Bob Iger says, "No Ratatouille Attractions"

[disneyfann121]

Come to think of it, I find it surprising that The Incredibles are totally absent from Disney parks (as far as I can tell). Yet, they made a ride out of Roger Rabbit, a much older movie that didn't enjoy the same box office, and is not likely to spawn a sequel (as far as I know).

If I dared, I would guess that maybe they haven't used The Incredibles simply because they haven't yet found a way to make a great attraction based on that movie. But, I don't dare, for fear of being labelled naive by the curiously schizophrenic Disney lovers/bashers/cynics on this site...

[Coheteboy]

Originally Posted by disneyfann121

Come to think of it, I find it surprising that The Incredibles are totally absent from Disney parks (as far as I can tell). Yet, they made a ride out of Roger Rabbit, a much older movie that didn't enjoy the same box office, and is not likely to spawn a sequel (as far as I know).

If I dared, I would guess that maybe they haven't used The Incredibles simply because they haven't yet found a way to make a great attraction based on that movie. But, I don't dare, for fear of being labelled naive by the curiously schizophrenic Disney lovers/bashers/cynics on this site...

I think they have found ways to make a great attraction for The Incredibles. They're just figuring out the minor details. And when it's announced, it certainly will get a high level of critiques complaining about how un-tomorrow it is. As much as I LOVE the Incredibles, I might be one of those people too. Only time will tell.


But as Roger Rabbit goes, that was a ground breaking film and it also introduced the whole notion of Toon town. If you think about the release dates, WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT came out in 1988. "Mickey's" Toon Town debut at Disneyland in 1993. Roger Rabbit Car Toon Spin in 1994. That isn't too far after the film's release really and it's only proper that they include Roger Rabbit in the land that was inspired from the film. I only wish the land was more fun.

Also, Roger Rabbit... sequel or not, is a true movie star. Film credits include:

1. Who Framed Roger Rabbit
2. Tummy Trouble
3. Rollercoaster Rabbit
4. Trail Mix Up

[MJMcB]

Originally Posted by GhostHost2

I would want an Aladdin ride where you escape from the Cave of Wonders on a magic carpet.

That would be a nice replacement for the Treehouse in adventureland. And speaking of franchises, Little Mermaid clearly is, so when Mr. Iger are we getting that dark ride shown in the DVD

[MJMcB]

Originally Posted by disneyfann121

Come to think of it, I find it surprising that The Incredibles are totally absent from Disney parks (as far as I can tell).

If Ratatouille is not a franchise worthy of an attraction, I'm not sure how the Incredibles is

[sir clinksalot]

Originally Posted by GhostHost2

Nemo Overload. Nemo Overload.

Normally I'd agree, but Nemo: The Musical is RIGHT THERE, and it would get rid of the road-side carnival dino theme.

Originally Posted by MJMcB

If Ratatouille is not a franchise worthy of an attraction, I'm not sure how the Incredibles is

I think The Incredibles by their "Superhero" nature Definately lends itself to theme park attractions, moreso than Ratatouille.

I also find the assumption that attractions based on movies require no imagination. Somebody imagined the movie right? It's all synergy, and something that has been going on since DAY ONE.

[MJMcB]

Originally Posted by sir clinksalot

I think The Incredibles by their "Superhero" nature Definately lends itself to theme park attractions, moreso than Ratatouille.

I agree, but with Bob Iger's definition its no "franchise."

Originally Posted by sir clinksalot

I also find the assumption that attractions based on movies require no imagination. Somebody imagined the movie right? It's all synergy, and something that has been going on since DAY ONE.

I agree, but I like to see non-movie based attractions. E:E just seems much more creative than say the Laugh Floor

[AlwaysImagineer]

I think that was a good move. I dont really see how you could really turn that movie into a good franchise. Maybe a game or two, but not like clothes and attractions. Good move Disney! Although it would have been a great idea because its set in Paris!

[MJMcB]

Originally Posted by AlwaysImagineer

I think that was a good move. I dont really see how you could really turn that movie into a good franchise. Maybe a game or two, but not like clothes and attractions. Good move Disney! Although it would have been a great idea because its set in Paris!

Not a franchise but howzabout a roller coaster? So now, we're limited attractions to franchises. Get ready for a lot Toy Story and Princesses then. Well, a lot more

[Monkey joe]

Originally Posted by MJMcB

Not a franchise but howzabout a roller coaster? So now, we're limited attractions to franchises. Get ready for a lot Toy Story and Princesses then. Well, a lot more

and PR.

[GhostHost2]

Originally Posted by Coheteboy

Rides should be made based on an idea (and theme) FIRST. Movie tie-in LAST. Fantasyland is brought up a lot and I'm guilty of it too but that's an entirely different situation where the animated storybook is WELCOME.

None of Pixar's films really belong in Fantasyland at all! What has happened is that they've been shoe-horned into every OTHER land, which is also a big mistake.

that's why I really do hope for a PIXAR PLACE or something similar at Disney's Hollywood Studios. They need a realm of their own where we can forgive a logistical loophole for why something is the way it is... like how Buzz and his Etch-a-sketch are ginormous. Did we shrink or did he grow??

Yet another great post that I completely agree with from coheteboy.

Originally Posted by sir clinksalot

I also find the assumption that attractions based on movies require no imagination. Somebody imagined the movie right? It's all synergy, and something that has been going on since DAY ONE.

Attractions used to have imagination. Mr. Toad going to Hell in his Wild Ride was a work of Imagineering genius. Now days, we get lame crap like Stitch burping on us, or a god awful comedy show with jokes so bad, you think the comedians are trying to kill you. Or else you get a slow moving ride, where you are a passive viewer to a cliff notes version of the movie like DCA's Monsters Inc. or the ride in The Seas with Nemo and Friends.

To the person who mentioned Roger Rabbit, Who Framed Roger Rabbit was a big time box office hit for the time it came out. Movies rarely grossed more than 100 million back then. Plus, Roger Rabbit is a better movie than The Incredibles and a tribute to the early days of animation.

[SomethingWicked451]

I don't mind there not being a Ratatouille attraction, but the reasoning is all wrong. So something has to be a "franchise" to become an attraction? What about original themes? What about great rides like Splash Mountain and Dinosaur? Hardly gems in the Disney crown (or, in the case of the former, not allowed to be), but extremely popular attractions, nonetheless.

[MJMcB]

Originally Posted by SomethingWicked451

I don't mind there not being a Ratatouille attraction, but the reasoning is all wrong.

I agree

[Destination]

I always heard rumors about there being a Rataouille "wild-mouse" coaster type ride. Like Mulholland Madness at DCA.

[MJMcB]

Originally Posted by Destination

I always heard rumors about there being a Rataouille "wild-mouse" coaster type ride. Like Mulholland Madness at DCA.

yeah but Bob Iger said there will be no Ratatouille attractions

[WSVR]

And not everything has to be a franchise. I was recently asked whether "Ratatouille" was a franchise. I said no: "Ratatouille" is an extremely good animated film and will be a classic unto itself, but it is not a franchise. You are not going to see "Ratatouille" attractions in parks. When you look at "Toy Story," we're making our third film, we're opening two Toy Story Mania attractions at parks this summer, we have a very strong consumer products line, we have a "Toy Story" musical opening on the cruise line, we have a game in development - that's a franchise.

Oh you aint got a thing if you aint got that synergy swing
Du rat Du rat Du rat.