Muppets move to Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster, Monsters Inc. take over their area at Disney's Hollywood Studios

BrettV:

Yep. Rise of the Resistance and Guardians really suck.

Or Tron. Or Guardians. Or Flight of Passage. Or Maverick.

I will miss MuppetVision, but we all knew its days were numbered. I'm super happy that they're keeping the Muppets in the park, I think Rock & Roller Coaster is a perfect fit, goes well with the road trip theme of the original Muppet Movie.

Also, I hate Aerosmith so good riddance. They were a great band in the 70s with iconic rock anthems and then pissed all over their legacy turning in to a complete joke of a band with "Fallin In Love Is Hard On The Knees" and crap like that. Plus Steven Tyler's a pedo so there's that.

The_Orient_of_Express:

Muppets is obviously a very old IP, but still hold alot of appeal to all ages.

Really?

I would argue Muppets and Aerosmith are more or less targeting the same demographic.

Old to slightly older.

OhioStater:

I would argue Muppets and Aerosmith are more or less targeting the same demographic.

Yea. I get what you are saying. At least the Muppets still hold young kid appeal because they are cute puppets.

Disney still tries to keep them fairly relevant with new movies and tv shows every now and then. But no doubt the Muppets mean more to the over 40 crowd.

I remember when MuppetVision4D was new and thinking it was so clever and delightful. Then some years later I revisited the attraction and was quite less enchanted. The jokes were old and it seemed that technology had by then passed the poor Muppets by. Some of it didn’t even work. It was an attraction original to the park and truthfully I was surprised to realize it was still there. As for Rock n Roller Coaster, I thought it was one of the best indoor launched coasters anywhere, and thankfully that’s the part that won’t change. What kept me from riding every time I visited was the dreadful time-suck of a preshow that was impossible to avoid, and thankfully that’s the part that will change.
I think the Muppets continue to occupy a place in show business because the creators have managed to keep it relevant with characters and situations that go beyond the expected. (Like with an over-the-top rock band filled with amusing, stereotypically edgy musicians). I sense some worry here over whether Disney knows how to build family oriented attractions, whether they know how to handle their IP, or whether hapless visitors will accidentally be lured onto a dynamic and forceful ride. And to that I say “Pshaw”.

One of the things about Muppet Vision that probably should be noted is that, I think, it still was using dual 70mm film projection for the 3D, as it did when it opened in the 90's. That was current tech back then, but that has been largely surpassed by video projection. Obviously the prints are no longer original, but, in 1991, motion pictures all used analog soundtracks - it really wasn't until Jurassic Park in 1993 that digital started. Muppet Vision likely has been updated somewhat since then, but replacement of film with digital is not a trivial task - though Soarin did that several years back. It is an older technology that is getting harder and harder to find people who have knowledge about.

Sure, Muppets premiered well before digital- all film can be transferred digitally but it will still look and sound like the original: scratched, grainy and jurassic stereo. I had the same experience with Mickey's Philharmagic- moved to digital but still felt old.

UNLESS great care is taken to restore each frame and soundtrack to modern specs. Which Disney has proven time after time, rerelease after rerelease (Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, Little Mermaid and Lion King animated features) that each can look and sound better than previously. In fact, all four of those were even CONVERTED to modern 3D technology.

My point is, if they wanted to, they could do a full film restoration and build a new, albeit smaller, Muppet Theatre to house it in with updated effects.

Spider-Man at Islands of Adventure made the digital conversion years ago. That had to be rough back then, because the film was on a relatively short loop that repeated every few minutes, and presumably stopped-started periodically to synchronize with the ride. (I imagine the film could have repeated the sequence several times on one "reel," but I don't know.) I don't think film transfer is particularly challenging. It's a one-and-done procedure.

“The Muppets will be taking over Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster, teaming up with some of music’s biggest stars for a rockin’ music festival!”

Maybe it’s going to be themed as a Winnebago ride with the Muppets going out to Coachella? 🤣

BrettV:

Yep. Rise of the Resistance and Guardians really suck. Bring back the original classics like Sounds Dangerous.

This isn’t a particularly effective counterpoint. First, Rise of the Resistance is quite good, but it’s a fair criticism of Hollywood Studios to say that there’s not much of a cohesive theme there anymore, and I really don’t see why Star Wars would get a unique land in Disneyland when no other franchise gets that. Rise of the Resistance being great and Star Wars lands being questionable thematic fits to the parks in which they’re located can both be true statements. Ditto Marvel land (Marvel being heavily New York-focused) in California Adventure. It’s fair to say that there seems to be a push to include IP in the parks regardless of whether or not it fits in to its respective land or park.

See also: my criticism of the Marvel restaurant onboard the Disney Wish. Stuck out like a sore thumb compared to the elegance of the other parts of the ship.

