And Disney these days probably sees alot of marketing success with creating attractions themed off of films; you like the film so you ride the ride. But it is interesting to know another reason why the early parks were mostly original ideas 🥰
Yep. You can even see this with rides based on more obscure movies like 20k leagues. Rides need the attraction of iconic movies to be popular enough to run.
it started with the massive success that universal had with harry potter, disney piggy backed, had massive success, and when you have success you seem to stick with it
It’s also do in a large part to guest preferences. When Disney’s California adventure at the Disneyland resort opened it had almost no Disney IP in it and because of that it wasn’t as successful as they anticipated. People were complaining that it didn’t feel very “Disney”. So to boost its popularity they started putting Disney IP into California adventure to try and make it more popular and it worked. Things like changing California screaming into “increda coaster” and changing there tower to guardians of the galaxy. The more IP they put into the park the less people complained about the lack of “Disney” in the park. It was in fact so successful that they started bringing this idea to other aspects of other parks like Disney’s Hollywood Studios over in Florida. It’s not that they don’t have the creativity to think of new rides they just know that putting in IP is going to get more bang for the buck compared to thinking up something new.
People don’t buy haunted mansion or tiki room merch on the way out of the ride. That’s why the rides are themed now. Same deal in six flags, they just paint a rollercoaster yellow & red and call it “Wonder Woman”.
And plus, it literally has "Disney" in it's name Of course there would be Disney stuff at a park that has Disney in it's name, that's like going to a park called "SpongeBobLand" but when you get there, there are no SpongeBob related things there, not even toys or rides
Disney has not lost creativity, they make rides from pre existing movies because a lots of people really love said movies and it brings in a lot of profit for Disney and fans still really love it
My problem isn’t IPs. More attractions the better right? The actual problem is they replace old attractions with new IPs, but those new IPs don’t even really fit the theming. Epcot is a great example. Used to be a park that tried to inspire education in a fun way. Now we have Marvel coaster (I love marvel just not here) and frozen (a ride that fits better in fantasy land but they put it there because it had a vague connection to Norway)
Although I like the better rides. I agree Frozen belongs at MK. I just dislike the boring rides so I'm not against the replacement, they should upgrade them instead. Mickey's Runaway Railway for an example, it's a fun ride at HS but should probs be at MK too.
Probably a third reason for this was Walt Disney actually put up his own money to get the park started. He created companies specifically for creation and imagineering of Disneyland that was not a part of Walt Disney Productions.
Disney hasn't "lost its ability to be creative." Disney has lost sight of its original mission. It puts the bean counters above the creatives and no longer allows them to do what they do best; tell stories. Also, the generation of Imagineers that started the whole thing in the 50s through the 70s are gone, and replaced with Engineers without the same capability for Imagination. And those that DO have the creative spark take second place to the pencil necks that put profit above EVERYTHING else.
Honestly, no. I don't think disney has lost their creativity. I would assume that with more new movies released, and with more new characters, guests would enjoy to see beyond the movies. Get to see more of the story. This is just my honest opinion.
I don’t think Disney has lost their thing to be creative. I just think they’re teaming it more on Disney movies because that’s what little kids are into.
So many people forget that Disney, parks included, is a Business! Which means customer preference has directly affected most of the company’s choices. And Disney is very very good at listening to customer preference. When Disneyland first opened the number one complaint was “Where are the characters?” They didn’t have way around characters. And the rides where suppose to put the rider in place of the main character, so you saw the story from that viewpoint… yeah… no one got it! Lol So, Disney added characters! Want hadnt even designed walk around characters when it opened! But when it was apparent that’s what people wanted, he contracted some already made costumes from the ice capades! To terrifying results! Which they have since fixed. They where the first to feature, and perfect, walk around characters. They have taken risks by making new rides. New material. Some stay and become cannon. Some fail. Each is a financial risk. And, they have been around a long time. As new imageneers take over for old ones, some have great ideas, and some don’t. But all we remember in nostalgia is the good. A very good example is the now defunked and formally loved splash mountain. It came around in the late 80s-early 90s. Largely filled by animatronics from the outdated and aging America Sings. But the only material they had at the time that had matching characters was Song of the South, which had aged worse that America sings! But the characters are cute… and it’s space is in carefree country, so let’s take a risk. It was a hit! But it was still tied to a now-seen-as-racist movie in the past. And how that Disney has Tiana and the gang, well, it’s smart Business to use that movie for a revamp. I’m surprised it didn’t happen sooner! They will be, again, recycling whatever they can to save some $$. But what the customer likes, they will do. They are very good at producing what customers want: a nostalgic happy place where you can forget your worries. Because it’s become the company’s image for many growing generations. And they protect that image tooth and nail! Sometimes viciously! But they are a Business! And new material is risky. So they give us what is most likely to succeed…. Although I question the boatload of crappy remakes and live action re-adaptations of classics… but hopefully the new crop of Disney tops listen. And take more risks… 🤷🏻♀️
I personally don’t think Disney has lost its creativity. I think it has been focus in other areas. Like you said, all the the newer rides are about or themed around a movie or franchise, but the newest rides are highly advanced and innovative. Rides like the avatar rides in Animal Kingdom are extremely immersive and technologically complicated. The upcoming Tron ride in Magic Kingdom is turning out to be rather complex as well. So I think Disney is still creative, but not in the way we think.
