FL being revised?

[HauntedGabe]

You seem to be saying "some of the buildings were completely themed" and others "were just being painted". .

I don't believe that is what you are implying is what I was driving at. I think you missed my point. But that is OK. There is a long standing thread on this topic. We should move it there as we are a tad off topic for FL.

^ Didn't say it was true or that I believed it. Just said it was interesting.

I really enjoy Hills perspectives. I don't drink all of the Kool-Aid of any podcaster or sight but I do listen and follow many of them. Any time you start to parse tidbits out of any podcaster/author or nail any of them on something that turned out not to happen the fun then fizzles out. And for as often as Disney wiggles out of what they state will happen, all of these guys and gals are bound to pass on to us some tidbit and later Disney will pull the plug on. None of them are immune.

Did he really claim people had heart attacks after eating there?

Point in case.


Frankly, I hope some of Hill's article is on target. How original are clowns? I'd rather the Barnstormer stay as it is. I to this day look at any clown sculpture and think John W. Gacy. Princesses just don't do it for me either. I hope Disney is rethinking the draw of their first rendition of FL and take a serious look at HP at the Universal property and the huge draw it is.

[Disney2000]

Good point on the "brand new icon." Still, the Villains Mountain relies on existing tradition and success but can be new. It just has to be done on the level of the haunted mansion; immersive from first sight (even before you even get to the queue). It also must be a great attraction/mountain in the spirit of all of the other mountains, including Everest (except for not properly designing the ride's finale).

I believe there are two keys to the timelessness disney needs. One is a good subject, Two is quality. A good subject consists of: Not being too focused towards one gender. (Ex: Yes, it's Cinderella Castle... but guys enjoy it just as much as girls.) Quality consists of going all out, immersive, above and beyond everything they've done before. Basically, one upping themselves. They don't need to use touch screens and new technology to do it. They need to apply and adapt current technology so that they CAN do it.

When I think of something that will last, I think of the matterhorn, Pirates of the caribbean, the haunted mansion. They're all broad subjects, and therefore they can last for a long time without fading with this fad or that fad. (Ex. I'd rather ride Pirates ten times than Pooh ten times.)

A Non-character specific attraction that captures the magic of the natural (or unnatural) world is the way to go. I believe disney, with the right mindset and enough money could make an attraction about paint drying to beat out WWoHP. They just need to do that... with a different subject of course. Frontierland or Adventureland sounds good to me, along with fantasy forest... WWoHP wouldnt hold a candle.

P.S. Disney magic beats Wizard magic anyday... lets keep it that way!

[JNota0005DakMC]

I believe there are two keys to the timelessness disney needs. One is a good subject, Two is quality. A good subject consists of: Not being too focused towards one gender. (Ex: Yes, it's Cinderella Castle... but guys enjoy it just as much as girls.) Quality consists of going all out, immersive, above and beyond everything they've done before. Basically, one upping themselves. They don't need to use touch screens and new technology to do it. They need to apply and adapt current technology so that they CAN do it.

When I think of something that will last, I think of the matterhorn, Pirates of the caribbean, the haunted mansion. They're all broad subjects, and therefore they can last for a long time without fading with this fad or that fad. (Ex. I'd rather ride Pirates ten times than Pooh ten times.)

A Non-character specific attraction that captures the magic of the natural (or unnatural) world is the way to go. I believe disney, with the right mindset and enough money could make an attraction about paint drying to beat out WWoHP. They just need to do that... with a different subject of course. Frontierland or Adventureland sounds good to me, along with fantasy forest... WWoHP wouldnt hold a candle.

P.S. Disney magic beats Wizard magic anyday... lets keep it that way!

1. I agree with you on this...

2. Cinderella Castle is only gender unspecific because it is synonymous with WDW...

3. staying gender unspecific is the way to go for WDW... HP is for all children... and yes things like PoC and HM are for everyone... (amazing how things created for Disney became Disney film franchises... even though one was a joke really...)

4. Disney could make something that would blow HP outta the water... as long as they let the imagineers do the work... and not let the board or anyone else get in the way... but good luck with that in todays world...

[BamaEd1]

4. Disney could make something that would blow HP outta the water... as long as they let the imagineers do the work... ...

Can I get a big AMEN from the congregation????

[Carolla]

Did he really claim people had heart attacks after eating there?

Yes, see the 2009 Unoffical Guide for his exact info.. (Also, known around my house as "the fictional guidebook".... )

[Veritas]

I understand this is a hot topic and frankly the Harry potter thing is a big challenge to Disney. Mind you it's not as if a single wildly successful land in another park will hurt WDW but competition does spark amazing feats. To paraphrase some snippite I heard somewhere -

"it is from their competitors, not their friends, that parks learn the skill of building great attractions"

That said the Fantasyland Foest is a good idea and I hope the major aspects get pushed through. The villas/castles for the characters like Belle and The Little Mermaid E-ticket will be a huge draw.

The Pixie Hollow is so specificllay targetted taht i think the draw is severly limited Other than afficiandos most folks with out a little girl between the ages of 3 and 10 can't name a single pixie except for Tinkerbell.

