WDW becoming homogonized theme park?

[skier_pete]

I don't think this is the case at all.

First off - Magic Kingdom has changed very little in 45 years. The FL additions are very much in keeping with the park. Your claim is that they are all "rides about movies" ends right at the start of this park. Many attractions are based on movie, yes, but that was the concept right from the beginning. There are also many of the biggest attractions NOT based on movies (Space Mountain, BTMRR, Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise, Small World, even Pirates should be considered this since the movies are based on the attractions, not vice versa.)

AK - I personally think Avatarland/Pandora fits well in the AK theme. The original concept was "the world of Animals, Present, Past and Fantasy". All along the design of that park was supposed to have a "Beastly Kingdom" with animals of fantasy. Pandora is that Beastly Kingdom - if they keep the theme of environmentalism that Avatar had, I think this could be a good fit. (I'll admit there are many that disagree with me, though.)

Epcot - people act like replacing Maelstrom with a Frozen ride is the downfall of Epcot at similar levels to the fall of the Roman Empire. I think it is disappointing to turn Norway into basically Arenndale, but I don't think this will lead to the "cartooning" of Epcot. Many of those that are critical of this have been critical of Disney to be slow to bring in new concepts into the park. Now they are bringing Frozen, a massive hit the likes of which Disney hasn't seen since probably the Lion King, in very quickly. They are bringing it into a location where I ride existed that really needed to be updated, and they are bringing it into a place where the story feels like it belongs. This is why I don't have that big a problem with it. And, I don't think it will change the feel of EPCOT. To me - Future World still feels like a park inspired by science and technology. World Showcase still feels like I am marching around the world - albeit a sanitized Disney version - but that has always been the case.

DHS - I think this park has the biggest problems. Ever since it gave up the concept of a working studio, it's been more of a mish-mash of themes then anything. The back-lot tour was on life support as it was. But if any park should have a theme of "ride the movies" it should be this park. So yeah, I think DHS is going in that direction, and it feels the least differentiated from MK, but I do think it still feels like it's own thing.

But, as I said, lots of people disagree with me. Buy my opnion is, no-one is forcing you to go to WDW. If you don't like it, the best way to show this is to take your money elsewhere. (It seems that very few of the people on here that complain constantly are willing to do that.)

 

[JZCubed]

I was thinking about this earlier this morning. Is WDW going in the direction of having just 4 general theme parks? It seems like some of what has set the four parks apart is being destroyed little by little. After all, with the addition of Frozen EPCOT is being turned into a park full of movie rides (I'm sure Norway isn't the last to fall to this); Magic Kingdom was already a park full of movie rides; HS is a park full of movie rides, AK is going to be a park full of movie rides. And while I realize Disney was built on a movie foundation, I can't help but wonder what will set these parks apart anymore.

While there will still be animals at Animal Kingdom I kinda feel like with the addition of Avatar it is just going to be another movie park. Will this make the animals of AK second seat to all the Avatar stuff? And if that's the case, how long is it until the animals are shipped out to make room for another movie area?

Take EPCOT as a prime example of this. EPCOT was built around the idea of a World Showcase. WDW has had ample opportunity to add countries to its World Showcase, yet hasn't done it. What have they done? Shut down one of the countries in favor of some here today and gone tomorrow movie ride. Why? Why are we adding Frozen to a World Showcase? Is there just not demand for additional countries? And is this Disney's fault for allowing the area to become so stagnant and stale?

Don't get me wrong, AK & HS are in need of a big shot in the arm. The amount of activities at each is enough to maybe stretch them into a single day park. EPCOT, which we have always considered a two-day+ park is sadly going to become a one day park for us if WDW continues the Frozen trend.

Sorry for the ramblings, its just been on my brain all day and I needed to find an outlet for it. If my friends at the DIS don't understand it, then I guess no one will.

