arrangement to allow a property to appear in a park a little bit, but not a lot. It seems like it would benefit both parties to dive in all the way.

Only if the license owner would benefit from it. And generally the way they do it if there are no direct sales opportunities to take the cut on is through the licensing fees. So the more access you give.. the more you demand in licensing fees. But of course the licensee wants to control their costs.. so they can't just go hog wild.

If Disney gave Turner a cut of gate admissions... I'm sure they would entertain it. But Disney doesn't charge for attractions like this... and no way would they give someone a cut of their overall ticket sales.

There needs to be a better revenue model then 'wouldnt it be cool' unfortunately When you are as big as Turner and have properties as valuable as they do... just the prestige of being in a Disney park doesn't cut it as compensation

I'd love to know what kind of action Lucas is getting for Indiana Jones rides. Because unlike Star Wars... there isn't really a huge merchandising empire to drive with the attractions. Only brand... so he must be getting some massive ongoing action for these. That.. or he's just a Disney nut who wants to see it in the park. Given the rest of Lucas' actions... I doubt that

[MJMcB]

why would disney do an Oz attraction at this point? no synergy

[clockworkmonkey]

Oh yes. That darn synergy!

I am mainly going here from the "wouldn't it be neat" perspective. I certainly don't know the business ins-and-outs or have any studies to cite, but I bet an awesome Oz attraction (or OZ land) would sell tickets. I bet it would be the main draw for some and the tipping point for others. Every year, you still see kids dressed up as the Oz characters for Halloween, the movie still plays to fans of all ages, a stage version tour perpetually. It's practically the only non-Disney movie that has proven to have that kind of lasting hold on children's imaginations. Dorothy meet-and-greet? The girls would flip for it. She'd be the studios princess equivalent.

[nicoleloveswalt]

Even I would flip to meet Dorothy and Scarecrow and Tin Man and the Cowardly Lion. And the Wicked Witch.

The Great Movie Ride Dinner at Disney’s Hollywood Studios | The DIS Unplugged Disney Blog

Has Glinda make an appearance, perhaps Disney is expanding Oz's presence? It could be just a one-off thing, but it's possible.

[Witches of Morva]

ORWEN: Disney COULD do an OZ attraction based on RETURN TO OZ, if they wanted to. Of course the movie wasn't very popular because so many people compared it to THE WIZARD OF OZ. Still, France included the Emerald City in their Storybook Land canal boat ride.

[SpectroMan]

..and with the immense popularity of "Wicked", it seems only natural that someone would want to build a dark ride combining the two stories. Endless appeal if done right, I'd think.

[nicoleloveswalt]

I do believe film rights to Wicked are held by NBC Universal and as they will likely one day make a film out of it, a Disney attraction would only promote their film.

[CoasterMatt]

Wicked is in development as a feature film, and there's a pretty good "mini" version of the musical at Universal Studios Japan.

[SnorkletsMom]

I've just never liked The Wizard of Oz. I know a LOT of people love it, I'm just not one of them. But what was mentioned earlier is the biggest point...Disney is focusing on
'branding' now, and if it isn't something they can control and sell in a number of formats and markets, they just aren't interested.

[MJMcB]

Oh yes. That darn synergy!

I am mainly going here from the "wouldn't it be neat" perspective.

then i agree with you