PDA

View Full Version : It's been awfully quiet


daber
04-04-2003, 09:50 AM
concerning Mickey's Philharmagic. With all the focus on M:S, I was wondering how the new 4-D movie at MK was progressing.

All Aboard
04-04-2003, 10:18 AM
This will undboubtedly generating a whole new Universal v. Disney debate. However, I'm very curious to know why the constructin timeline for PhilharMagic is so long. Legend of the Lion King closed in February of 2002 and development of Phil appeared to commence almost immediately. Yet, 14 months later there has been no mention of an opening. And, rumors have it set to go no earlier than the middle of the summer.

Yet, Universal shut down Hitchcock just shy of one year later than Disney stopped Legend, and Shrek is slated to quite possibly open BEFORE Mickey.

They are both 4-D shows, built on digital technology with in-theater effects. Heck, Universal has been hyping Shrek to be on-par with Terminator. That's quite a lofty claim to have to deliver on.

So, all this, of course, begs a couple of questions.

1) Is Mickey that much more advanced (and better) of a show?

or

2) Is there some reason that Disney is dragging its feet on this one?

Or is there some other explanation?

KNWVIKING
04-04-2003, 10:22 AM
Hasn't there been some discussion about WDW not wanting to open M:S and Phil at the same time. They could get more PR mileage out of staging to seperate grand openings,two different parks. Of course,with the rumored delays on MS opening, this stratagey could backfire.

HB2K
04-04-2003, 11:12 AM
I think AV had mentioned this in one of his posts a little while ago.

His point seemed to be that Disney churns out these 4D attractions with relative ease....and he was wondering what was going on....

I'll be interesting to see what happens....

DC7800
04-04-2003, 09:19 PM
2) Is there some reason that Disney is dragging its feet on this one?

Could this be budget related? This is pure speculation, but cost overuns (or just an inadequate budget to begin with) could delay work until the additional money gets approved. Also, wouldn't dragging out the construction period also spread the cost of the attraction over a longer period of time? Specifically, divide the cost over more than one fiscal year (or quarter, or whatever). Probably cost more in the long run, but it helps this years financial numbers, and I can sure see Eisner's Disney doing something that way.