I think the imagineers are probably just as creative now as back then. Way back when the issue of building a ride was “what neat concept can we do and is it possible to be built?” Where as now it’s “how do we work with this theme to our advantage and is it possible to be built?” Another thing is that when people walk into Disney now, they want to see stuff based on the movies and shows
This is partially because originally Disney would get a corporate sponsor to pay for the ride, thus when that was phased out the attractions needed another way to pay for themselves
I definitely feel that making rides after movies adds to the magic, immersing you in the movies you love and making it a one of a kind experience. However, it is also cool riding something like Expedition Everest where the story is told through the ride and thats it. Both are great in their own way but using IPs reaches out to a broader audience
I like the newer rides that have other things based off them cuz you can say things like oh I’ve loved that movie where as say for small world I’m like oh cool, it feels more magical
I thought this was gonna be about the fact that all the new shows and movies they make are just taking the old good ideas and changing them to a point beyond recognition.
It’s not about ability to be creative, it’s about what draws in the most guests to the parks. Nobody would be as interested in a new slow moving ride with a completely new story and characters when they could have one including a bunch of famous ones. The old ones are allowed to stay because they’ve already gotten popular but when making new rides of course they’re gonna go with one of their hugely popular properties.
It is because of something that Disney also coined called synergy. They use their rides to sell merchandise they make themed drinks foods etc. to capitalize on peoples love of characters and movies.
I actually don’t think so Just because your making stuff with ip does not mean your not “creative” Example, Universal, almost all of their rides us ip, and we praise them, but Disney gets called out as being “not creative” whenever they make an ip attraction
I understand that it's for the marketing purposes and that those rides work better with people but imo the true charm of a disney park is having exclusive rides only guests could experience themselves, basically having their own movie instead of relying on characters, even the old ip rides like snow white's adventures used not to have snow white in it to make us feel like WE are in snow white's shoes, so basically the main character!
I prefer a mix. Some of the most recognizable rides are original themes, Tower of Terror, the Haunted Mansion, Expedition Everest, It's a Small World, etc.. I think the unique themes are important, and I think it would be really cool if they still created some. However, the ones based on IPs also bring in more guests, so I get it, and many of them are fun too. I haven't been to Disney World since I was a kid, probably like 13 years old was the last time I got to go (I'm 22 now), but the Star Tours ride based on Star Wars was one of my favorites. Still, my actual favorites were the Tower of Terror and the Rocking Rollar Coaster (kinda strangely based on the band Aerosmith).
Fantasyland has long had Peter Pan, Dumbo, Casey Jr., Storybookland, Snow White, Pinocchio, Alice in Wonderland, and Mr. Toad as featured attractions, as well as walking through Sleeping Beauty's castle. Most Disney films to that point had been Fantasy related fairy tales. The other lands were themed around time periods and locales that didn't necessarily appear prominently in Disney films. (Exceptions such as the Swiss Family Robinson TreeHouse and Davy Crockett Explorer Canoes notwithstanding). However, as those films were created, they were incorporated into the parks. So I think early Disneyland was more of a mix of what was available in the Disney library, what was popular in American cinema and literature in general, and what reflected the nation's history and collective dreams for the future. I think we see the same innovation and creativity in today's attractions, with more of a focus on celebrating what is most popular within Disney's vast wealth of stories and films.
Not only in the parks. Movies too. All the live action remakes coming out of older movies. It's rare to see a movie that isn't a live action remake or followed by a number
Something I’ve noticed is that basically every ride is that you are viewing something new and it goes wrong , eg giardians if the galaxy, Star Wars rise of the resistance, incredicoaster etc
Walt himself was driven by innovation. Remakes and sequels/prequels were anathema to him. After his death, his company became increasingly corporate, with profits being valued above all else. And the easiest way to make a profit is to beat a successful idea to death by milking it to the very last drop. Along the way, it lost its soul, and it sees the Walt Disney name purely as a lucrative corporate asset.
tbh i liked it when not every ride was a movie theme i mean it’s cool and all but ima miss the ogs like splash mountain tower of terror journey of water js the classics not every ride has to be movie based it’s nice to see some creativity through the park outside of the movies that Disney makes
You have to also realize that Disneyland opened with Sleeping Beauty’s castle before the movie came out in hopes people would connect with it and see it in the theaters. Same thing with Cinderellas castle. Disney just now has more movies to play with and that’s what guests like. Guests are also different now then they were when they first opened. Guests liked theme parks for the sake of. Now new Disney guests want more of a Disney feel.
