The Future of Disney Studios

[mrsR123]

Most excellent syopsis, Yoho; it could be used as the syllabus. Extra credit for the use of both bold and italics. Now you just need to add color.

 

[Planogirl]

I think that MGM HAD a great theme at one time. The glory days of Hollywood are very compelling and interesting, and I wish that the powers that be would have stuck to this theme. Putting modern classics in the mix didn't bother as these are Hollywood history in the making. However adding in pointless TV stars and a car show seems completely irrelevant. Disney unfortunately lost its focus in this case.

 

[Archie Andrews]

Am I the only one that thinks the Muppet show blows, to me its annoying and irreatating. JMHO

The left side of the park is totally lost and something needs to be done. The Potential is endless

 

[YoHo]

I don't think it blows, but I could stand to be replaced. Of course, I'd rather they add more then replace existing.

 

[ThurlFan]

"hollywood that never was and always will be."

MGM isn't nearly as far away from this ideal as Epcot is from Walt's original concept, but I guess that's neither here nor there. If it's about Movies or Moviemaking I don't mind it's inclusion in the Studios too much. But I agree on Drew Carey and Playhouse Disney.

The swift careening ride on the Southern California freeways is close enough to this theme for me, as is the Muppets (but then I've always been a diehard Muppet fan), although the 3D show I'll admit could be better. The CGI 3D critter is definitely irritating, and a shame that it's the focus of the show.

The thing I'm stunned nobody has mentioned is the game show - Who Wants to be a Millionaire - Play It. This is a tribute to all that's crass and exploitative in television and frankly is an insult to Hollywood Past, Present, AND Never Was.

 

[MJMcBride]

I actually like the Muppet attraction. Although rumor has it that since Disney obtained the rights to the Muppets they will change and/or add to the existing attraction, but who knows? I like it the way it is and like YoHo think they should just add.

 

[MJMcBride]

"hollywood that never was and always will be."

MGM isn't nearly as far away from this ideal as Epcot is from Walt's original concept, but I guess that's neither here nor there. If it's about Movies or Moviemaking I don't mind it's inclusion in the Studios too much. But I agree on Drew Carey and Playhouse Disney.

The swift careening ride on the Southern California freeways is close enough to this theme for me, as is the Muppets (but then I've always been a diehard Muppet fan), although the 3D show I'll admit could be better. The CGI 3D critter is definitely irritating, and a shame that it's the focus of the show.

The thing I'm stunned nobody has mentioned is the game show - Who Wants to be a Millionaire - Play It. This is a tribute to all that's crass and exploitative in television and frankly is an insult to Hollywood Past, Present, AND Never Was.

Its actually dead on in recreating present Hollywood.

And Playhouse Disney was a smah hit with my toddler so I say definately keep that. I thought it was a cute little show for the littler kids. As for Sounds Dangerous, it could go. I'm kind of surprised its not a Sounds Dangerous with the cast of Lost or Desperate Housewives actually.

 

[exDS vet]

The thing I'm stunned nobody has mentioned is the game show - Who Wants to be a Millionaire - Play It. This is a tribute to all that's crass and exploitative in television and frankly is an insult to Hollywood Past, Present, AND Never Was.

Sounds a bit like today's Disney to me.

 

[wwtbamrob]

The thing I'm stunned nobody has mentioned is the game show - Who Wants to be a Millionaire - Play It. This is a tribute to all that's crass and exploitative in television and frankly is an insult to Hollywood Past, Present, AND Never Was.

Based on a theme of movies/Hollywood, you are correct that Play It really doesn't fit. It is an attraction based on a television show and one taped in New York at that.

However, at least at present, there is no better attraction to give you a feel for what it is like to be part of a "film production". As a former contestant on the television program, I can tell you first-hand that the whole look and feel of the show is captured quite well. If you let yourself, you can really feel like you are part of the television show.

Other attractions such as the Monster Sound Show also let you feel like you were part of the creative process, but the only other one that does that now is the backlot tour and that has been scaled way back since the addition of Lights, Motors, Action.

Rob

 

[dbm20th]

Ooo, You've just taken your first step out of the Dis (Disney 101)
To advanced Disney theory (Disney 405)

Epcot and DL/MK have exactly 1 theme/Story.

Thanks for presenting probably the single most used quote from Walt about DL ever. If that is what you consider Advanced Disney, perhaps its time for the the Board of Ed to come up with a new syllabus

But seriously, I was speaking more in the nuts and bolts of it. It seems that MGM's idea of "the Hollywood that never was", yada-yada-yada, was always going to be somewhat limiting and that is why we get these out of place attractions.

Take a look at AK. It seems on the surface that it too would be somewhat limiting, but by adding a Dinosaur area, you open the imagination of the guest and that allows you to do something like a Beastly Kingdom, which EE comes awful close to in content. MGM doesn't have that kind of flexibility, and all it takes is to give it a "land" layout like everything else

 

[MJMcBride]

MGM studios has long since fudged its "Hollywood that never was" theme. Even from the get go, the Backlot tour never really fit into it. That was more a working studios theme.

