WDW and Universal. Who wins?

[Aluminum Falcon]

Long video I know but it really fits the discussion on why some aren't exactly happy with where the new additions are going.

Sorry, i can't take poseidon entertainment seriously. They cannot hide from their hatred of Disney

 

[Smugpugmug]

Long video I know but it really fits the discussion on why some aren't exactly happy with where the new additions are going.

I watched the video and couldn't help but wonder why in his Tiana video, he gave that ride a pass when it has the same problems that he brings up in this video.

Also I do feel like he doesn't give Universal the same level of criticism. Disney does deserve it in a lot of ways but so does Universal. I'm glad he at least acknowledges how insanely cheap Villain Con and Dreamworks land turned out.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

I watched the video and couldn't help but wonder why in his Tiana video, he gave that ride a pass when it has the same problems that he brings up in this video.

Also I do feel like he doesn't give Universal the same level of criticism. Disney does deserve it in a lot of ways but so does Universal. I'm glad he at least acknowledges how insanely cheap Villain Con and Dreamworks land turned out.

yeah it's just not impartial enough for me, he isn't judging on an even playing field. I mean he clearly has an audience just can't get behind him or view his content as valuable

 

[Smugpugmug]

yeah it's just not impartial enough for me, he isn't judging on an even playing field. I mean he clearly has an audience just can't get behind him or view his content as valuable

I do think he does bring up a lot of valid points (the Avengers campus video is spot on) but I'm just wondering why he won't give Universal the same level of criticism when they deserve it. At least Disney doesn't have a park where more than half of the attractions are terrible.

 

[Minnie1222]

I much prefer the current parks. Like many people here, I also went to Disney in the 80's, 90's, etc...and I don't think it was better back then. There's nothing wrong with holding on to the past, just don't insult the presence or the future until we have personally experience them.

 

[Jrb1979]

I much prefer the current parks. Like many people here, I also went to Disney in the 80's, 90's, etc...and I don't think it was better back then. There's nothing wrong with holding on to the past, just don't insult the presence or the future until we have personally experience them.

I have no issue with the majority of the new attractions. I think they are great. The issue I have is how they plop them down with our any thought to theme of the park now.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

I have no issue with the majority of the new attractions. I think they are great. The issue I have is how they plop them down with our any thought to theme of the park now.

People keep saying that, but what isn't themed correctly?

 

[tjkraz]

It basically comes down to whether we want to rigidly adhere to some 75-year old concept of what is "appropriate" for each park vs allowing a little flexibility in the interest of expansion. I don't see Indiana Jones at DAK as any worse of a fit than Kali River Rapids or Expedition Everest. The landscaping and architecture certainly fit. There's a similar element of adventure and exploration. IJ will certainly have some animal presence.

Is GOTG a perfect fit for Epcot? No. But they massaged the storyline and presentation to help. Specific to this one, Disney basically had two other choices: use the same ride and make it some generic scientific theme which was a "better fit" or put the ride in a different park. To the latter point, we can't keep shoving all the "good stuff" into Hollywood Studios. As for the former, there's really no doubt that the GOTG overlay generated much more excitement and interest vs some generic big bang theme.

It's tough to wrap my head around the idea of Rivers of America becoming a fully developed plot of land. That said, all of these things are also true:

- Functionally, Tom Sawyer Island and the riverboat hold almost zero value to the masses. The hourly capacity of two Cars attractions will certainly exceed the number of guests riding the boat or walking around the island in same amount of time.

- Having a shorter route from Fantasyland and Liberty Square to BTRM / Tiana / railroad will be a welcome addition for everyone.

- If I want that island / riverboat experience, it still exists in Disneyland. And that's the one that Walt actually created.

- When I'm standing in the middle of this new land, seeing BTMR in one direction, Frontierland in another and Liberty Square in another, the theming will probably be a decent fit. This isn't supposed to be Lightning McQueen and Radiator Springs, it's a different time and place in the Cars universe

I've been a fan of the Disney Parks for many years and enjoy things like Haunted Mansion and Everest which don't have specific IP attached. But overwhelmingly, I suspect the general public wants to see their favorite characters come to life. When you're spending $250-500M on a new attraction, it's a lot easier to market when you've got that built-in name recognition. (Not to mention the merch sales.) Disney's competitors aren't building non-IP attractions for the same reason..unless they're some sort of generic steel coaster where exactly zero dollars are being spent on theming.

 

[Jrb1979]

People keep saying that, but what isn't themed correctly?

Frozen in Norway, Guardians in Epcot, the mish mash of IP that's now Disney's California Adventure. Same can be said of DHS. You have remnants of a park themed to a studios with a mish mash of IP.

