Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>I think the entire park was $720m in the end.<< Considering that this was done in the same era where Mission:Space was around $100M, I think that's pretty impressive. While the end result definitely had its issues, it sounds like they did a pretty good job of getting as much as possible for a very tight budget And a random question: Is there a reason that Disney has kept the huge service road running parallel to Katella, now thet the Timon lot has closed? As far as I know, it hasn't been open to public traffic in years, and likely never will be. It's used for the two half marathons run at the resort, but other than that it seems like a complete waste of space. Without it, more space could have been given to Carsland (while still keeping a regular backstage road) and the space behind Screamin' could be developed into something meaningful. With it there, they lose a huge (though somewhat awkwardly shaped) swath of land that's roughly as wide as the F! or WOC viewing areas are deep. On its own, I don't think it could be developed into anything, but as part of a larger project (like Carsland), that extra space could be really useful. It seems like the current usage (backstage connector) doesn't justify the multi-lane width, so I've often wondered why they haven't made a better use of that space
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Davy Crockett in FrL is the perfect example where it actually works" Well of course it works. Davy Crockett wasn't a cartoon he was real historical figure, and that, in a nutshell, is the difference between the Disneyland we have now and the DL that Walt Disney built. Whatever they do is fine with me as long as it's entertaining and well produced, however it bothers me when people try to make it seems that it's always been this way and that simply isn't true. There was a time when titles of the themed lands at Disneyland actually meant something.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Considering that this was done in the same era where Mission:Space was around $100M, I think that's pretty impressive. While the end result definitely had its issues, it sounds like they did a pretty good job of getting as much as possible for a very tight budget" Wasn't TL '98 in the $100 million range too? DCA was a bargain in comparison.
Originally Posted By berol I don't think the motels would have liked the range right against their properties. It serves as a 20-30 yard wide buffer for some of it, and as a backstage artery.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros ^^I can't imagine it's about Disney being a good neighbor. They set off explosives in the sky nearly every night of the year for pete's sake. Given the opportunity, I think Disney would love to buy those properties and bulldoze them for future expansion More likely, there's some sort of property setback regulation in the city's building code that prohibits building above a certain height within a certain distance of the property line. Still, it seems odd that the RSR show building is so far back from it, since it's relatively short and presumably could have been moved closer to the edge. Or they just weren't thinking about the really big picture for that space when they were designing the area, which would disappoint me, but not really surprise me.
Originally Posted By berol It's so little space that it's nearly trivial. In one section, we're only talking 5 yards cuz they wouldn't get rid of that road entirely. They could also need the full width to get the rare long truck around a corner or two. If they ever get control of the whole block, they could add a couple of lands.
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>It would have been perfect for DCA but ultimately WDP&R is a conservative business unit and gambling on original IPR to that coin just won't fly any more. << Yet, they DO gamble on attraction ideas tied to films - Just to dump them later, because the film didn't make the company the money they expected. We can come up with multiple examples as of late, can we?? One would think - Being "conservative" could mean - coming up with ideas that aren't connected to potentially box office bombs is the safe way!
Originally Posted By choco choco <<One would think - Being "conservative" could mean - coming up with ideas that aren't connected to potentially box office bombs is the safe way! >> I just don't understand how, when the biggest franchise they have had this millennium came from a theme park ride, they don't green-light more original theme park rides to generate more IP. I mean, it's already been proven to work.
Originally Posted By xrayvision >>How do you keep Cars Land relevant if it fades?<< Change the theme to Wreck-it-Ralph, featuring Sugar Rush Racers through Candy Mountain, Oreo Bumper Cars (replacing Luigi's Tires), and Hero's Duty Jamboree?
Originally Posted By Captain Neo A highly respected insider on another forum says that Oz and the Iron Man e-ticket planned for Tomorrowland are not happening. I guess Al Lutz was right on the money when he said the next projects are Star Wars for DIsneyland and Monsters Inc. for DCA.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>I just don't understand how, when the biggest franchise they have had this millennium came from a theme park ride, they don't green-light more original theme park rides to generate more IP. I mean, it's already been proven to work.<< The reason that it worked is because POTC was a good movie, regardless of the connection. Other than the general pirate theme and a couple minor nods to the attraction (like the dog with keys), there was really nothing from it. The first film succeeded on its own merits; and like most franchises, the following films got progressively worse (though I still say that 2&3 together are a great film, albeit very long) In the same era as the original POTC film, we also saw other park-based films. The Country Bears was cute and harmless, though hardly a smash hit. The Haunted Mansion was completely dreadful from beginning to end. And neither of them did especially great at the box office. So to say that POTC did well because of the park tie-in is completely downplayin the merit of the film and the taste of the moviegoing public For what it's worth the Tomorrowland and Magic Kingdom films are in the works, and are set to be released in a few years. The jury's still out regarding their quality
Originally Posted By leemac <<Wasn't TL '98 in the $100 million range too?>> Sure was - and Rocket Rods was about a third of that total. Comparable to the Pooh budget.
Originally Posted By leemac <<For what it's worth the Tomorrowland and Magic Kingdom films are in the works, and are set to be released in a few years. The jury's still out regarding their quality>> Tomorrowland is a dead cert to reach theaters but I'd wager that we won't see Magic KIngdom now. It has been sent back to the drawing board and it looks like Jon Favreau is no longer involved. All of the other park-related movies seem to have all quietly slipped back into development - Jungle Cruise, Haunted Mansion, Matterhorn, 20k Leagues etc. Del Toro has opted to focus on his own haunted house story (Crimson Peak) so I'd be surprised if he went back to HM.
Originally Posted By hbquikcomjamesl > Yup, the best view in the entire resort. > Go have a seat on the side patio in back > of the restaurant along the road that > leads to Pacific Wharf and soak it all > in. Ah. Both times I've eaten there, I sat in the room with all the displays equating mechanics' tools with surgical instruments.
Originally Posted By believe >>>>And a random question: Is there a reason that Disney has kept the huge service road running parallel to Katella, now thet the Timon lot has closed?<<<<< Part of it might be because of the power lines. If you push things back, the lines would become easily visible. I wonder what the cost would be to put the wires underground (or if it's even feasible to do that due to EMF issues).
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <I wonder what the cost would be to put the wires underground (or if it's even feasible to do that due to EMF issues).> During construction of DCA, there was talk of moving the power lines -- apparently it's not feasible. Like expanding the WDW monorail system ($1 million per mile is the rumored cost)
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I don't think it would be feasible from Edison's standpoint to move the wires underground for only a block of two. That's a lot of work with some of the trickiest elements (plus a couple brand new substations) for something that hardly covers any of the lines' total distance. And from Disney's standpoint, I don't think they'd be interested in paying to underground the wires for several miles, so they're sort of at a standstill Presumably if they were to close the service road, that area would become more backstage space. I don't think the onstage guest areas would get any closer to the poles than they currently are, but it would allow them to have bigger buildings (for either attractions or support facilities), which could only be a good thing, since DLR is so limited with its expansion space
Originally Posted By cheesybaby <<Like expanding the WDW monorail system ($1 million per mile is the rumored cost)>> This is a myth. The real cost would be closer to $100 million per mile: <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.yesterland.com/monoraillegends3.html">http://www.yesterland.com/mono...ds3.html</a>
