Home

[Anthony]

Ok, if we're going to discuss one critique of Disney, please let it be this one!

It's long and will require a few minutes, but it's worth it for a quite brilliant, balanced analysis of what fans thought they wanted during the last decade and how we actually feel about the new developments of this decade. That is - Carsland, Toy Story Playland, Avatar, and so on. You're sensing a theme there: franchises. I'm sure this will resonate with a lot of members here.

I think I mentioned, in relation to DLP's over-reliance on character images for its brochures and advertising, how Disneyland should be built and marketed as its own world, it's own story, an extension of the Disney you see on the big-screen, not just a re-telling. This particular paragraph sums it up:

The entire reason so many fans have rebelled against the franchise mania – Cars here, Toy Story there – is it illustrates an underlying insecurity at Disney that they won't be able to get people in the gate without a movie property they can slap up there to assure people. This condemns Imagineering to a spiraling circle of mediocrity, and ensures that they are not allowed to produce something that wows or surprises us like Pirates, or Mansion, or Western River Expedition.

:arrow: Give it a read and discuss: http://progresscityusa.com/2011/12/18/t ... conundrum/

[CafeFantasia]

Yes, I read that article this morning in bed. It was great.

Personally I don't have a problem with Cars Land. I think the end result will be great and very popular. But, it is an odd choice. Cars isn't the best film going, so to dedicate an entire land to it will seem like a really bad idea decades from now (as Michael says in his article). Imagine how dated Big Thunder Mountain would seem if it was the Davy Crockett Experience, or something like that? Cars Land is so highly customised, there's no way they'll ever be able to retheme it. It will forever be a land 100% based on an old film that pre-dates interactive cinema, that only got 74% on Rotten Tomatoes :-)

[davewasbaloo]

Thanks for sharing this story guys. This articulate my greatest frustration with Disney at the moment. WHat I always loved about the disney parks is how they took me to another place or time. THe fax attractions had nothing to do with synergy at all. TO me, being on a cruise in the congo, sailing the spanish main, exploring a haunted house, creeping down the matterhorn, or being shrunk to the size of an atom, were all increadible experiences not found in any other park. THe characters and synergy of fantasyland never appealed at all.

When epcot center opened ,i was blown away. And all these attractions inspired me to read and learn more about their subjects. They had heart and intelligence.

But charracter or series synergy in the main turn me off. Just like wanting to fast forward through the adverts on Sky+, I have little to no interest in the character based attractions or lands (except star tours, yes, i recognise the hypocrisy). Carsland looks like it will be epic, but i would have preferred a non toon based approach. Little mermaid and toystory mania hold little appeal, and please do not get me started on tspl. Where is the inspiration? Where is the truly imaginative attractions that surprise us with their genius? Where are the timeless attractions that can be enjoyed by people of all ages?

To be honest, the DCA of 2001 held more appeal to me than the one of 2012, and to me, the money could have been spent much smarter! I feel the same of toon studios and so many other things.

And look at the diisney live action releases. Although I have enjoyed recent okones such as PotC, Tron Legacy, Sorceror's Apprentice, Prince of Persia etc, none of those were original ideas. It is so sad, as i used to hold disney's creativity and risk taking ability aloft as being the halmark of excellence, an inspiration to us all. My unwavering love of the company, my awe, has been poisoned and made me very bitter towards the firm and all that defend. WHile i know this is an unsavoury disposition, I watch in hopes that one day we will see a return to excellence. While iger remains though, I fear my hope is in vain.

[CafeFantasia]

You're totally right Dave. People that understand Disney, understand what's wrong with it.

That said, I think the way they're expanding Disney California Adventure is fantastic. Everything they're building is so lush and lavish. They may not be building anything particularly original, but they are building stuff that's attractive, and environments you'd want to be in.

[ed-uk]

I haven't read the article yet but i will do later. All I can say is the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, and what that franchise has done for Universal. If Disney had built Harry Potter and not Carsland and Avatar, how would fans react to that? Harry Potter isn't an original idea from Universal but nobody says anything about that except what a huge success it's been. Cars is an original idea created by Pixar which Disney happens to own.