The idea of incorproationg Villians has a bunch merit Conisder the big reaction to villians at MNSSHP. My wife and I will happily wait in line to see the evil queen. The idea of attractions that allow interaction with Villians AND still have the good guys triumph reinforces the Disney ethos. Malificent cany spout flames but we all know it ends right.

Ok all that aside some ideas

Course of Action (COA) 1 - Villian E-ticket expansion - thye get to stomp and snarl but the good guys triumph. Little girls still get princesses and favorite characters boys get edgy villian stuff and the good guys win.

COA 2 - Fantasy Forest redux. Ariel and the baseline princess expansion Finish dueling Dumbos though you cannot go wrong with dueling Dumbos. Add something to frontierland or adventure land. There are shelved Imagineering projects that can be dusted off or stral and attraction for Tokyo disney or Paris Jule verne maybe soemthing to replce the much missed 20K.

COA 3 - Ariel and spread the wealth. The Ariel attraction goes in. As several people suggest the tommorrow land race way get refured with Cars theming nd becomes part of fantasyland vs tomorrow land. Dueling Dumbos goes ahead (FACE IT I'M NOT GIVING UP ON DUELING DUMBOS). The other money then gets shifted to other parks.

DHS gets a eticket Star Wars ride think of an x-wing attack on the Death Star it appealst ot folks who saw the original int eh 70s and to kids today. The new est technology can be used for a fully immersive experince

EPCOT can maybe revamp the technology areas that areoften skipped or do something usefule with the pavilsion that held body wars. Again push somethng off the shevles from igamineering or borrow and upgrade an attration form an overseas park.

DAK. Face it Camp Mickey Minnie is a palce holder and not a very good one. Beastly Kingdomme will probably never happen but Could something from a south American or Australian theme be put there? Again i'm thinking somekind fo AMzon or peruvian adventure, or an outback experince.

[doconeill]

Several people I know spoke with Imagineers this past weekend on an Adventures By Disney trip.

Right now, the only changes actually taking place compared to what was announced is that the whole Pixie Hollow area is being scaled back, with Toontown essentially getting a makeover with a more circus theme. It wasn't mentioned as to whether Dumbo is still being relocated back there (it would fit the theme), but the meet and greet areas would be placed in one of the three "tents" that will be there. It was unclear to me if the existing "fair" tents would be retained as part of that.

That's the only change at this point. Everything else mentioned is still moving forward.

And it could all change again...

[Disney.Gen.2.0]

Excuse me while I go off on a rant...

I'm always amazed when these big Hollywood heads can't figure out why a movie did poorly. I didn't see "The Princess and the Frog" so this is purely spectulation, but it seems like they wrote that movie via a checklist of ideas.

Princess of African-American heritage - check!
Everybody is into helping out New Orleans, let's set it there! - check!
We really need another princess! - check!
Princess with girl-power? - check!

I mean, how is she even a princess? She's a young women from New Orleans that wants to open a restaurant. Are there a lot of princesses running around New Orleans? Do they even cook? Why couldn't she just be a young women with a dream? This is where Walt succeeded. He didn't think "franchise", he only thought of "good story".

Disney isn't even the only studio with this problem. They all do it. "Hey, the kids love the super hero movies. Get me a super hero movie!" It's like they come up with original ideas by accident.

This is only my opinion, I could be wrong.

[MartianCrab]

Why couldn't she just be a young women with a dream? This is where Walt succeeded. He didn't think "franchise", he only thought of "good story".

Bingo! I think most sequels are the bane of good entertainment.

[JNota0005DakMC]

Bingo! I think most sequels are the bane of good entertainment.

most sequels are nothing more than to challenge our intelligence...

i use a checklist like this one to determine whether to see a sequel...

1. was the first movie worth it to see again...?
2. does the ending warrant a sequel...?
3. is the sequel even necessary...?
4. what company made it...? (this is important)

most sequels are just there to make more money...

can anyone name all of the Lion King movies...? Aladdin...?

[Creambunni]

I mean, how is she even a princess? She's a young women from New Orleans that wants to open a restaurant. Are there a lot of princesses running around New Orleans? Do they even cook? Why couldn't she just be a young women with a dream?

Technically by the definition, Cinderella and Belle would also not be considered princesses. They would be "really lucky maid" and "bookworm who becomes a prisoner".

Anyways, I don't care if it fits a genre or anything like that as long as it's good. Movies should be judged on their own merit. However, as I have gotten older I don't really care for sequels as much.

[JNota0005DakMC]

Disney has to stop making princess movies off of some "cookie-cutter" storyline...

take Pixar... really no 2 movies are alike... and up until now the sequels have been worth it and successful...

[MartianCrab]

many disney movies do tend to be very formulaic
i wish they tried to be more innovative

[WDW4Ever]

Pixar movies are all original concepts as well

[supernova]

Two Dumbos and a (sure to be) less-than-spectactular Little Mermaid ride will not usurp Universal's technologically-advanced Harry Potter ride.