While I agree that upgrades and updates are continuously needed not only for maintenance, but to also increase the pleasure of regular Park goers, I cannot agree that the most recent changes at Disney are homogenizing.

Let's start with the 'commercialization' notion that many people point to as being indicative of homogenization - many things at Disney have been commercialized through sponsorships. Kodak was the official film at Disney and even sponsored PhilharMagic.....DoleWhip....Spaceship Earth has always been sponsored.....Test Track....Coca-Cola....Nescafe instant coffee....the list goes on and on and has pretty much been the case since Disney opened.

As to too many rides being about movies - I'm at a loss. Walt Disney made movies. Disney still makes movies and has acquired media companies that fit with the Disney brand appeal - Marvel, Pixar, Star Wars. Frankly, there could be a much larger presence of any and all of these (save Marvel due to contractual agreements at Universal).

The theory that new attractions should not be about movies made after the opening of Disney World in 1971 is off the mark. Matter of fact, I might argue that too many present rides are about movies that children (and even many adults today) have little knowledge. How many parent let their kids look at Pinocchio without cringing at the smoking and drinking done on Pleasure Island? The list could go on about current attractions for which current park visitors have little familiarity.

Also, Little Mermaid was a huge commercial success, why not create an attraction....twenty years after it was in the theaters. Unfortunately, Little Mermaid attractions is 'meh' in my book. Disney is not making the mistake with Frozen to wait twenty years to showcase their success.

Am I OK with putting movies into the World Showcase at EPCOT - no. However, I would still prefer progress and/or change to simply keeping things as they always were.

Even if you consider that Disney is a museum that can never be altered, even museums expand to add to demands by their customers. That's Disney. By and large, attractions that are antiques remain while new attractions are built. Hopefully, some of these new attractions will also become favorites that can stand the test of time to also become classics.

If I could suggest one last thing to the OP, Disney is seemingly becoming homogenized because you have gained so much knowledge about how to maximize your time at Disney, that the Parks have seemingly become too small.

If you really want to appreciate Disney all the more (or again), try going to other amusement/theme parks before going back to Disney. Then you'll likely find a new appreciation for how much better Disney is than the other places.

 

[MakiraMarlena]

I say don't put movie themed rides in WS it is about the countries and that is what makes it special. Keep the movies at HS or MK.

It's already been done with Mexico. Norway is next, most likely because Frozen is such a hot property. If it's successful, look for more to come.

 

[tyniknate]

I don't think this is the case at all.

First off - Magic Kingdom has changed very little in 45 years. The FL additions are very much in keeping with the park. Your claim is that they are all "rides about movies" ends right at the start of this park. Many attractions are based on movie, yes, but that was the concept right from the beginning. There are also many of the biggest attractions NOT based on movies (Space Mountain, BTMRR, Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise, Small World, even Pirates should be considered this since the movies are based on the attractions, not vice versa.)

AK - I personally think Avatarland/Pandora fits well in the AK theme. The original concept was "the world of Animals, Present, Past and Fantasy". All along the design of that park was supposed to have a "Beastly Kingdom" with animals of fantasy. Pandora is that Beastly Kingdom - if they keep the theme of environmentalism that Avatar had, I think this could be a good fit. (I'll admit there are many that disagree with me, though.)

Epcot - people act like replacing Maelstrom with a Frozen ride is the downfall of Epcot at similar levels to the fall of the Roman Empire. I think it is disappointing to turn Norway into basically Arenndale, but I don't think this will lead to the "cartooning" of Epcot. Many of those that are critical of this have been critical of Disney to be slow to bring in new concepts into the park. Now they are bringing Frozen, a massive hit the likes of which Disney hasn't seen since probably the Lion King, in very quickly. They are bringing it into a location where I ride existed that really needed to be updated, and they are bringing it into a place where the story feels like it belongs. This is why I don't have that big a problem with it. And, I don't think it will change the feel of EPCOT. To me - Future World still feels like a park inspired by science and technology. World Showcase still feels like I am marching around the world - albeit a sanitized Disney version - but that has always been the case.