Good point re: Sleeping Beauty's Castle. Sometimes, I think Disney has lost its way....but if Walt was still around, I wonder if he would be making some of the same / similar decisions...based on guest's feedback. (Remember, he used to listen to guest's conversations while eating in some of the park's restaurants)
I feel like the newest creative ride was Mickey and Minnie's Runaway Railway because it has it's own story but it is based on the 2013 Paul Rudish Shorts "Mickey Mouse"
They were just more creative back then. They didn't want to be boxed in by their film line. Disney was bigger than that. It was a leader in entertainment and storytelling that went beyond the medium of film. It was a leader in innovation and imagining more. They found ways to make education into entertainment (Carousel of Progress, Hall of Presidents, Spaceship Earth). To tell stories through a ride instead of through a movie (Jungle Cruise, Pirates of the Carribean, Thunder Mountain). Frankly, these are my favorite parts of Disney. For example, I LOVED ExtraTerrorestial Alien Encounter when I was a kid of ten years old. I loved how scary it was. It was one of my favorite rides. When it turned into the Stitch ride, I think I rode it once, and it ultimately failed.
I would argue the creativity is in the movies themselves. Disney is a brand manager, meaning they create brands that they capitalize from in an assortment of ways. They create the movie with the intention of incorporating rides, or even themed areas from those movies. I don't believe you can claim they lost their creativity when the imagineers were animators in the past, which is essentially what they are doing now, just from a top down perspective.
It starts off with false info, the original Disneyland relied on ip heavily, like Mickey and Minnie and all of them of course, but all of the fantasy land rides were based on ip, and about ip in the parks today, what’s going to draw more people in, an Encanto attraction, or a generic-ish ride?
Mickey Mouse gets people through the turnstiles, but they keep coming back for The Haunted Mansion. I love Peter Pan's Flight, but I could live without going on it everytime I'm in Disneyland. But, I can't leave the park without going on Pirates, Haunted Mansion, or seeing Mr. Lincoln. Disney still has the ability to be creative, they just don't want to.
They probably stopped being so imaginative and creative because all the movies that they have released recently *1990s and up* have bathed in popularity and the addition of those themed rides to their park would probably attract more people and cause more people to spend more money on those rides and related items.
It didn't lose creativity, it gained money. People generally dont really care about original rides, that's why they keep replacing the older ones with themed ones
Also in the 50s and 70s a lot of people wouldn’t have seen the older movies, and couldn’t if they wanted to. But now with Disney+ DVDs and even VHS Tape’s it’s easy to see a year’s old movie, Back then you saw it in movie theatres or you didn’t see it.
I feel like this is fine, because all those old rides are considered classics and if they added a random ride now it probably would not have the success of a themed ride.
Ummm, that's exactly why he opened the parks. Yes he wanted a clean safe place for kids and adults to have fun together, but he definitely wanted to promote movies and tv with the park. Day 1 attractions included Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland, and he had tv specials about the different lands.
It's because when a company is so loved and gets so large to this point they essentially can't fail. So they keep overusing successfull intellectual properties and rehashing stuff that people know because it's guaranteed to make money instead of actually making something creative that had a larger potential to fail and lose money.
Expedition Everest was based off of a mythical being and a real life Mountain so not really original. But it’s still creative, they don’t just shove a movie into a ride and call it a day. I mean, they came up with a whole new planet for Galaxy’s Edge. And all the IP that Disney uses is still creative because Disney created it
I still think Disney has a bit of creativity. Even in using IP's, imagineers can still manage to come up with cool and fun rides based around existing property. There has to be at least some creativity put into that.
Idk, I don’t think it’s fair to discount the incredible amount of work and creativity that imagineers put into creating these recent rides, even if they are based on films. Take Rise of the Resistance, for example, that’s like the longest and most innovative ride they have, and it’s based on Star Wars.
I don't think they lost it, they probably make more money from all the themes based on the films. If I was to go to Disneyland, I'd want to see something I know from them. It just makes sense.
Y’all want to know what's hilarious. The fact that Disney is losing so much money and yet if they could only admit to its existence they could have at least a bit money flowing in. The best part of this whole thing is that it's a movie that they created years ago. Disney could have merch, a new attraction, don't even get me started on the fact that if do it right a second movie. I am speaking of course about Disney's forsaken child Treasure Planet.