 

[Jrb1979]

It basically comes down to whether we want to rigidly adhere to some 75-year old concept of what is "appropriate" for each park vs allowing a little flexibility in the interest of expansion. I don't see Indiana Jones at DAK as any worse of a fit than Kali River Rapids or Expedition Everest. The landscaping and architecture certainly fit. There's a similar element of adventure and exploration. IJ will certainly have some animal presence.

Is GOTG a perfect fit for Epcot? No. But they massaged the storyline and presentation to help. Specific to this one, Disney basically had two other choices: use the same ride and make it some generic scientific theme which was a "better fit" or put the ride in a different park. To the latter point, we can't keep shoving all the "good stuff" into Hollywood Studios. As for the former, there's really no doubt that the GOTG overlay generated much more excitement and interest vs some generic big bang theme.

It's tough to wrap my head around the idea of Rivers of America becoming a fully developed plot of land. That said, all of these things are also true:

- Functionally, Tom Sawyer Island and the riverboat hold almost zero value to the masses. The hourly capacity of two Cars attractions will certainly exceed the number of guests riding the boat or walking around the island in same amount of time.

- Having a shorter route from Fantasyland and Liberty Square to BTRM / Tiana / railroad will be a welcome addition for everyone.

- If I want that island / riverboat experience, it still exists in Disneyland. And that's the one that Walt actually created.

- When I'm standing in the middle of this new land, seeing BTMR in one direction, Frontierland in another and Liberty Square in another, the theming will probably be a decent fit. This isn't supposed to be Lightning McQueen and Radiator Springs, it's a different time and place in the Cars universe

I've been a fan of the Disney Parks for many years and enjoy things like Haunted Mansion and Everest which don't have specific IP attached. But overwhelmingly, I suspect the general public wants to see their favorite characters come to life. When you're spending $250-500M on a new attraction, it's a lot easier to market when you've got that built-in name recognition. (Not to mention the merch sales.) Disney's competitors aren't building non-IP attractions for the same reason..unless they're some sort of generic steel coaster where exactly zero dollars are being spent on theming.

It's not the IP that's the problem. Remy is a good example of IP fitting into the area it's in.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Main Street Theater? They scrapped that pre-covid for unknown reasons.

Also Mary Poppins Ride, the PLAY Pavilion, seemingly the Spaceship Earth refurb is out for the foreseeable future, the length of Navi significantly cut, the restaurant for Toy Story came very late area announced at 2015 D23, opened 2018, restaurant in 2023 after being delayed nearly 3 years from when it was supposed to open, it started construction long enough before covid, Epcot's multi-year long front overhaul dumbed down a lot from concept art (which is called that for a reason but it's way different), etc. You can only blame so much on economic reasons of which are not somehow unique to their multi-decade history. In part this is why Universal doesn't get quite as much flack because they tend to not release information til they are pretty far into the process.

I have hard core DISer friends (much more than I am) and it's very much been the source of talk about how we all feel about announcements made of what Disney will be doing, especially at D23 because we basically feel like we've been burned too much in the past. I felt bad for our CM friend when he asked us all if we had heard about the announcements and most of us just couldn't drum up any excitement for it. These are coming from people who used to LIVE for going to the D23 events and now it's just depressing to them to think about what will likely be cut, what will never happen, etc. The public is a lot more cautious with Disney's announced projects and the scale of them and Disney is aware of their not so stellar reputation on this based on some comments they made at this year's D23 event.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

It's not the IP that's the problem. Remy is a good example of IP fitting into the area it's in.

I'd say Frozen is as well even though it's their IP and Maelstrom probably fit the old Epcot theme better, new Epcot is adding in IPs.

I'm struggling with the cars ride overtaking (presumably) Tom Sawyer Island and Rivers of America because that area is Frontierland and desert rocks a la cars land at DCA don't fit that. Tiana already changed the vibe. A retheme could occur but where does that leave BTMRR.

Disney is capable of putting whole lands of IP together which often make more cohesion and people just talk about the transition from land to land, they are also capable of putting random IPs down in places that remove or significantly change the existing theme and that's what most people are critiquing.

Well themed can be subjective but you can make a park feel disjointed with seemingly random things put in there. It's not a one off opinion either, plenty of people speak about how they feel about the IP stuff, maybe more so because they wish they could have the more "from scratch" of the olden years.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

It's not the IP that's the problem. Remy is a good example of IP fitting into the area it's in.

How does Remy fit but Frozen doesn't? They are both based in the world showcase in the countries they derive from, and they are both IP

 

[HokieRaven5]

I'm struggling with the cars ride overtaking (presumably) Tom Sawyer Island and Rivers of America because that area is Frontierland and desert rocks a la cars land at DCA don't fit that. Tiana already changed the vibe. A retheme could occur but where does that leave BTMRR.

The Cars area set for MK is based more on the wilderness frontier in the Rocky Mountains/Yosemite, which can blend with the Utah themed BTMRR.