DHS - I think this park has the biggest problems. Ever since it gave up the concept of a working studio, it's been more of a mish-mash of themes then anything. The back-lot tour was on life support as it was. But if any park should have a theme of "ride the movies" it should be this park. So yeah, I think DHS is going in that direction, and it feels the least differentiated from MK, but I do think it still feels like it's own thing.

But, as I said, lots of people disagree with me. Buy my opnion is, no-one is forcing you to go to WDW. If you don't like it, the best way to show this is to take your money elsewhere. (It seems that very few of the people on here that complain constantly are willing to do that.)

But why Epcot for Frozen? Wouldn't it better fit in MK? And my OP wasn't talking about MK. That has stayed true to is theme. The other parks are what I'm worried are losing their individuality. Will the park eventually all become another MK?

And I'm not complaining, and certainly not constantly. I was simply asking if I'm the only one who thinks that this is the general direction these changes are going. No reason for the snark.

 

[tyniknate]

While I agree that upgrades and updates are continuously needed not only for maintenance, but to also increase the pleasure of regular Park goers, I cannot agree that the most recent changes at Disney are homogenizing.

Let's start with the 'commercialization' notion that many people point to as being indicative of homogenization - many things at Disney have been commercialized through sponsorships. Kodak was the official film at Disney and even sponsored PhilharMagic.....DoleWhip....Spaceship Earth has always been sponsored.....Test Track....Coca-Cola....Nescafe instant coffee....the list goes on and on and has pretty much been the case since Disney opened.

As to too many rides being about movies - I'm at a loss. Walt Disney made movies. Disney still makes movies and has acquired media companies that fit with the Disney brand appeal - Marvel, Pixar, Star Wars. Frankly, there could be a much larger presence of any and all of these (save Marvel due to contractual agreements at Universal).

The theory that new attractions should not be about movies made after the opening of Disney World in 1971 is off the mark. Matter of fact, I might argue that too many present rides are about movies that children (and even many adults today) have little knowledge. How many parent let their kids look at Pinocchio without cringing at the smoking and drinking done on Pleasure Island? The list could go on about current attractions for which current park visitors have little familiarity.

Also, Little Mermaid was a huge commercial success, why not create an attraction....twenty years after it was in the theaters. Unfortunately, Little Mermaid attractions is 'meh' in my book. Disney is not making the mistake with Frozen to wait twenty years to showcase their success.

Am I OK with putting movies into the World Showcase at EPCOT - no. However, I would still prefer progress and/or change to simply keeping things as they always were.

Even if you consider that Disney is a museum that can never be altered, even museums expand to add to demands by their customers. That's Disney. By and large, attractions that are antiques remain while new attractions are built. Hopefully, some of these new attractions will also become favorites that can stand the test of time to also become classics.

If I could suggest one last thing to the OP, Disney is seemingly becoming homogenized because you have gained so much knowledge about how to maximize your time at Disney, that the Parks have seemingly become too small.

If you really want to appreciate Disney all the more (or again), try going to other amusement/theme parks before going back to Disney. Then you'll likely find a new appreciation for how much better Disney is than the other places.

Again, this is not about the movies. Of course WDW is going to have rides based on their movies. The point, I will say again, is that they are losing the individuality of the parks. They have also gotten away from "creating", which has given us some of the best rides in the theme parks.

I'm not anti-Disney. I love it as much as anyone else on here. I'm just wondering what direction all these changes are taking and if it is going to push the parks into a more general theme instead of what they were created for.

 

[JRawkSteady]

They need more rides at every park except MK. What should they base them off if not Disney movies?

