Disney Brand Fatigue Is Damaging Its Parks
Summary
TLDR视频剧本深入探讨了迪士尼乐园依赖其电影IP(知识产权)的策略,以及这种策略可能带来的长期风险。作者质疑,将电影IP简单粗暴地应用到乐园的新设施上,是否真的能够吸引游客,还是仅仅因为这些设施本身有趣。随着消费者行为的转变,以及对已建立的特许经营电影的兴趣减少,作者预测迪士尼的这种依赖IP的策略可能不会持续有效。视频还比较了迪士尼和环球影城在将IP融入主题公园方面的差异,指出环球影城的新设施即使脱离了其IP,也能独立存在并提供有趣的体验。作者认为,如果迪士尼不改变其策略,继续依赖IP而不是创造真正有创意和吸引力的游乐设施,那么随着品牌忠诚度的下降,这些昂贵但感觉廉价的乐园投资可能会对迪士尼产生昂贵的反噬。
Takeaways
- 🤔 迪士尼乐园依赖电影IP(知识产权)的策略可能在短期内有效,但作者质疑这种策略是否能持续吸引游客。
- 🎢 迪士尼的新游乐设施往往被认为是半成品,依靠知名电影IP来吸引游客,但这种吸引力可能只是因为新鲜感和游乐设施本身的趣味性。
- 📉 传统电影票房的下滑和消费者行为的转变,让人怀疑迪士尼对皮克斯和漫威等品牌的大型投资是否会适得其反。
- 🎟️ 迪士尼将乐园视为品牌广告牌,而不是真正的主题公园,这可能导致他们的新增加项目很快过时。
- 🚀 与迪士尼不同,环球影城在整合IP到其乐园和游乐设施时,似乎更加注重创造有趣和独特的体验。
- 🎬 电影行业正在经历重大转变,大型电影系列的观众兴趣和回报正在减少,这可能影响迪士尼乐园依赖电影IP的策略。
- 📊 流媒体服务的兴起提供了一种更便宜、更方便的电影观看方式,这可能会减少人们去电影院观看迪士尼或皮克斯品牌电影的兴趣。
- 🌐 迪士尼乐园的某些区域,如Galaxy's Edge,可能因为IP的过度饱和而变得乏味,缺乏与经典迪士尼乐园景点相媲美的细节和吸引力。
- 🎢 加州冒险乐园的汽车土地(Cars Land)是一个成功的IP整合案例,因为它即使脱离了电影IP,也是一个精心设计的主题区域。
- 🚫 迪士尼乐园的一些新景点,如皮克斯码头(Pixar Pier)和复仇者校园(Avengers Campus),可能因为缺乏深度和创意而很快过时。
- ❗ 迪士尼需要重新思考其乐园策略,避免过度依赖IP,而是创造独立于IP、能够提供真正有趣体验的游乐设施和主题区域。
Q & A
迪士尼乐园新景点是否因为IP而受到游客的欢迎?
-视频作者认为,尽管迪士尼乐园的新景点如银河护卫队的过山车因其IP的知名度而具有一定的市场吸引力,但这些景点之所以受欢迎,更多是因为它们本身作为游乐设施的质量和新鲜感,而不仅仅是因为IP的附加。
消费者行为正在发生怎样的转变?
-消费者行为的转变体现在对已建立的特许经营电影的兴趣逐渐减少,人们开始对新鲜和独特的文化体验感兴趣,而不是仅仅因为品牌的熟悉度。
为什么迪士尼乐园的IP战略可能在长期内不可持续?
-作者认为,随着消费者对特许经营品牌兴趣的减少,迪士尼乐园过度依赖IP的战略可能会导致游客回流的减少,从而影响其长期的可持续性和吸引力。
视频作者对迪士尼乐园的哪些新增加内容持批评态度?
-作者批评了迪士尼乐园的一些新增加内容,如皮克斯码头和复仇者校园,认为这些内容在创意上显得廉价,没有真正提升加州冒险乐园的吸引力。
为什么说迪士尼乐园的IP依赖可能最终损害其品牌?
-如果消费者对迪士尼的特许经营品牌失去兴趣,或者迪士尼通过不断推出新内容而稀释了这些品牌的价值,那么迪士尼乐园的IP依赖可能会损害其品牌,导致游客对乐园的兴趣减少。
环球影城是如何与迪士尼乐园在IP使用上有所不同的?
-与迪士尼乐园相比,环球影城在将IP融入其乐园和景点时,更多地注重创造独特的体验,而不是仅仅依赖IP的知名度。即使没有看过相关的电影或电视剧,游客也能享受环球影城的景点。
视频作者如何看待当前电影行业的转变?