They could still use the general "look" of old Hollywood. But then how does New York Street fit into that. Or Light Motors,etc., or MuppetVision, or Indy, or Star Tours, etc. I feel it was always basically rides about various movies, TV shows, etc. Granted Tower of Terror fits nicely into that theme but how does Fantasmic.

As an aside, when are we getting an attraction based on "Lost"?

 

[Another Voice]

The real theme of the Disney/MGM Studio was "beat Universal" - the only reason the park exists at all is because MCA announced it was opening just up the road and Michael Eisner was going to do anything to ruin that project. Disney/MGM was hastily thrown together and that’s caused problems since the beginning.

But the “theme” of the park was supposed to be a “celebration of all forms of entertainment”. The park opened with a working radio station, the “you’re in a television show” show and a replica of the Hollywood Bowl to present stage shows. Yes, it wasn’t really a lot – but again there wasn’t a lot of deep thinking that went into the park. The place was never to focus just on movies, but since most of the areas were copied from Universal Studios Hollywood and that it was supposed to be an actual film making location, “movies” tended to dominate.

And what’s really funny was that at the time the studio was built, Disney management thought so little of Disney’s reputation that they went out of their way to avoid “Disney”. They leased the “MGM” name because they thought more people associated it with movies than Disney, they filled the park with all kinds of non-Disney movies and TV shows, and they hired a gaggle of Hollywood stars to provide “street cred” to the place.

 

[DannyDisneyFreak]

The real theme of the Disney/MGM Studio was "beat Universal" - the only reason the park exists at all is because MCA announced it was opening just up the road and Michael Eisner was going to do anything to ruin that project. Disney/MGM was hastily thrown together and that’s caused problems since the beginning.

But the “theme” of the park was supposed to be a “celebration of all forms of entertainment”. The park opened with a working radio station, the “you’re in a television show” show and a replica of the Hollywood Bowl to present stage shows. Yes, it wasn’t really a lot – but again there wasn’t a lot of deep thinking that went into the park. The place was never to focus just on movies, but since most of the areas were copied from Universal Studios Hollywood and that it was supposed to be an actual film making location, “movies” tended to dominate.

And what’s really funny was that at the time the studio was built, Disney management thought so little of Disney’s reputation that they went out of their way to avoid “Disney”. They leased the “MGM” name because they thought more people associated it with movies than Disney, they filled the park with all kinds of non-Disney movies and TV shows, and they hired a gaggle of Hollywood stars to provide “street cred” to the place.

Couldn't have said it better.

 

[MJMcBride]

Well, part of the reason to get MGM was that they had a huge library of films. At that time, there weren't many non-animated disney movies that people really knew.

Also, I had heard that originally they were planning on making a Movies themed pavillon in Epcot that just grew into a whole theme park. Disney would tell taht the idea was too big for a pavillon, and that the announcement of Universal Florida was happenstance. Uh-huh.

 

[Another Voice]

I had heard that originally they were planning on making a Movies themed pavillon in Epcot that just grew into a whole theme park.

That's a little corporate fib which was created after the fact when Universal started screaming that Disney was copying their business plans. EPCOT Center already had the Imgination pavilion with a various movie exhibits in it. Eisner thought theme parks were a horrible investment - he'd rather put the money into actually making movies. But he took Universal's move into Orlando as a personal insult by the CEO of Universal at the time (a feud that became really, really nasty). And like everything else that Eisner took personally, he was willing to throw company money around to keep his ego intact.

Not a lot of money, of course, becasue this was still Eisner (and most of the big bucks went to Eisner's architect friends to build massive hotels, office buildings and other momuments to Eisner's granduer). The park was intentionally created to be as small as possible to keep going off property. And the "working studio" was added in an effort to improve the economics of the project (Eisner hated theme parks, but understood the profit potential of a real studio).

 

[MJMcBride]

How do you know that its a little fib?

 

[Greg K.]

Does anyone else find that Sorcerer's hat to be a design disaster?

I can understand plopping it down, briefly, for the 100 Years of Magic celebration. But its 15 minutes are UP. It doesn't fit. It shatters the "old Hollywood" design of the main entryway, and completely obliterates the Chinese Theater.

The original park, as it was laid out years ago, is a masterful piece of engineering -- you ever see the world's biggest hidden Mickey, photographed from above? --and the park really captures some of the elegant old architecture of LA. It also achieves what the designers intended, which is a nice, warm feeling of intimacy, similar to the original Disneyland (a feeling sadly lost in translation, when that park was enlarged into the Magic Kingdom, and it's completely missing from Epcot.)

 

[Greg K.]

I couldn't resist. If you haven't seen it, here it is: the world's largest hidden Mickey, at MGM! How cool is that???

 

[MissTink]

I couldn't resist. If you haven't seen it, here it is: the world's largest hidden Mickey, at MGM! How cool is that???

WOW! Great pic! I never knew about this hidden Mickey. IMHO, MGM need MAJOR improvements. It's not a park I visit anymore with my play 3 days FL pass. Wish I could find a new reason to visit.

 

[raidermatt]

How do you know that its a little fib?

I think his post explained pretty well about Eisner's intentions, which would make the alternative reason a fib, or at best a convenient coincidence. You can choose not to believe him of course.

But then there's the timing and how things were done. Kinda hard to ignore that even without knowledge of the inner workings.