Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

Collapse

Get Away Today

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by CAspace View Post
    Sadly I think especially in the face of the horrible failure that John Carter of Mars became at the box office, we will see even less risks being taken at "Disney" now. I say Disney because there is no longer the "Walt Disney Pictures" it has become "Disney" you will notice this in the new logo which made it's debut last year.

    The board and the financial purse holders at Disney Corp. will not be willing to take gambles on unknown properties, hence we are seeing more of the Disney/Pixar films in the pipe line all being sequels of established franchises. This mindset will certainly also dictate development dollars being spent on attractions at the "Parks" We will continue to see "new" attractions based on existing properties/franchises only IMHO.

    There will hopefully be some exceptions to this rule, but I do think that for the next 10 years we will see films and attractions which are all based on "Established" franchises.

    I certainly wish this was not the case, although until someone takes over the Disney board with enough power and control to sway the financial decisions of the company, I do not see it going any other way.
    Well, with the Cameron deal for Avatar as a park land, Disney is taking a HUGE risk. Even though this IS connected to a movie, I seriously doubt that it will have any direct connection to the movie (at least the first one - a franchise if they are lucky) outside of the environment. So whatever they include in the land will probably be some sort of creative stretch based on that environment.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

      Movies and Disney theme parks have one thing in common. And that's storytelling. Turning those stories into attractions is what Disneyland has always been about. And without that storytelling element, Disneyland and other Disney parks like it would only be ordinary amusement parks. I don't think there's anything wrong with basing an attraction on a film and/or film franchise as long as it's done well. Cars Land is a great example of that.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

        Originally posted by bfdf55
        Well, with the Cameron deal for Avatar as a park land, Disney is taking a HUGE risk. Even though this IS connected to a movie, I seriously doubt that it will have any direct connection to the movie (at least the first one - a franchise if they are lucky) outside of the environment. So whatever they include in the land will probably be some sort of creative stretch based on that environment.
        There are at least two Avatar sequels in the pipeline per the rumor sites, I think Avatar land further solidifies the proof that large outlays of money to be spent on new park attractions or lands will only be routed to large franchises with built in customers. This strategy obviously makes sense from a business MBA perspective.


        Originally posted by film975 View Post
        Movies and Disney theme parks have one thing in common. And that's storytelling. Turning those stories into attractions is what Disneyland has always been about. And without that storytelling element, Disneyland and other Disney parks like it would only be ordinary amusement parks. I don't think there's anything wrong with basing an attraction on a film and/or film franchise as long as it's done well. Cars Land is a great example of that.
        Film975 I must disagree with the sentence,
        Turning those stories into attractions is what Disneyland has always been about.
        Disneyland certainly had attractions which may have been based on existing stories or films but it also certainly did have original elements. I don't think anyone is suggesting that there should not be any attractions ever built based on existing films or franchises, but I do think that there needs to be a balance. At this point I think the pendulum has swung all the way towards only creating items based on existing "known quantities" vs. taking a chance and creating something new and exciting.
        Which will then no doubt be turned into a feature film and then altered to reflect the film

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

          When I was a little kid and first visited Disneyland, I don't recall ever distinguishing between "original" attractions and movie-based attractions. I mean, while I may have been familiar with some of the characters and concepts (Alice in Wonderland, Dumbo, etc), when it came to the attractions themselves, I just liked what I liked on their own merits. As an adult, my tastes have evolved some, but my general outlook is pretty much the same: keep me entertained, and I'll keep coming back. Quality is paramount. My enjoyment of Indy, for example, would not be enhanced if the ride had been created as Adventures in a Temple.
          Last edited by Frozone; 07-14-2012, 08:46 PM.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

            Originally posted by CAspace View Post
            There are at least two Avatar sequels in the pipeline per the rumor sites, I think Avatar land further solidifies the proof that large outlays of money to be spent on new park attractions or lands will only be routed to large franchises with built in customers. This strategy obviously makes sense from a business MBA perspective.
            The Avatar project is still a HUGE risk in that the potential for a successful land is still very tenuous based on such a limited but excessive environment, whereas the Marvel universe has a huge potential in the variety of characters, worlds and story lines available. But, even there, when it comes to stories, the Marvel universe is largely limited to hero vs villain with little Disney level story capabilities.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

