Posted Wednesday, February 4, 2015 9:47 AM | Contributed by Jeff
Disney chief Bob Iger told Wall Street analysts that there’s “a fair amount of design and development (taking place by the company’s Imagineers) to greatly increase ‘Star Wars” presence in multiple locations around the world,” shortly after the Mouse House announced another strong financial quarter. “The plans are ambitious, so it’s going to take some time for them to be built and opened.”
Read more from Variety.
Eagerly awaiting Slave Leia meet & greet.
Unfortunately ... It'll actually be 2016 Carrie Fisher in the metal bikiniLast edited by JOz99, Wednesday, February 4, 2015 1:15 PM
Hmm. Lets see. Space Mountain re-branded as "Trip to Endor". Matterhorn re-branded as "Escape from Hoth". At Epcot, we will walk under the Death Star as we enter the park... At Disneyland, Rocket Rods would become "The Land Speeder Transportation System."I could go on.
No, in all seriousness, from a business standpoint, I could see this as almost a license to print money given the interest in Star Wars movies.
Walt, while it's fun to imagine all of your ideas, I hate the idea that all the classic attractions would be repurposed into Star Wars attractions. I don't want to lose iconic landmarks to a film franchise.
Besides, Star Wars deserves its own land or entire theme park.
I'm pretty sure Space Mountain and Spaceship Earth are safe :) Hell hath no fury like a Disney fan scorned.
Why Disney went ahead with a whole land devoted to Avatar when they had Star Wars, with a worldwide fan base and, what, nearly 40 years of proven popularity, remains beyond me.
^ I agree. I mean. . . I love Avatar like a fat kid loves cake. And it is the top grossing movie of all time. But in two years, you think the blue people will have the same mass appeal? We don't even remember movies from last year.
^ But in two years, you think the blue people will have the same mass appeal?
Disney and Cameron are banking on it, since there will (supposedly) be three new Avatar films over the next 5 years.
We've beaten Avatar to death here, and rightfully so. However, you can at least understand some of the rationale given the new films in development.
I understood the rationale up until the point Disney bought Lucasfilm. Decades of sales across multiple product lines, worldwide fan base, a proven track record against one successful film with little longevity and several more in the pipeline?
In a purely unscientific study, I just Googled "Avatar movie toys" and "Star Wars movie toys". The first returned 433,000 hits. The latter returned 14,000,000 hits.
The current rumor for Disneyland goes like this: plans were to be announced and Innoventions, Autopia and Submarine Voyage were to go away for a new Star Wars area in Tomorrowland. It was to be based on the original trilogy and they even closed the Submarine Voyage in preparation for this. Plans were then changed by the Disney CEO Robert Iger to push "Synergy" with the new movie and poor Submarine Voyage got a hasty rehab to reopen it as the existing plans were scrapped.
Now, what seems to be happening is that Toontown, an area with only two rides that take up a lot of space in a landlocked park will be the area sacrificed for Star Wars. It can also be linked by going over the railroad to the remaining expansion spot at Disneyland if they need more space.
Over in Florida, it will go to the Studios, but nothing solid has been mentionned.
Well, nothing public has been mentioned.
Bye bye New York, New York.
There is an area of unused land on the other side of the entrance road to Disney Studios that could be connected to the park and used. I'd like to see that.
There is one current operational issue to be resolved with a Star Wars land in Toontown's current location. Toontown closes each night because of its proximity to the fireworks. It usually closes an hour before the scheduled fireworks presentation.
Seems illogical to put your new big land someplace where you know it has to close completely for at least 1.5 hours each night.
They can't change where they shoot fireworks off at?
I know, right? Half of New Fantasyland has caught fire at this point, and they keep on doing Wishes every night. :)
Folks that I know that work there (Dippin' dots guy equivalents) say that there really isn't any other place to launch from, given the current land locked situation.
Who knows, maybe if they're pouring several hundred million into a new land, they've also got a plan for this as well. Maybe it's just not the issue that everyone thinks it would be.
It would just seem to make more sense to leave a fairly decent (if totally tamed down) kiddie section with a junior coaster and a popular dark ride intact when you have a ton of space available with the sub lagoon, autopia, innoventions, (and who knows how much else of Tomorrowland) available for a complete redo.
Yes, the Episodes 1-3 version of Star Tours would conflict with episodes 7-9, if that's what they're truly going for with the new stuff, but I'm sure that can be worked around.
^Which could all be cured by placing that area inside a dome. Some of the more out there rumors point to Tatooine being the entry point from Frontierland, Naboo being where the Fantasyland theatre now is, and in place of Toontown, a domed Courisant where it would always be night.
Even when Disney officially announce stuff, that still does not mean things get built. Hyperion Wharf was officially announced back in November 2010. Yet, what is being built is something else called Disney Springs? How about ordering replacement track for a refurb project, having your maintenance crew mark up the existing ride structure for dismantling. Then at the last second, cutting up the rehab time and just "sand" the existing track to keep the roller coaster operational?
The source that mention the Star Wars news has been on target about many things. He revealed the line up for Shanghai Disneyland over a year before Disney even acknowledged a single ride going there. He broke the story that the resort is severely behind the original schedule and the grand opening is pushed back at least 6 months. With his track record, I'd take his word over Disney in many cases.
Who is "he?"
You must be logged in to post