-作者认为电影行业正在经历一场巨大的转变,大型特许经营电影的观众兴趣和回报正在减少,而新鲜和独特的文化时刻更能吸引观众。
为什么迪士尼乐园的银河边缘区域可能不会长期吸引游客?
-作者认为银河边缘区域可能不会长期吸引游客,因为这个区域缺乏像潘多拉或哈利波特世界那样的细节和吸引力,而且随着星球大战品牌被迪士尼不断推出新内容而稀释,人们对这个品牌的兴趣可能会减少。
迪士尼乐园的艾波卡特中心为什么没有达到预期的成功?
-艾波卡特中心没有达到预期的成功,部分原因是迪士尼试图通过依赖IP来修复这个公园,而没有提供足够的刺激游乐设施或与公园原始愿景相一致的有吸引力的景点。
为什么迪士尼乐园的新景点可能随着时间推移而变得过时?
-迪士尼乐园的新景点可能随着时间推移而变得过时,因为它们过度依赖特定的IP,而这些IP可能会随着消费者兴趣的变化而失去吸引力。此外,如果这些景点在设计和创意上不够强大,它们可能无法独立于IP之外吸引游客。
视频作者对迪士尼乐园未来的战略有何建议?
-作者建议迪士尼乐园应该重新考虑其依赖IP的战略,并且创造更多独立于IP、具有创造性和吸引力的景点和体验,以适应消费者行为的变化,并确保其乐园的长期成功。
Outlines
🤔 对迪士尼乐园IP依赖的质疑
视频提出了对迪士尼乐园是否过度依赖其电影IP的疑问,担心这种策略可能最终适得其反。作者指出,迪士尼的新景点似乎都是将知名IP简单附加上去,质疑这种做法是否真的有效,以及消费者是否真的因为景点的核心吸引力而感兴趣,还是仅仅因为IP的市场营销。作者认为,尽管短期内IP策略看似有效,但长期来看,随着消费者行为的转变,这种策略可能不可持续。
📉 电影行业的变化与迪士尼的挑战
视频讨论了电影行业正在经历的巨大转变,尤其是大型电影系列的观众兴趣和票房回报正在减少。作者认为,电影质量的普遍下降和制片厂自身的行为是导致消费者行为改变的催化剂。视频还提到了流媒体服务的兴起和其对电影院观影体验的冲击,以及迪士尼加和其他流媒体服务之间的竞争。作者预测,未来几年,更具创意和新颖性的小成本电影可能会成为主流。
🌟 迪士尼乐园的IP依赖问题
作者对迪士尼乐园的IP依赖问题进行了深入探讨,特别是对好莱坞工作室和银河边缘等景点的分析。作者认为,尽管这些景点在短期内可能吸引游客,但长期来看,由于缺乏深度和细节,可能会导致消费者兴趣的下降。视频还提到了迪士尼乐园的建设不足和吸引力不足的问题,以及迪士尼如何通过IP来强化其品牌,但可能忽视了创造真正有趣的景点体验。
🎢 迪士尼乐园的转型与挑战
视频回顾了Epcot中心早期的景点,并讨论了这些景点被认为技术过时的普遍观点。作者认为,这些景点之所以伟大,是因为它们的细节、氛围和鼓舞人心的信息,而不仅仅是因为它们的技术。视频还批评了迈克尔·艾斯纳领导下的Epcot转型,认为引入更多刺激的游乐设施和相关IP是失败的。作者认为,迪士尼应该通过增加刺激游乐设施和减少对IP的依赖来修复Epcot。
🚀 迪士尼与环球影城的IP运用差异
视频比较了迪士尼和环球影城在主题公园中运用IP的方式。作者认为,虽然IP可以作为有趣概念的催化剂,但迪士尼的一些景点仅仅是为了品牌协同而存在,而环球影城的景点即使脱离了它们的IP也能够独立存在。视频举例说明了迪士尼乐园中的一些景点,如加勒比海盗和幽灵公馆,以及环球影城的哈利波特和超级任天堂世界,来支持这一观点。
🧩 迪士尼乐园的未来与IP的可持续运用
视频对迪士尼乐园的未来进行了展望,特别是对迪士尼如何继续运用其IP进行了讨论。作者认为,迪士尼需要创造真正有趣的景点体验,而不是仅仅依赖IP来吸引游客。视频还提到了迪士尼乐园中的一些景点,如玩具总动员乐园和银河边缘,它们可能因为IP的过时而变得不再吸引人。作者警告说,如果迪士尼不改变其依赖IP的策略,可能会导致昂贵但质量不高的景点投资最终损害公司。
🎶 结语
视频以音乐结束,没有提供具体内容。
Mindmap
Keywords
💡IP (知识产权)
💡主题公园景点
💡品牌协同
💡消费者行为
💡票房
💡流媒体服务
💡品牌忠诚度
💡主题公园设计
💡电影行业
💡环球影城
💡品牌饱和
Highlights
迪士尼电影IP授权给其乐园的策略可能会适得其反,因为新景点似乎都是一些半成品体验,贴上了IP。
人们对于乐园中《银河护卫队》的过山车等IP景点的兴趣,可能更多是因为其本身作为过山车的乐趣,而非IP的市场性。
尽管短期内IP策略看似有效,但消费者行为的转变可能对迪士尼的长期吸引力构成挑战。
迪士尼将乐园视为品牌广告牌,而非真正的主题公园,可能导致其新增加的景点迅速过时。
环球影城与迪士尼不同,它将IP融入公园和景点的方式更加复杂和引人入胜。
电影行业正在经历巨大转变,大型电影系列的观众兴趣和回报正在减少。
观众对于电影的兴趣正在从大型系列电影转向具有文化时刻感、想法新颖的电影。
流媒体服务的兴起改变了消费者的观影行为,但流媒体并非像制片厂预期的那样盈利。
迪士尼乐园的某些区域,如《星球大战》的银河边缘,可能并不像预期的那样受欢迎。
迪士尼对《星球大战》系列的过度开发可能损害了该品牌,并导致观众对相关内容的兴趣下降。
迪士尼乐园的Epcot中心由于过度依赖IP而失去了其原有的魅力和未来主义主题。
迪士尼乐园的新景点如《冰雪奇缘》和《银河护卫队》的吸引力可能并不持久,因为它们依赖于可能会过时的IP。
迪士尼乐园的IP景点需要超越其基于的电影或品牌,创造新的体验和故事,以吸引观众。
迪士尼乐园的某些景点,如汽车总动员的Radiator Springs Racers,即使没有IP也能独立存在,因为它们本身就设计精良。
迪士尼乐园的策略如果不考虑电影观众口味的转变,可能会导致其在公园上的昂贵投资变得无意义。
迪士尼乐园的IP依赖策略与环球影城的景点设计相比,后者即使没有强大的IP也能提供有趣和创新的体验。
迪士尼需要重新思考其公园策略,避免过度依赖IP,而是创造独立于IP之外的有趣和富有创意的景点。
Transcripts
[Music]
throughout the time that I produced
videos for this channel I have wondered
to myself if Disney's movie IP mandate
for its Parks will ever end up
backfiring on them
things have reached a point where every
new attraction is essentially some