              I don't see the function of an attraction as just telling a story. It should be to provide an experience to the guest that is above and beyond just retelling the story or a variation of the story. It should provide an immersive, interactive, customized and "live" feeling, bringing the story to life and involving the guest in the experience. Not just retelling the story that you already know from having watched the movie.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                Originally posted by bfdf55 View Post
                The Avatar project is still a HUGE risk in that the potential for a successful land is still very tenuous based on such a limited but excessive environment, whereas the Marvel universe has a huge potential in the variety of characters, worlds and story lines available. But, even there, when it comes to stories, the Marvel universe is largely limited to hero vs villain with little Disney level story capabilities.
                We can agree to disagree then. I do not see how a franchise who's first film grossed 2.8 billion dollars at the box office, 750 million of those dollars coming from the U.S is a risk. I just do not see it. The film has two perhaps three sequels in the pipe. Opposed to the Harry Potter franchise built at Universal which is based on a Film franchise that is completed. There will be no more Harry Potter movies since the owner and creator of the HP franchise has moved on and holds strict control to the license.

                Avatar land being based in Florida which is visited by many more international visitors will become a must visit attraction, much more so in my eyes then Harry Potter and Universal. Considering the next few Avatars do not release for a number of years from now, there will be longer staying power with the new Land created.

                Regardless, the point of the thread was that we are not going to see many more original attractions or lands (not based on existing films) , and I think we perhaps both agree that Disney does seem to be following that pattern as of late.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                  Avatar is way to preachy. Don't want to be preached at while I'm a theme park

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                    Originally posted by Frozone View Post
                    When I was a little kid and first visited Disneyland, I don't recall ever distinguishing between "original" attractions and movie-based attractions. I mean, while I may have been familiar with some of the characters and concepts (Alice in Wonderland, Dumbo, etc), when it came to the attractions themselves, I just liked what I liked on their own merits. As an adult, my tastes have evolved some, but my general outlook is pretty much the same: keep me entertained, and I'll keep coming back. Quality is paramount. My enjoyment of Indy, for example, would not be enhanced if the ride had been created as Adventures in a Temple.
                    Indy is not based off a movie really but the series and make a new Adventure you can't go on any where else.

                    They took idea's from the movies and what not but it's not a IN your face story like Nemo...it's you in a temple with Indy trying to escape its an adventure

                    Heck...even Splash is not really based off the movie...it takes elements but in the end of the day MANY things are also different and that's what makes it feel like a quality ride.....you take elements from a movie or idea...and make it your own

                    I hope one day we see rides like HM and Pirates again....rides that just take you away let you go somewhere new and don;t really have a story.....it's just an amazing experience that makes people say Wow...40 years later
                    Happy Halloween!!!

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                      Originally posted by Uncle Bob View Post
                      Of course I think that Cars Land could have been just as good if it was original, but you won't convince Disney that a big part of the success isn't the billion dollar toy sales machine behind it. All of the arguments about what can be good in the hypothetical, quality and everything else are beside the point. The point is that all Disney does as an organization in the U.S. is cross promote films. That is now their entire strategy, and as you can see, there are plenty of people that are perfectly happy to see it go in that direction. They think it's crazy to even want original attractions, that's where we are now.
                      Aren't you doing what your OP said not to do?

                      ---------- Post added 07-15-2012 at 01:49 AM ----------

                      Originally posted by mickdaddy View Post
                      Also rides people keep mentioning as orignal that actually had/have film ties like the matterhorn, the subs (20,000 leagues under the sea) and swiss family robinson treehouse
                      Matterhorn was inspired by the filming and production of "third man on the mountain" and not inspired by the film itself. The idea from a snow based attraction (that eventually became the Matterhorn), was an idea before that film was even a script.

                      Matterhorn really is an original in every sense of the word.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                        Originally posted by film975 View Post
                        Movies and Disney theme parks have one thing in common. And that's storytelling. Turning those stories into attractions is what Disneyland has always been about. And without that storytelling element, Disneyland and other Disney parks like it would only be ordinary amusement parks. I don't think there's anything wrong with basing an attraction on a film and/or film franchise as long as it's done well. Cars Land is a great example of that.
                        I completely agree. I love film, I love storytelling, I love DL, so for me it seems a nutural progression and not a bad thing.

                        There is so much animosity here for movie based rides and I just don't understand. Yes, POTC, HM and JC are fantastic innovative rides that have withstood the test of time (in fact in some cases rides that have spawned films ) but...