How about original ideas? Pirates, Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise, Horizons, Carousel of Progress, World of Motion, Journey Into Imagination, Kitchen Kabaret, Small World...etc etc etc etc...none of these are based off movies. The OP is 100% correct. Where's the originality lately? Everest was the last new attraction with any sort of imagination. And look at the amazing theming - all the intricacies. That was over 8 years ago! Nothing original has opened since then...

 

[surferdave]

It sounds like your issue is mostly with Epcot. Unfortunately, I think the basic principle of Epcot as a sort of permanent world's fair is floundering because they struggle to keep sponsors for the pavilions and countries. They've managed to replace some of the sponsors in Future World but corporations know it's hard to get patrons to associate old attractions with new companies. They've gotten past this by tearing down Horizons when they lost GE as a sponsor and replacing it with Mission:Space sponsored by HP, and that didn't work out very well. Commitment from the organizations that help with World Showcase has waned, and they never got past 11 countries even though there is plenty of room.

The more Disney has to foot the bill for Epcot themselves the more they will plaster their own properties up on the signs.

 

[Priory]

It's already been done with Mexico. Norway is next, most likely because Frozen is such a hot property. If it's successful, look for more to come.

They're out of rides now. Lol.

Speaking of, if they want to open a new movie-based ride in world showcase, I'm all for it. That area needs more rides and has at least one if not 2 unfinished ride show buildings (is any part of the bullet train ride there? I can't remember).

These parks (except MK) need new net attractions. Planning my fastpasses this week made me realize that more than ever

 

[MakiraMarlena]

As noted, Frozen is a hot property (extremely hot). WDW is going to get the most mileage out of taking a year to convert an existing attraction rather than several years to build a new one from scratch. Maelstrom was there, and it just seemed to fit. They want some new blood at Epcot too, countering complaints that it's boring for kids.

They're out of rides now. Lol.

I wouldn't count on any new rides. Reworks of the movies featuring characters probably. Maybe shows.

 

[Ron from Michigan]

Thinking of this from Disney's side this is a no brainer. Frozen is going to bring lots and lots of families into Epcot for this ride. Can you imagine the lines? I can remember eating dinner in Norway and having choices that you would have if you were vising Norway. I loved how on our first visit years ago to Epcot I found out that the cast members that worked in the showcase were from those host countries. That was so great. Whats going to happen with the movie, I'm sure it will be some type of Frozen film. I will still enjoy the WS but it will not be the same. I want the showcase to be all about the the people and there customs.

 

[BuzzinDownToDisney]

How about original ideas? Pirates, Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise, Horizons, Carousel of Progress, World of Motion, Journey Into Imagination, Kitchen Kabaret, Small World...etc etc etc etc...none of these are based off movies. The OP is 100% correct. Where's the originality lately? Everest was the last new attraction with any sort of imagination. And look at the amazing theming - all the intricacies. That was over 8 years ago! Nothing original has opened since then...

Personally I don't care what the source material is, I just want fun, well themed, fully immersed experiences. From what I've read Carsland is the best thing in any US Disney Park. I'd take that at the MK over Alien Encounter.

 

[Lillian Gracey]

As noted, Frozen is a hot property (extremely hot). WDW is going to get the most mileage out of taking a year to convert an existing attraction rather than several years to build a new one from scratch. Maelstrom was there, and it just seemed to fit. They want some new blood at Epcot too, countering complaints that it's boring for kids.



I wouldn't count on any new rides. Reworks of the movies featuring characters probably. Maybe shows.

In regards to the bolded part, I think this ride will really help with that. My parents took me and my siblings to just Body Wars (This was back in 2000) and we didn't really do anything else at Epcot. We pretty much just wanted to go back to MK and my mom didn't feel there was anything fun for us kids. We were 9, 7, 6, and 4 at the time. I think if they had more rides similar to the upcoming Frozen one, we would have spent more time there.

I think if they did something similar to the Three Caballeros ride, like having the characters of Frozen take you through Norway rather than Arendelle, it would still be fun and fresh while keeping the educational theme.