The reason certain rides like Pirates and Haunted Mansion were made to be park originals not based on movies is because of what you said. They didn't have enough movies that would for good to be rides. Like Lady And The Tramp. I don't see any way that could be a ride! I mean I'm sure Disney could figure it out if they wanted to. But Disney now has so many movies. Going into Disneyland and seeing stuff not from DISNEY movies now would be weird. So now they only do movie themed attractions so it can actually feel like a DISNEYland! But it would be nice to see Disney create an attraction that's not themed after any movies or tv shows.
I feel like it would weird now if they had non-disney Disney rides nowadays lol. Like small world is fine but I think the theme rides are a big part of the appeal instead of just another amusement park
Disney didn’t have a lot of money to build all the rides so many of the rides were corporate-sponsored; as TV and esp. the internet grew in-person marketing like this was less attractive so as they’ve lost corporate sponsors to pay for the rides they added their own (free) IPs. Ex in Tomorrowland on opening day there was a paint company that sponsored a pavilion where you’d go and see different walls of paint. Literally, an attraction to watch paint dry in Disney.
So does that mean they have the excuse to no longer be creative? Creativity and imagination are what make Disney grand. Its just sad the direction Disney is going
This was a shower thought I had hoping they already have it, but I think it's belles book shelf, from that scene... I dunno, it's been a while since I've watched beauty and the beast, but I'm pretty sure she loves books. They should make a huge mystical library, just for the book lovers.
Plus no one goes to disney land expecting to see harald the ant eater or whatever, they go expecting to see Darth Vader or Mickey Mouse or Spider-Man Even if they didnt want to change they had to to keep people coming
This is demonstrably untrue. Disneyland opened with 19 attractions, of which at least half were based on an existing or upcoming movie, short, or TV show. Each land of the park was designed to tie in with an existing IP, and the Disneyland TV show produced several short films to help promote the park and its attractions. Walt was synergizing the park with IP before they were even built.
And Disney these days probably sees alot of marketing success with creating attractions themed off of films; you like the film so you ride the ride. But it is interesting to know another reason why the early parks were mostly original ideas 🥰
Yeah both thrive off of each other.
You like the movie, go on the ride.
Like the ride, go watch the movie
Yep. You can even see this with rides based on more obscure movies like 20k leagues. Rides need the attraction of iconic movies to be popular enough to run.
it started with the massive success that universal had with harry potter, disney piggy backed, had massive success, and when you have success you seem to stick with it
Waffle House has Found it's New Host
@@lemonlizard1 that's it, the human centipede of Disney Studios and Parks, basically
Like pirates of the Caribbean and jungle Cruise, we’re both rides before they became movies
I was literally coming here to say this! Now the movies are based on those guys rides rather than the other way round 😂
yea potc is defenetly the best darkride i've ever done (and im talking about the paris version) with phantom manor comming in second
So was tower of terror
The waffle house has found it's new host
And haunted mansion
It’s also do in a large part to guest preferences. When Disney’s California adventure at the Disneyland resort opened it had almost no Disney IP in it and because of that it wasn’t as successful as they anticipated. People were complaining that it didn’t feel very “Disney”. So to boost its popularity they started putting Disney IP into California adventure to try and make it more popular and it worked. Things like changing California screaming into “increda coaster” and changing there tower to guardians of the galaxy. The more IP they put into the park the less people complained about the lack of “Disney” in the park. It was in fact so successful that they started bringing this idea to other aspects of other parks like Disney’s Hollywood Studios over in Florida. It’s not that they don’t have the creativity to think of new rides they just know that putting in IP is going to get more bang for the buck compared to thinking up something new.
I think Pixar Pier definitely helped a lot with making California Adventure feel more Disney
Tower of terror was based off the twilight zone tho
@@sirsnek3933 yup, I saw it at Disney world before Disneyland and I’m live very close to Disneyland
Rip tower of terror
but tower of terror was based off a franchise? it was better as the tower of terror imo :/
The worlds of their original rides are so intriguing. I mean look at Expedition Everest, almost every Tokyo Disney sea ride, and even Dinosaur.
People don’t buy haunted mansion or tiki room merch on the way out of the ride. That’s why the rides are themed now. Same deal in six flags, they just paint a rollercoaster yellow & red and call it “Wonder Woman”.
I like the change. For me it makes the experience more magical.
Yes, we come for stuff from Disney after all.
And plus, it literally has "Disney" in it's name
Of course there would be Disney stuff at a park that has Disney in it's name, that's like going to a park called "SpongeBobLand" but when you get there, there are no SpongeBob related things there, not even toys or rides
The price is not magical
@@gato48480it's magical how easily they can drain you of money lmao
@@gato48480 you’re not forced to go
Disney has not lost creativity, they make rides from pre existing movies because a lots of people really love said movies and it brings in a lot of profit for Disney and fans still really love it
My problem isn’t IPs. More attractions the better right? The actual problem is they replace old attractions with new IPs, but those new IPs don’t even really fit the theming.