                        I would venture to say that rides at Disney parks have always leaned more movie based because it works. Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't the ride count always leaned more movie based?

                        OTOH, DCA 1.0 (which many call ill concieved and I agree with them) was more "original" and Paradise Pier was mostly rethemed to Disney character based because it DOES fit better.

                        Also the complaining that only movie rides are the wave of the future and no new original rides will be made forget that soarin', GRR, TOT, and CS were all made just over a decade ago. That's really not a long time.

                        Maybe I shouldn't add this because I've never actually been on it but everytime I see someone say we need more original rides vs. movie based all I can think is god I hope they don't make another Superstar Limo.
                        You know, I have the strangest feeling that I've seen that ship before. A long time ago, when I was very young. ―George Darling
                        It seems to me that we have a lot of story yet to tell. ― Walt Disney

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                          Originally posted by JMazz View Post
                          Aren't you doing what your OP said not to do?
                          I don't think so, but I'm not sure in what way you're suggesting I did what I said not to. I don't think that by sympathizing with others feelings I was contradicting myself. In any case, the OP was meant to promote a lively discussion about Disney's Corporate business model and whether or not it has any chance of changing, which I am skeptical that it will. I think in this type of discussion it can be useful to take both sides at times as an intellectual exercise.

                          If you want a good discussion you have to take a strong stance and make people think. I think there has already been many really interesting points made about a topic that comes up constantly but seems rarely analyzed in the abstract. I wanted to see if there was a strong argument that my premise was wrong. I'd like to be wrong, I just don't think I am. I didn't start the thread simply to tell everyone who complains about no original attractions to shut up. I started it to provoke a debate about why Disney might be doing the wrong thing. But I have my doubts personally both that it is the wrong thing to be doing and that they will ever change.

                          But I can go ahead and fully argue against myself and contradict myself for argument's sake as well. There are reasons why I think Disney should still be building original attractions, that was part of the OP. I have my worries that the current business model not a strong long term strategy for many of the reasons which others have said. I have concerns about the sacrificing the theme of lands by bringing in too many attractions that don't really fit. I have concerns about the artistic and creative use of theme parks as their own distinct medium that can do things movies can't. And I personally just enjoy original attractions.

                          But my point was that this has become an unrealistic wish that I see no short term reason for Disney to change. I'm not even sure it's a bad long term strategy. They've created an audience that has come to expect film based attractions, which was the other aspect I was bringing up for discussion. I see no real reason to suggest that this isn't working just fine for them financially, and I'm really not sure that it is a bad long term strategy.

                          I don't see enough attractions getting forgotten or stale enough to really make the audience lose interest. Perhaps they will, but it just doesn't seem to be happening that quickly to become a financial problem. I think that Disney does have a certain level of commitment to maintaining the integrity of the themes of lands. But that is a very loose definition of what "fits", and I don't see those poor decisions really turning off most of the audience either. The artistic merit of original attractions holds very little financial value, so that isn't going to make them change.

                          A lot of the audience seems to be begging for more film based attractions. Disney does what the market research says people want, that's the way most corporations work these days. So, despite my personal wishes, I think that we're just unlikely to get many, if any, more original attractions in the U.S.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                            Originally posted by doppio View Post
                            Avatar is way to preachy. Don't want to be preached at while I'm a theme park
                            Amen to that! Avatar should not be in any Disney park period! That overrated movie is overrated.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                              Originally posted by Mom kissed Walt View Post

                              I would venture to say that rides at Disney parks have always leaned more movie based because it works. Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't the ride count always leaned more movie based?


                              No, the vast majority of attractions at Disneyland have always been original or very loosely tied to movie franchises. Original attractions, despite their age continue to have the longest wait times and largest fan following at both parks. I would also venture to say that movie based attractions become outdated far quicker and in general do not stand the test of time due to evolving trends; the only ones to do this are based on films which achieved classic status and were created under Walt Disney's supervision and talented team of imagineers/artists.

                              ---------- Post added 07-15-2012 at 03:09 AM ----------

                              Originally posted by Mom kissed Walt View Post

                              OTOH, DCA 1.0 (which many call ill concieved and I agree with them) was more "original" and Paradise Pier was mostly rethemed to Disney character based because it DOES fit better.