These may all be good rides, sure, but the criticism is fair. Disney has a long history of taking a high-level view to additions and keeping things cohesive, even with extended sight lines. Now you enter one of their parks literally seeing the backstage of a ride and the metal posts holding up the mountain peaks of Batuu. I think it’s a reasonable concern.

a fair criticism of Hollywood Studios to say that there’s not much of a cohesive theme there anymore

It was always a slap dash soup to try and beat Universal to the punch, and the only really great concept was TOT, and that Ironically uses an IP Disney doesn’t even own. After Dick Tracy got canceled, and the idea of using it as a semi fake functioning studio lost its sheen you only had so many options.

sirloindude:

I really don’t see why Star Wars would get a unique land in Disneyland when no other franchise gets that.

I think I know the rea$on.

Well, obviously money plays into it. My point is that Disney has a long history of putting money-making attractions where they fit thematically, and they didn’t always need IP to do it.

It's the same reason why the Universal parks have dedicated Harry Potter lands. People are interested in experience-based attractions now. They spend more money on souvenirs and food and go wild Instagramming, which is free advertising for the parks.

Wendover Productions has a great video on the topic.

Let's just not talk about Galactic Starcruiser.

I'm not sure Galaxy's Edge is the first Disney version of this; you can make a pretty compelling case for Pandora, which has a lot of the same feel. A completely immersive world, entirely based on a specific movie, including food/beverage/etc. customized to the environment. New Fantasyland is close to this too, but it's built around a family of otherwise unrelated movies. But, the placemaking is IMO similar in depth.

I know it's been said a lot, but it's definitely the case that they have made a conscious effort to have the parks as a showcase of their properties, rather than creating properties for the parks that they could eventually utilise (often badly) somewhere else like Haunted Mansion, Pirates, etc.

Hear me out ... In some ways, it's not that much different to what Six Flags do. You go to Great Adventure, they have a DC area with Flash, Justice League, Cyborg and Batman all doing their thing. In the same way Disney has a Star Wars area with two rides based on that IP.

Maybe I am in the minority (I am sure that they have the data on it), but I am quite nostalgic for wandering into a Disney park and having a unique and compelling attraction offering without characters popping up everywhere.

DisneySea is possibly the best example of this, something like Centre of the Earth, their awesome version of Tower of Terror, Aquatopia and the like are great rides that I would argue are stronger for it because they don't rely on a Buzz or the rat popping up to remind you that you're at Disney. But whatever ... that era is gone.

Sharpel007:

It was always a slap dash soup to try and beat Universal to the punch, and the only really great concept was TOT,

I have to disagree with this. First, Disney-MGM was far better than Universal on their respective opening dates. First, things at Disney's park worked. (Universal had lots of opening issues). MGM was the smaller park (and Tower of Terror didn't open with the park) but I think MGM was realized far better, conceptually, than Universal's second attempt. (To be fair, I still LOVE the original Universal in Hollywood).

Disney's opening attractions and the general vibe were all good (albeit again, the park opened too small and was roundly criticized for that). But, the Animation tour, Backstage Tour, Great Movie Ride, Monsters Sound Show, Superstar Television, etc were all good. The character actors gave Hollywood Blvd life.

The park improved when two new attractions opened later that year in the Indiana Jones Stunt Spectacular (still filling that theater today) and Star Tours.

Neither park fully embraced the "working studios" concept, which is probably more a byproduct of Florida not being a very friendly state to filmmakers. I think that is why neither park captured the spirit of Universal Hollywood. (Obligatory side note: I was lucky enough to be cast as an extra for a day when the New Mickey Mouse Club was being produced at Disney-MGM circa 1992).

I don't mind the IP. The various Fantasyland areas have always done a fine job of handling those. I'm also not terribly opposed to some modern introductions. I think Guardians is slightly reaching, but a case can be made that it fits in a bit with the idea of Future World. Radiator Springs, which admittedly going back about a decade, works brilliantly as a sort of California high-desert area inside a park themed around the state.

The issue is that it's coming off as if it's a requirement for everything going forward, and unless you're really careful, you run the risk of eroding theme cohesiveness. Rick_UK brought up the Gotham sections of Six Flags parks, which is partially true, but consider the following: Batman at SFGAm is in Orleans Square, Superman at SFGAdv is in the Boardwalk area, SFA had Two Face in the Northwest Territory, etc. We're now looking at a Magic Kingdom with Cars running right in front of the Haunted Mansion. We've been discussing how Hollywood Studios has a bit of everything going on inside.

IP is fine and Disney is smart to use it, but Disney has a long and storied history of being able to put out a good product with attention to even the finest details and rake in the revenue, so the "They're just doing what makes money" argument doesn't quite hold up, in my opinion. I think it's a valid concern to think that portions of the product side, or at least some historical considerations, are being somewhat compromised.

Again, I don't think that everything they're doing is bad. I think the Cruise Line is still nailing it. The Wish is a bit underrated based on reviews I've seen, even if some criticism is valid, and I think the Treasure looks to be a masterpiece.

So what’s the next big IP these parks will try and turn into a Themed immersive Land?

Fast and Furious Land

Lord of the Rings Middle Earth land

Planet of The Apes world

Hunger Games world

Mission Impossible land

something else??

My Dinner with Andreland.