Epcot is a great example. Used to be a park that tried to inspire education in a fun way. Now we have Marvel coaster (I love marvel just not here) and frozen (a ride that fits better in fantasy land but they put it there because it had a vague connection to Norway)
This is my thoughts
Although I like the better rides. I agree Frozen belongs at MK. I just dislike the boring rides so I'm not against the replacement, they should upgrade them instead. Mickey's Runaway Railway for an example, it's a fun ride at HS but should probs be at MK too.
Probably a third reason for this was Walt Disney actually put up his own money to get the park started. He created companies specifically for creation and imagineering of Disneyland that was not a part of Walt Disney Productions.
Disney hasn't "lost its ability to be creative." Disney has lost sight of its original mission. It puts the bean counters above the creatives and no longer allows them to do what they do best; tell stories. Also, the generation of Imagineers that started the whole thing in the 50s through the 70s are gone, and replaced with Engineers without the same capability for Imagination. And those that DO have the creative spark take second place to the pencil necks that put profit above EVERYTHING else.
I find it really sad that creative parks and areas like blizzard beach are slowly starting to be filled with disney properties
*confused in Peter pans flight, snow whited scary adventure, and Mr toads wild ride*
It's not a loss of creativity, it's an increase of reference materials.
One weird thing is disney keeps working with vekoma which is known for the roughest rides out there (now they are the smoothest out there)
I know right. Cosmic Rewind is one of the smoothest coaster ever and I was surprised it was Vekoma.
Honestly, no. I don't think disney has lost their creativity. I would assume that with more new movies released, and with more new characters, guests would enjoy to see beyond the movies. Get to see more of the story. This is just my honest opinion.
I don’t think Disney has lost their thing to be creative. I just think they’re teaming it more on Disney movies because that’s what little kids are into.
So many people forget that Disney, parks included, is a Business! Which means customer preference has directly affected most of the company’s choices. And Disney is very very good at listening to customer preference.
When Disneyland first opened the number one complaint was “Where are the characters?” They didn’t have way around characters. And the rides where suppose to put the rider in place of the main character, so you saw the story from that viewpoint… yeah… no one got it! Lol So, Disney added characters! Want hadnt even designed walk around characters when it opened! But when it was apparent that’s what people wanted, he contracted some already made costumes from the ice capades! To terrifying results! Which they have since fixed. They where the first to feature, and perfect, walk around characters.
They have taken risks by making new rides. New material. Some stay and become cannon. Some fail. Each is a financial risk. And, they have been around a long time. As new imageneers take over for old ones, some have great ideas, and some don’t. But all we remember in nostalgia is the good.
A very good example is the now defunked and formally loved splash mountain. It came around in the late 80s-early 90s. Largely filled by animatronics from the outdated and aging America Sings. But the only material they had at the time that had matching characters was Song of the South, which had aged worse that America sings! But the characters are cute… and it’s space is in carefree country, so let’s take a risk. It was a hit! But it was still tied to a now-seen-as-racist movie in the past.
And how that Disney has Tiana and the gang, well, it’s smart Business to use that movie for a revamp. I’m surprised it didn’t happen sooner! They will be, again, recycling whatever they can to save some $$. But what the customer likes, they will do.
They are very good at producing what customers want: a nostalgic happy place where you can forget your worries. Because it’s become the company’s image for many growing generations. And they protect that image tooth and nail! Sometimes viciously!
But they are a Business! And new material is risky. So they give us what is most likely to succeed…. Although I question the boatload of crappy remakes and live action re-adaptations of classics… but hopefully the new crop of Disney tops listen. And take more risks… 🤷🏻♀️
I think Mystic Manor shows that Disney Imagineers are still capable of developing unique creative rides.
Imagineers are still doing work! A movie doesn't magically transform into an interactive attraction without a professional involved
I don’t think it’s a bad thing.
Seeing the characters we love from the big screen make their way to physical attractions in Disney’s parks is fun!
Yes
@@thomasstory8251 Yes
But it gets boring fast
@@budi9573 how?
@@Apollosbiggestsimp its the same thing as the others
I personally don’t think Disney has lost its creativity. I think it has been focus in other areas. Like you said, all the the newer rides are about or themed around a movie or franchise, but the newest rides are highly advanced and innovative. Rides like the avatar rides in Animal Kingdom are extremely immersive and technologically complicated. The upcoming Tron ride in Magic Kingdom is turning out to be rather complex as well. So I think Disney is still creative, but not in the way we think.