                              There was nothing original about Paradise Pier to begin with, it was all off the shelf and completely void of creativity. Adding Disney characters did not make Paradise Pier fit any better, they could have completely omitted that aspect of the redo and everything would have been fine, quality is the key here; does the new beer garden need a Disney character to satisfy guests or does it stand well on its own merits as a detailed and well made area?

                              Also the complaining that only movie rides are the wave of the future and no new original rides will be made forget that soarin', GRR, TOT, and CS were all made just over a decade ago. That's really not a long time.
                              A decade of no originality is a long time considering Disney pre-Eisner was opening up one blockbuster attraction year after year.

                              Maybe I shouldn't add this because I've never actually been on it but everytime I see someone say we need more original rides vs. movie based all I can think is god I hope they don't make another Superstar Limo.

                              Your comparison to Superstar Limo has nothing to do with originality being at fault, it has everything to do with the lack of proper investment and creativity from Imagineering at the time. Soarin is a great example of how to do original attractions effectively.
                              Last edited by Seawolf; 07-15-2012, 02:36 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                                Originally posted by Uncle Bob View Post
                                I don't think so, but I'm not sure in what way you're suggesting I did what I said not to. I don't think that by sympathizing with others feelings I was contradicting myself. In any case, the OP was meant to promote a lively discussion about Disney's Corporate business model and whether or not it has any chance of changing, which I am skeptical that it will. I think in this type of discussion it can be useful to take both sides at times as an intellectual exercise.

                                If you want a good discussion you have to take a strong stance and make people think. I think there has already been many really interesting points made about a topic that comes up constantly but seems rarely analyzed in the abstract. I wanted to see if there was a strong argument that my premise was wrong. I'd like to be wrong, I just don't think I am. I didn't start the thread simply to tell everyone who complains about no original attractions to shut up. I started it to provoke a debate about why Disney might be doing the wrong thing. But I have my doubts personally both that it is the wrong thing to be doing and that they will ever change.

                                But I can go ahead and fully argue against myself and contradict myself for argument's sake as well. There are reasons why I think Disney should still be building original attractions, that was part of the OP. I have my worries that the current business model not a strong long term strategy for many of the reasons which others have said. I have concerns about the sacrificing the theme of lands by bringing in too many attractions that don't really fit. I have concerns about the artistic and creative use of theme parks as their own distinct medium that can do things movies can't. And I personally just enjoy original attractions.

                                But my point was that this has become an unrealistic wish that I see no short term reason for Disney to change. I'm not even sure it's a bad long term strategy. They've created an audience that has come to expect film based attractions, which was the other aspect I was bringing up for discussion. I see no real reason to suggest that this isn't working just fine for them financially, and I'm really not sure that it is a bad long term strategy.

                                I don't see enough attractions getting forgotten or stale enough to really make the audience lose interest. Perhaps they will, but it just doesn't seem to be happening that quickly to become a financial problem. I think that Disney does have a certain level of commitment to maintaining the integrity of the themes of lands. But that is a very loose definition of what "fits", and I don't see those poor decisions really turning off most of the audience either. The artistic merit of original attractions holds very little financial value, so that isn't going to make them change.

                                A lot of the audience seems to be begging for more film based attractions. Disney does what the market research says people want, that's the way most corporations work these days. So, despite my personal wishes, I think that we're just unlikely to get many, if any, more original attractions in the U.S.
                                Originally posted by Uncle Bob View Post
                                That era is over, that's not what Disney does anymore, it's time to stop complaining and except it or move on.
                                This line of your OP... esp the part where you say except [accept] it or [and] move on...

                                The whole premise of your thread seems contradictory to me. The era is over, accept it, move on, original attractions are dead... but then you argue why original attractions are great and that the current ratio is skewed. To me it appears as if you have NOT accepted it. And that is fine, b/c many of us have not gotten over it. But to suggest we should stop discussing it, and then turn around and discuss it is where I am confused. I am not trying to stir the pot, I just wanna know if it is even worth posting in this thread...

                                ---------- Post added 07-15-2012 at 06:41 AM ----------

                                Originally posted by Seawolf View Post

                                No, the vast majority of attractions at Disneyland have always been original or very loosely tied to movie franchises.
                                Here is a Yesterland.com list of opening day attractions...