 

[jamieann]

That's exactly what I'm thinking about though. Are we moving away from that distinct feeling to something more generalized? I know its very early, but that's how it feels to me. Keep what makes these parks distinct. They should be building on that, not tearing it down. The changes that are being made don't necessarily keep that feeling (at least for me).

No, I don't feel like we are. It seems like a doomsday mentality to think that because they're putting a Frozen ride in Epcot, all the parks are becoming homogenized. Epcot will still be a distinct park with a distinct feel.

 

[pogopossum]

My problem with most of the World Showcase is the lack of attractions, and if these attractions could be tied to Disney/Pixar movies all the better. on our recent summer trip to WDW i realized how much of the real estate in the world showcase is dedicated to merely shopping. while this may be fun for a lot of the crowd on these boards, i have grown weary of this. i think that a lot of us with dissatisfaction issues are guests with many visits under our belts, who have ridden Maelstrom every trip since it was put in and are ready for anything new, just like we were with the Mexico boat ride.

most of the attractions at DL, and therefore the knockoffs,at WDW, were based on movies that were the "Frozen" of their time, i.e. Snow White's Scary Adventure, Peter Pan's Flight, etc. So this is actually not a new concept for the parks.

 

[pogopossum]

My problem with most of the World Showcase is the lack of attractions, and if these attractions could be tied to Disney/Pixar movies all the better. on our recent summer trip to WDW i realized how much of the real estate in the world showcase is dedicated to merely shopping. while this may be fun for a lot of the crowd on these boards, i have grown weary of this. i think that a lot of us with dissatisfaction issues are guests with many visits under our belts, who have ridden Maelstrom every trip since it was put in and are ready for anything new, just like we were with the Mexico boat ride.

most of the attractions at DL, and therefore the knockoffs,at WDW, were based on movies that were the "Frozen" of their time, i.e. Snow White's Scary Adventure, Peter Pan's Flight, etc. So this is actually not a new concept for the parks.

 

[JRawkSteady]

Personally I don't care what the source material is, I just want fun, well themed, fully immersed experiences. From what I've read Carsland is the best thing in any US Disney Park. I'd take that at the MK over Alien Encounter.

I've seen video of Carsland...I personally would take Alien Encounter over that anyday. But this is just my personal opinion. I know how popular Carsland is, so I would never disagree with you there. However, I'm sure you've been in Monsters Inc Laugh Floor, Stitch's Great Escape, Seas With Nemo, Under The Sea...all lackluster, all unoriginal. I haven't done 7DMT yet, but I have heard mediocre reviews on a whole from my friends. Fun, but not worth the wait, etc etc etc...

Do I love Disney films? Yes. Do I want to be immersed in them in attraction form? Yes. Has Disney shoehorned films into attractions? Yes. Has it been working out as of recently? Not really.

Their biggest issue though is closing attractions and dedicating entire areas to meet & greets...

 

[KimBean]

The name is about all that will remain. The interior of the church is now a Frozen exhibit, the castle is a Princess character meal with a menu that is no more Norwegian than I am , the store will be primarily Frozen merchandise, and the Norwegian CMs will be gone. I don't know why Disney doesn't drop its disingenuous posing and just rename it "Arendelle Pavilion".

Side point - but if those desserts aren't Norwegian then please give me chocolate cake or apple pie. I hate those desserts and we go there every time...

 

[cigar95]

most of the attractions at DL, and therefore the knockoffs,at WDW, were based on movies that were the "Frozen" of their time, i.e. Snow White's Scary Adventure, Peter Pan's Flight, etc. So this is actually not a new concept for the parks.

Yet we've already seen in this thread references to many Disney attractions that were *original* ideas.

What's working against such attractions now is that they're harder to market - you tell people "Frozen", "Toy Story", "Snow White", and, yes, even "Avatar", and those things will sell themselves. But build an attraction based on an original idea and the built-in marketing hook is not there.