Counter point: we got pirates of the Caribbean and it became one of the best film franchises of all time
I thought the whole point of Disneyland was to see the characters that you love
No it wasn't. It was to create an amusement park that would be enjoyable for both kids and adults
I don’t feel like Disney has lost its creativity but I feel like they’re creative in a new way
I think it's based on making sales. They can link rides to movies and sell more merchandise as well. They have added so many stores
I think the imagineers are probably just as creative now as back then. Way back when the issue of building a ride was “what neat concept can we do and is it possible to be built?” Where as now it’s “how do we work with this theme to our advantage and is it possible to be built?” Another thing is that when people walk into Disney now, they want to see stuff based on the movies and shows
This is partially because originally Disney would get a corporate sponsor to pay for the ride, thus when that was phased out the attractions needed another way to pay for themselves
I definitely feel that making rides after movies adds to the magic, immersing you in the movies you love and making it a one of a kind experience. However, it is also cool riding something like Expedition Everest where the story is told through the ride and thats it. Both are great in their own way but using IPs reaches out to a broader audience
I like the newer rides that have other things based off them cuz you can say things like oh I’ve loved that movie where as say for small world I’m like oh cool, it feels more magical
And Disney made a few movies based on rides, like Pirates of the Caribbean and Haunted Mansion to name a few.
I thought this was gonna be about the fact that all the new shows and movies they make are just taking the old good ideas and changing them to a point beyond recognition.
universal sitting in the background glancing around nervously
It’s not about ability to be creative, it’s about what draws in the most guests to the parks. Nobody would be as interested in a new slow moving ride with a completely new story and characters when they could have one including a bunch of famous ones. The old ones are allowed to stay because they’ve already gotten popular but when making new rides of course they’re gonna go with one of their hugely popular properties.
It is because of something that Disney also coined called synergy. They use their rides to sell merchandise they make themed drinks foods etc. to capitalize on peoples love of characters and movies.
While it be cool to see more original rides it’s pretty cool to see our favorite Disney characters go on an adventure in a ride
I actually don’t think so
Just because your making stuff with ip does not mean your not “creative”
Example, Universal, almost all of their rides us ip, and we praise them, but Disney gets called out as being “not creative” whenever they make an ip attraction
People want relatable rides. Young children respond to what they know already.
Yes and that’s why all the new rides have merc shops when you’re exiting
I understand that it's for the marketing purposes and that those rides work better with people but imo the true charm of a disney park is having exclusive rides only guests could experience themselves, basically having their own movie instead of relying on characters, even the old ip rides like snow white's adventures used not to have snow white in it to make us feel like WE are in snow white's shoes, so basically the main character!
Dumbo, Snow White, Casey Jr, Alice in wonderland, Mr. Toad, Peter Pan, Cinderella, sleeping beauty, Davy Crockett.
I prefer a mix. Some of the most recognizable rides are original themes, Tower of Terror, the Haunted Mansion, Expedition Everest, It's a Small World, etc.. I think the unique themes are important, and I think it would be really cool if they still created some. However, the ones based on IPs also bring in more guests, so I get it, and many of them are fun too. I haven't been to Disney World since I was a kid, probably like 13 years old was the last time I got to go (I'm 22 now), but the Star Tours ride based on Star Wars was one of my favorites. Still, my actual favorites were the Tower of Terror and the Rocking Rollar Coaster (kinda strangely based on the band Aerosmith).
The Star Wars one is incredible and amazing
Fantasyland has long had Peter Pan, Dumbo, Casey Jr., Storybookland, Snow White, Pinocchio, Alice in Wonderland, and Mr. Toad as featured attractions, as well as walking through Sleeping Beauty's castle. Most Disney films to that point had been Fantasy related fairy tales. The other lands were themed around time periods and locales that didn't necessarily appear prominently in Disney films. (Exceptions such as the Swiss Family Robinson TreeHouse and Davy Crockett Explorer Canoes notwithstanding). However, as those films were created, they were incorporated into the parks. So I think early Disneyland was more of a mix of what was available in the Disney library, what was popular in American cinema and literature in general, and what reflected the nation's history and collective dreams for the future. I think we see the same innovation and creativity in today's attractions, with more of a focus on celebrating what is most popular within Disney's vast wealth of stories and films.
Not only in the parks. Movies too. All the live action remakes coming out of older movies. It's rare to see a movie that isn't a live action remake or followed by a number
Honestly I don't think so sure they use IPs but the way they use them mixed with technology we have now is actually pretty creative
These memes where so good it saved me from splash back on the toilet
They didnt lose their creativity, they just dont have to make the story part of it anymore
I like how it’s based on the movies now rather than random things (not saying any of the older rides weren’t cool)
Something I’ve noticed is that basically every ride is that you are viewing something new and it goes wrong , eg giardians if the galaxy, Star Wars rise of the resistance, incredicoaster etc
Walt himself was driven by innovation. Remakes and sequels/prequels were anathema to him.