[Epcot_Boy]

When i first visited WDW back in 1989, on a family holiday to Florida, it was much against my better judgement, only family pressure forced defeat and a visit to Epcot first was the compromise. Up until then I had little or no interest in Disney and certainly considered Disney for 'Children Only!'.
Well Epcot blew me away, and there were very few toons or franchises to be seen. Epcot, to me, wiped the floor with any entertainment centre I had seen before. Visits to other WDW parks including the later addition of AP helped to seal the deal with me.
To this day I still have an appalling knowledge of Disney Cartoons, films or anything on the Disney Channel. But you see that didn't matter then, the parks were about providing you with the resources to create and develop your own dreams. Its floating down the river on Pirates of the Caribbean wondering about the days of swashbuckling, it's about spooky nights at the Haunted Mansion (I always think of Stephen King at the mansion and wonder what great story he could create from it), it's about climbing to the top of a tree and wandering how people survived such adventures, it's about steaming down the Mississippi on the Molly Brown with a big fat cigar in your mouth, it's about wondering about the history behind the guestroom doors at the ToT, it's about flying through space..........it's about whatever you want it to be about..........it's about using your imagination
The parks were about imagination, but more importantly, they were about my imagination, and that of my children.
Where Disney has failed dismally in recent years is that they have forgotten to help our children use their imagination in the same way we did.
Disney parks appear these days to be absolutely about the promotion of products, not the promotion of the imagination.
I still go to visit DLP because over the years I have learn't to develop an imagination, I've learn't to explore and dream, and that first visit in 1989 played a great part in that.
But is Disney helping the youngsters of today to dream, will Carsland or Avatar Adventures help them learn to explore their imagination....I don't believe so. By the time Avatar is created it will be well and truly past it's sell by date.
But the Pirates of the Caribbean, its still full of adventures, yes even now. And even now I can fly through space to wherever I want, and whenever I want.
Carsland and AA will in the end do nothing for our children, and that to me is Disneys biggest mistake. If you can keep dreaming of new adventures everytime you visit, then you will go again and again.....if you've seen it all before, then you'll look elsewhere, Universal for instance.
I sincerely hope that sometime down the road the powers that be at Disney give the parks back to the imagineers and keep the film characters where they belong, on the big screen. I want the children of today to walk into our Park and let their imagination just run wild and to do that, well Disney can lend them a hand by using it's imagination......wouldn't that be great [-o<  /
Just imagine

[DGRavenswood]

Yep... another very worthwhile article by Michael Crawford.

I haven't read the article yet but i will do later. All I can say is the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, and what that franchise has done for Universal. If Disney had built Harry Potter and not Carsland and Avatar, how would fans react to that? Harry Potter isn't an original idea from Universal but nobody says anything about that except what a huge success it's been. Cars is an original idea created by Pixar which Disney happens to own.

Universal has always been based on existing movies. That's its very concept... Disney however has a long history of creating first class original content for its theme parks and that unfortunately seems like a lost art these days.

[Josh]

I like how the article says that Disney started slipping into medeocracy the year I was born -- 1994. XD So basically, I've never known Disney at their best except from their older franchises.

What Disney really need is a CEO like Walt; one that comes from an animator/imagineering background rather than a business background. You could say that Apple will go down hill now that Steve Jobs is gone as well. Microsoft almost went downhill as well after Bill Gates semi-retired; at least until the new CEO Ballmer stood on the sidelines and let the department-heads deal with future strategies.

That said, I think the way they're expanding Disney California Adventure is fantastic. Everything they're building is so lush and lavish. They may not be building anything particularly original, but they are building stuff that's attractive, and environments you'd want to be in.

Certain things like Buena Vista Street are great. It's just a shame that there isn't a centrepiece of the park like the castle in the Magic Kingdoms or Spaceship Earth in Epcot.

I haven't read the article yet but i will do later. All I can say is the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, and what that franchise has done for Universal. If Disney had built Harry Potter and not Carsland and Avatar, how would fans react to that? Harry Potter isn't an original idea from Universal but nobody says anything about that except what a huge success it's been. Cars is an original idea created by Pixar which Disney happens to own.