 

[lowlight]

Disney's competitors aren't building non-IP attractions for the same reason..unless they're some sort of generic steel coaster where exactly zero dollars are being spent on theming.

When you attach “new” IP to rides or lands, you’ve effectively put a countdown timer on the relevance of it. In 80 years, I imagine kids will still be reading Peter Pan and Pooh, but few will have any idea what Encanto and GotG are (I say that as someone who loved both of those, as do my kids).

That isn’t to say that “IP of the moment” should never be used, but MK is the natural place of most of the classic IP. Frontierland is timeless, it’s a part of our national history. My kids are super excited for Cars land, but it would have gone great in HS. For me, it isn’t even that it doesn’t belong in MK, it’s that things that define MK are being removed for it. A shortage of undeveloped land isn’t really an issue at MK, is it?

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

Frozen in Norway, Guardians in Epcot, the mish mash of IP that's now Disney's California Adventure. Same can be said of DHS. You have remnants of a park themed to a studios with a mish mash of IP.

DHS has been argued about since its inception about not being well themed, Disney scrapped the OG theme of that park over a decade ago and has clung to Pixar and other IP outside of Disney Animation Studios. Personally i look at HS as a place to put Disneys newest IP and anything they do around that "fits" perfectly fine. If you're looking for old school 1950's hollywood i can see why you'd be upset

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

When you attach “new” IP to rides or lands, you’ve effectively put a countdown timer on the relevance of it. In 80 years, I imagine kids will still be reading Peter Pan and Pooh, but few will have any idea what Encanto and GotG are (I say that as someone who loved both of those, as do my kids).

That isn’t to say that “IP of the moment” should never be used, but MK is the natural place of most of the classic IP. Frontierland is timeless, it’s a part of our national history. My kids are super excited for Cars land, but it would have gone great in HS. For me, it isn’t even that it doesn’t belong in MK, it’s that things that define MK are being removed for it. A shortage of undeveloped land isn’t really an issue at MK, is it?

animation seems to last the test of time. My daughter loves Snow White and that lady be ooooold

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

I'd say Frozen is as well even though it's their IP and Maelstrom probably fit the old Epcot theme better, new Epcot is adding in IPs.

I'm struggling with the cars ride overtaking (presumably) Tom Sawyer Island and Rivers of America because that area is Frontierland and desert rocks a la cars land at DCA don't fit that. Tiana already changed the vibe. A retheme could occur but where does that leave BTMRR.

Disney is capable of putting whole lands of IP together which often make more cohesion and people just talk about the transition from land to land, they are also capable of putting random IPs down in places that remove or significantly change the existing theme and that's what most people are critiquing.

Well themed can be subjective but you can make a park feel disjointed with seemingly random things put in there. It's not a one off opinion either, plenty of people speak about how they feel about the IP stuff, maybe more so because they wish they could have the more "from scratch" of the olden years.

This is very unsurprising lately, hardcore fans are never satisfied and this comment is a good illustration of it. The glory days you're after aren't coming back, it may be time to move on

 

[Smugpugmug]

Also Mary Poppins Ride, the PLAY Pavilion, seemingly the Spaceship Earth refurb is out for the foreseeable future, the length of Navi significantly cut, the restaurant for Toy Story came very late area announced at 2015 D23, opened 2018, restaurant in 2023 after being delayed nearly 3 years from when it was supposed to open, it started construction long enough before covid, Epcot's multi-year long front overhaul dumbed down a lot from concept art (which is called that for a reason but it's way different), etc. You can only blame so much on economic reasons of which are not somehow unique to their multi-decade history. In part this is why Universal doesn't get quite as much flack because they tend to not release information til they are pretty far into the process.

Don't forget about how Galaxy's Edge received a decent amount of budget cuts. That included a 3rd ride and a dinner show restaurant. The concept art first revealed to the public looks so different to what we actually got. Similar to the Epcot "overhaul" (which was just embarrassing for the company, let's be real).

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

The Cars area set for MK is based more on the wilderness frontier in the Rocky Mountains/Yosemite, which can blend with the Utah themed BTMRR.

Yeah I thought of that but BTMRR is the "wildest ride in the wilderness", it's theme is based on long ago wild west style, lending on themes of tnt blasting, mining and railroad glory days. That's what I mean about rocks (shown in the concept art) and Tiana. Just having that doesn't match the original Frontierland aspect so it (including Tiana) will come across more as IP thrown in there lack of overall theming. But you could change the entire theme of the land which would then make BTMRR stick out more so then does BTMRR stay around in its current theming or not.

These are thinking out loud thoughts but it's about what the present push of Disney is for today in regards to the IP. When Disney does whole lands they do much better both in overall theming and reception of it, the biggest pushbacks are when they us their more recent IPs in places that not all feel fit right there.