                                Main Street, USA - all original (but not very unique IMO)
                                • Horse-drawn Street Cars
                                • Horse-drawn Fire Wagon (no longer operating)
                                • Horse-drawn Surreys (no longer operating)
                                • Main Street Arcade (now primarily a shop)
                                • Main Street Cinema
                                • Main Street Shooting Gallery (removed 1962)
                                • Santa Fe and Disneyland Railroad (renamed to Disneyland Railroad, 1974)



                                Fantasyland - no original attractions/all directly based on Disney films and TV
                                • Canal Boats of the World (became Storybook Land Canal Boats, 1956)
                                • Casey Jr. Circus Train (Storybook Land scenery added, 1956)
                                • Dumbo Flying Elephants (enhanced, new location, 1983)
                                • King Arthur Carrousel (new location, 1983)
                                • Mad Tea Party (enhanced, new location, 1983)
                                • Mickey Mouse Club Theater (renamed to Fantasyland Theater, 1964; closed 1981)
                                • an attraction even before the walk-thru


                                Tomorrowland - one film based attraction (?) Many were inspired by Disney live action films and travelogs; most attractions were unsatisfactory based on Walt's constant re-working of TL
                                • Monsanto Hall of Chemistry (closed 1966)
                                • Rocket to the Moon (closed 1966)
                                • Space Station X-1 (became Satellite View of America, 1958; closed 1960)
                                • Thimble Drome Flight Circle (closed 1966)
                                • Tomorrowland Boats (became Phantom Boats, 1955; closed 1956)
                                • 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (closed 1966)
                                • The World Beneath Us, presented by Richfield Oil Co. (closed 1960)


                                Frontierland - one film based attraction (?)


                                Adventureland - heavy inspiration from live action films and nature programs
                                • Jungle Cruise (numerous enhancements over the years)


                                I count 37 opening day attractions, 13 of them are film/TV based (approx 1/3 of attractions). Did this ratio change by 1965? 1975? 1985? etc...
                                What is acceptable these days? What would satisfy the average DLR fan? I ask these questions to all MCers. I would like to know at what point would the average DLR fan would be happy. If my numbers are wrong, please feel free to correct this.

                                Comment


                                • #76
                                  Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                                  Originally posted by ducktalesfan5555 View Post
                                  Amen to that! Avatar should not be in any Disney park period! That overrated movie is overrated.
                                  I respectfully disagree. The 3D in that movie blew away any other forms of film 3D up until that point and I thought the storyline was compelling.

                                  Comment


                                  • #77
                                    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                                    ^many do...many like me liked it but after seeing it three times.....I was like meh the movie is just too long, too preachy and even hypocritical...he talks about the beauty of nature and how tech is bad but uses CGI to make the world....along with the fact he makes the "America" settlers the bad guys when without them we would not have America...he would have never had the chance to make his money and make the movie.

                                    If you like it...like it but many of us go over the cool CGI and moved on to other movies that we think deserve a land because the movie/book has been tested by time not 3 years
                                    Happy Halloween!!!

                                    Comment


                                    • #78
                                      Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                                      Originally posted by JerrodDRagon View Post
                                      Indy is not based off a movie really but the series and make a new Adventure you can't go on any where else.

                                      They took idea's from the movies and what not but it's not a IN your face story like Nemo...it's you in a temple with Indy trying to escape its an adventure

                                      Heck...even Splash is not really based off the movie...it takes elements but in the end of the day MANY things are also different and that's what makes it feel like a quality ride.....you take elements from a movie or idea...and make it your own

                                      I hope one day we see rides like HM and Pirates again....rides that just take you away let you go somewhere new and don;t really have a story.....it's just an amazing experience that makes people say Wow...40 years later
                                      Great point - that is what I was trying to say earlier. You can have rides based on ideas in movies, or even characters in those movies, but I don't think anyone here would be hard pressed to find the difference between IJA and PotC - one is a definite "story" that, to me, gets in the way of show (PotC, or "The Search for Capt. Jack Sparrow), while the other simply uses a character to enhance an existing idea/experience.

                                      Comment


                                      • #79
                                        Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                                        The solution is complicated, expensive and difficult:
                                        If you don't like Avatar, then don't go to the land based on it.
                                        (And don't watch Pocahontas, either.)

                                        Comment


                                        • #80
                                          Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

                                          ^at least Pocahontas has good music....and the fact that the movies does not end by saying....we are (Americans) the bad guys but some men are greedy and that we should live in peace not just kicked out the people who came to the new land
                                          Happy Halloween!!!

                                          Comment

                                          Get Away Today Footer

                                          Collapse
                                          Working...
                                          X