Parks like Universal are successful for different reasons. This issue isn't necessarily about success in terms of visitor numbers, but success in terms of originality and quality.

the parks were about providing you with the resources to create and develop your own dreams. Its floating down the river on Pirates of the Caribbean wondering about the days of swashbuckling, it's about spooky nights at the Haunted Mansion (I always think of Stephen King at the mansion and wonder what great story he could create from it), it's about climbing to the top of a tree and wandering how people survived such adventures, it's about steaming down the Mississippi on the Molly Brown with a big fat cigar in your mouth, it's about wondering about the history behind the guestroom doors at the ToT, it's about flying through space.......... it's about whatever you want it to be about.......... it's about using your imagination

The parks were about imagination, but more importantly, they were about my imagination, and that of my children.

Where Disney has failed dismally in recent years is that they have forgotten to help our children use their imagination in the same way we did. Disney parks appear these days to be absolutely about the promotion of products, not the promotion of the imagination.

That quote should be blue-tacked onto the wall of every Imagineer's office.

[pussinboots]

I never knew Disney had a ride about Mormons:


It's a good article, although frankly it's a point that has been made six thousand times on web sites such as MiceAge. I haven't developed an opinion on it yet. (Originality trumps stock footage, but then why do I love Splash Mountain so much?) But I will say that I find it peculiar that all these Disney blog philosophers seem to agree that a park about the state of California was a good idea or would have been a good idea if it had been done well. Basing a theme park on a US state is a ridiculous, awful idea.

[davewasbaloo]

Not one based on California. One based on Utah or deleware, yes, I would agree. But geographically, California has more diversity than europe, and a very rich and diverse history too. Cowboys and indians ,miners, railway builders, immigrants from around the world, movies, agriculture, science and tech, gangsters, heavy duty war effort, the beat movement, the happy movement, human rights activism, earth quake, floods, a wealth of themes that many parks have borrowed from.

[pussinboots]

Not one based on California. One based on Utah or deleware, yes, I would agree. But geographically, California has more diversity than europe, and a very rich and diverse history too. Cowboys and indians ,miners, railway builders, immigrants from around the world, movies, agriculture, science and tech, gangsters, heavy duty war effort, the beat movement, the happy movement, human rights activism, earth quake, floods, a wealth of themes that many parks have borrowed from.

France has a cultural history a thousand times richer than California's, which was after all colonized about two weeks ago and had quite a stable period before that, yet I would never want to see a theme park based on that or any European country. Or Europe, for that matter. A specific geographic place is just not a good idea for a Disney park. Disney parks should be based on concepts, ideas, things that are as flexible as the imagination. California limits everything to the question: "but is it in California?"

So no deal, sorry.

[davewasbaloo]

I wholly disagree. Afterall, Walt built Mainstreet USA and Frontierland in California (where there are dozens of ghost towns and paddlewheelers still ply the Sacramento river). And DLP has a European flair in Fantasyland and discoveryland. It's not what you do but the way that you do it!

and i am more excited about our trip to Puy de Fou than DLP next year to explore recreations of European history!

[DutchBrit]

Personally I don't have a problem with Cars Land. I think the end result will be great and very popular. But, it is an odd choice. Cars isn't the best film going, so to dedicate an entire land to it will seem like a really bad idea decades from now (as Michael says in his article).

Actually I rather like the film, and regardless of how good or bad it is, you have to admit that the characters etc have become immensely popular as a theme for merchandise. That will give Carsland some legs for quite a considerable time, possibly not as long as Harry Potter, but long enough. And you need a "boy" thing to try and balance out all the princess stuff.

Re: the point that it has nothing to do with California, that IS where Lightening is meant to be going...Not the strongest link maybe, but a link!

[davewasbaloo]

Lol, I must confess I like the Cars movie and toys too (haven't seen the second one yet), but the link is tenuous (though Route 66 was the main highway from Chicago to LA. And although I would rather have a Journey to the Centre of the Earth at Paris rather than a Cars Race Rally, I wouldn't complain too much if this came here too.

[DedicatedToDLP(Steve)]

At least in decades to come, while the film may or may not still be in the mind of people who visit, boys will always like cars. I really like the film but as a master stroke of merchandising it's one of their very best.