After his death, his company became increasingly corporate, with profits being valued above all else. And the easiest way to make a profit is to beat a successful idea to death by milking it to the very last drop. Along the way, it lost its soul, and it sees the Walt Disney name purely as a lucrative corporate asset.
tbh i liked it when not every ride was a movie theme i mean it’s cool and all but ima miss the ogs like splash mountain tower of terror journey of water js the classics not every ride has to be movie based it’s nice to see some creativity through the park outside of the movies that Disney makes
You have to also realize that Disneyland opened with Sleeping Beauty’s castle before the movie came out in hopes people would connect with it and see it in the theaters. Same thing with Cinderellas castle. Disney just now has more movies to play with and that’s what guests like. Guests are also different now then they were when they first opened. Guests liked theme parks for the sake of. Now new Disney guests want more of a Disney feel.
Good point re: Sleeping Beauty's Castle.
Sometimes, I think Disney has lost its way....but if Walt was still around, I wonder if he would be making some of the same / similar decisions...based on guest's feedback. (Remember, he used to listen to guest's conversations while eating in some of the park's restaurants)
I feel like the newest creative ride was Mickey and Minnie's Runaway Railway because it has it's own story but it is based on the 2013 Paul Rudish Shorts "Mickey Mouse"
They were just more creative back then. They didn't want to be boxed in by their film line. Disney was bigger than that. It was a leader in entertainment and storytelling that went beyond the medium of film. It was a leader in innovation and imagining more. They found ways to make education into entertainment (Carousel of Progress, Hall of Presidents, Spaceship Earth). To tell stories through a ride instead of through a movie (Jungle Cruise, Pirates of the Carribean, Thunder Mountain). Frankly, these are my favorite parts of Disney. For example, I LOVED ExtraTerrorestial Alien Encounter when I was a kid of ten years old. I loved how scary it was. It was one of my favorite rides. When it turned into the Stitch ride, I think I rode it once, and it ultimately failed.
I loved that one clip with the avatars
I would argue the creativity is in the movies themselves. Disney is a brand manager, meaning they create brands that they capitalize from in an assortment of ways. They create the movie with the intention of incorporating rides, or even themed areas from those movies. I don't believe you can claim they lost their creativity when the imagineers were animators in the past, which is essentially what they are doing now, just from a top down perspective.
It starts off with false info, the original Disneyland relied on ip heavily, like Mickey and Minnie and all of them of course, but all of the fantasy land rides were based on ip, and about ip in the parks today, what’s going to draw more people in, an Encanto attraction, or a generic-ish ride?
Expedition Everest is my favorite ride at Disney, and I believe it's the most recent non IP ride made.
i get excited every time i see oswald merch or see him somewhere in these videos.
Seeing how their animated series are like now, then YES
The answer is a strong yes. It's just like their movies today.
Mickey Mouse gets people through the turnstiles, but they keep coming back for The Haunted Mansion.
I love Peter Pan's Flight, but I could live without going on it everytime I'm in Disneyland. But, I can't leave the park without going on Pirates, Haunted Mansion, or seeing Mr. Lincoln.
Disney still has the ability to be creative, they just don't want to.
They probably stopped being so imaginative and creative because all the movies that they have released recently *1990s and up* have bathed in popularity and the addition of those themed rides to their park would probably attract more people and cause more people to spend more money on those rides and related items.
They do that for kids so they can recognize characters and you try making a theme park with new ideas every ride
Gee, I wonder why a movie studio that owns a theme park would have attractions based on their movies 🤔
It didn't lose creativity, it gained money. People generally dont really care about original rides, that's why they keep replacing the older ones with themed ones
I think Disney has shifted it creativity. Cosmic Rewind... IYKYK
Also in the 50s and 70s a lot of people wouldn’t have seen the older movies, and couldn’t if they wanted to. But now with Disney+ DVDs and even VHS Tape’s it’s easy to see a year’s old movie, Back then you saw it in movie theatres or you didn’t see it.
I Think the only thing that changed is that now the Marketing Team Is at a Higher Rank Than the park designers
And now they are turning splash mountain into a Tiana based ride
Tbf, splash mountain is already an IP based ride
Would you rather have a random ride with some dude named Kirk or a ride based on a movie that you have seen and potentially enjoyed
I feel like this is fine, because all those old rides are considered classics and if they added a random ride now it probably would not have the success of a themed ride.