If the attraction is good (Pirates, MTMR, Haunted Mansion, Soarin, ToT, Horizons, etc.) the attraction will become a success anyway and eventually will market itself.

By contrast, even a mediocre attraction based on a well-loved property (Mermaid, for example) will still be a draw based on its name. (Not claiming this will be the case for a truly horrific attraction - no names needed.)

Personally, I want the Norway pavilion to be about . . . . . *Norway*. And the irony is, by the time this attraction opens, the 'Frozen' mania will have passed, though it will still be popular, and deservedly so.

I say let the Imagineers be creative and come up with great attractions from wherever their imaginations want to dwell. I have no doubt they can work their magic without having to satisfy the Marketeers. I just doubt they will get the opportunity in the current climate.

 

[dtats]

I tend to agree with the OP. As much as I enjoy Disney movies, both old and new, seeing all four parks succumb to overlays (e.g., 3 Caballeros in Mexico, Nemo in Living Seas) and regurgitating existing concepts (dumbo = alladin's flying carpets, in the worst possible place, to boot!) has not been encouraging.

Recalling visits to the three existing parks in the late 80's-mid 90's, they each had a distinctly different flavor, feel, and personality that is becoming more blurred as mgt. tries to make each one equally appealing to everyone for all the same reasons. And why not, that means MORE people visit ALL four parks, right? Thereby, more revenue coming in, correct? Well, that's all well and good for the shareholders. But for the park guests who enjoyed distinguishing between these gems, its becoming less and less so.

As others have rightly pointed out, this complaint seems most severe with EPCOT. Remember when you visited there, and left at the end of the day/evening, humming "Listen to the Land," or "One Little Spark," or "Energy; you make the world go round and round..."? Not anymore... Ask someone under the age of 25 if they have ever even heard of those songs? Ok, so maybe they're dated, but where are their replacements? EPCOT lacks the persona it once had. Nowadays, it's more of a cold-fish. It's just there. Yes, still fun to visit, but not with the awe it formerly provided.

They don't need to focus on movie-related overlays to recapture that feeling. I still prefer the hydro-lators and the movie of the creation of the seas ("...the deluge!") to a ride through a "where's Nemo" commercial with some forgetful tune lumped in at the end to... just get you to the end of the ride. What they need to do is to recapture that "spirit of EPCOT Center" to revitalize what was once a grand park.

I do, however, believe Hollywood Studios is on the right track for a much-needed renaissance. With the proposed changes being discussed, I think we're all in for a treat there, and those changes are in keeping with the theme of that park. THAT makes sense!

I have mixed feelings about the introduction of Avatar (yet another movie-themed project) into a park that doesn't really be screaming for that type of update. IMO, it's the square peg in the round hole. But, I'm willing to remain open and see what the imagineers will bring us.

But, a Frozen-overlay in Norway? Blech!

 

[tyniknate]

Yet we've already seen in this thread references to many Disney attractions that were *original* ideas.

What's working against such attractions now is that they're harder to market - you tell people "Frozen", "Toy Story", "Snow White", and, yes, even "Avatar", and those things will sell themselves. But build an attraction based on an original idea and the built-in marketing hook is not there.

If the attraction is good (Pirates, MTMR, Haunted Mansion, Soarin, ToT, Horizons, etc.) the attraction will become a success anyway and eventually will market itself.

By contrast, even a mediocre attraction based on a well-loved property (Mermaid, for example) will still be a draw based on its name. (Not claiming this will be the case for a truly horrific attraction - no names needed.)

Personally, I want the Norway pavilion to be about . . . . . *Norway*. And the irony is, by the time this attraction opens, the 'Frozen' mania will have passed, though it will still be popular, and deservedly so.

I say let the Imagineers be creative and come up with great attractions from wherever their imaginations want to dwell. I have no doubt they can work their magic without having to satisfy the Marketeers. I just doubt they will get the opportunity in the current climate.