Ummm, that's exactly why he opened the parks. Yes he wanted a clean safe place for kids and adults to have fun together, but he definitely wanted to promote movies and tv with the park. Day 1 attractions included Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland, and he had tv specials about the different lands.
It's because when a company is so loved and gets so large to this point they essentially can't fail. So they keep overusing successfull intellectual properties and rehashing stuff that people know because it's guaranteed to make money instead of actually making something creative that had a larger potential to fail and lose money.
The last original creative thought any of these Disney imagineers ever had for the parks was expedition Everest at animal Kingdom.
Expedition Everest was based off of a mythical being and a real life Mountain so not really original. But it’s still creative, they don’t just shove a movie into a ride and call it a day. I mean, they came up with a whole new planet for Galaxy’s Edge. And all the IP that Disney uses is still creative because Disney created it
I still think Disney has a bit of creativity. Even in using IP's, imagineers can still manage to come up with cool and fun rides based around existing property. There has to be at least some creativity put into that.
Idk, I don’t think it’s fair to discount the incredible amount of work and creativity that imagineers put into creating these recent rides, even if they are based on films.
Take Rise of the Resistance, for example, that’s like the longest and most innovative ride they have, and it’s based on Star Wars.
I don't think they lost it, they probably make more money from all the themes based on the films. If I was to go to Disneyland, I'd want to see something I know from them. It just makes sense.
Y’all want to know what's hilarious. The fact that Disney is losing so much money and yet if they could only admit to its existence they could have at least a bit money flowing in. The best part of this whole thing is that it's a movie that they created years ago. Disney could have merch, a new attraction, don't even get me started on the fact that if do it right a second movie. I am speaking of course about Disney's forsaken child Treasure Planet.
Ok but cartoon animators working on theme park rides sounds like a horrifying idea.
its almost like people go to disney parks primarily for disney related things
The reason certain rides like Pirates and Haunted Mansion were made to be park originals not based on movies is because of what you said. They didn't have enough movies that would for good to be rides. Like Lady And The Tramp. I don't see any way that could be a ride! I mean I'm sure Disney could figure it out if they wanted to. But Disney now has so many movies. Going into Disneyland and seeing stuff not from DISNEY movies now would be weird. So now they only do movie themed attractions so it can actually feel like a DISNEYland! But it would be nice to see Disney create an attraction that's not themed after any movies or tv shows.
I feel like it would weird now if they had non-disney Disney rides nowadays lol. Like small world is fine but I think the theme rides are a big part of the appeal instead of just another amusement park
It's crazy how some movies where based of rides like pirates if the Caribbean (it has been updated to include jack sparrow but you know)
Disney didn’t have a lot of money to build all the rides so many of the rides were corporate-sponsored; as TV and esp. the internet grew in-person marketing like this was less attractive so as they’ve lost corporate sponsors to pay for the rides they added their own (free) IPs.
Ex in Tomorrowland on opening day there was a paint company that sponsored a pavilion where you’d go and see different walls of paint. Literally, an attraction to watch paint dry in Disney.
Interesting! I didn't even know that Disneyland was that old!
I think it should be a mix of the two, have some attractions and areas based off of IPs and others off of original stuff
I rode those rocket things at night during fireworks, 10/10 must do
The rides you think don't have IP do have some sort of IP in them it's just not over the top like the newer ones
Has not lost it, just expresses it through its different IPs.
Being based after disney movies just draws in more people now
Short answer: YES
I remember that Halloween ride from 2013
I know they had tie-in shows for those old rides though. I know I've seen Pirates of the Caribbean stuff from the 60's somewhere.
So does that mean they have the excuse to no longer be creative? Creativity and imagination are what make Disney grand. Its just sad the direction Disney is going
This was a shower thought I had hoping they already have it, but I think it's belles book shelf, from that scene... I dunno, it's been a while since I've watched beauty and the beast, but I'm pretty sure she loves books. They should make a huge mystical library, just for the book lovers.
Plus no one goes to disney land expecting to see harald the ant eater or whatever, they go expecting to see Darth Vader or Mickey Mouse or Spider-Man
Even if they didnt want to change they had to to keep people coming
The older attractions are great...but when you go to a Disney park you really want to see IP...that's kinda half of what you go for.
I remember that animal ride from animal kingdom. It was so cool to see a rhino and cheetah irl
It’s because of universal studios , Disney themes every ride now even if it’s just slapping a name on it
This is demonstrably untrue. Disneyland opened with 19 attractions, of which at least half were based on an existing or upcoming movie, short, or TV show. Each land of the park was designed to tie in with an existing IP, and the Disneyland TV show produced several short films to help promote the park and its attractions. Walt was synergizing the park with IP before they were even built.
I actually feel very strongly about this. The old Disney world with rides not based on their films was far superior. Now it's all sold out tbh.