half-baked experience with an IP slapped
onto it and I then have to wonder is
this actually working
do people see that the Guardians of the
Galaxy have a roller coaster at Epcot
and think to themselves that this is an
exciting idea
I think that when you add a major
attraction to an already popular Park
people are obviously going to see it as
a reason to come back
the IP itself also has a large degree of
marketability as a pre-established movie
brand like Guardians of the Galaxy is
pretty easy to advertise just through
its familiarity
however is this attraction popular
because at its core it's a fun roller
coaster which is already popular with
part goers and Word of Mouth has
generally been positive or is it because
of the marketability of the franchise
slapped onto it
I would posit that it's popular because
it's new and the actual ride track
layout is one of Dizzy's better coasters
regardless of what theme you attached to
it it would probably do really well
however it's clear that while the IP
strategy seemingly works in the short
term I have wondered if this is
something that could sustainably keep
people coming back and the reason I
question this is because I think we're
in the beginning phases of a shift in
consumer Behavior
it's no secret that established
franchise films have been doing worse
and worse at the box office this year
and when I look at Brands like Pixar and
Marvel which audiences are becoming less
interested in showing up for I then have
to ask if Investments like Pixar Pier or
Avengers campus will end up backfiring
on Disney as interest continues to wane
these were both creatively cheap
additions that have not at all helped to
improve the attendance for California
Adventure and Walt Disney has clearly
indicated that they see their franchises
as Timeless and I completely disagree
do audiences really care about something
so underwhelming like Avengers campus
when the franchise that elevates it has
continued seeing so many narratively
unsatisfying projects
I can somewhat understand why people
might be intrigued by the changing
roster of character interactions based
on recent films and shows but when
they're as bad as something like secret
Invasion will people even continue to
care
the point I'm making and we'll continue
to make throughout this video is that
Disney uses its film and television IPS
as a crutch for often underwhelming
attraction and Land Design as Disney
continues doubling down on sequels and
remakes as theater audiences actually
seem to be moving away from them I think
that many of these ludicrously expensive
yet cheap feeling additions to their
Parks will age extremely poorly
but wait you might ask is universal not
doing the same thing
with the exception of villancon I would
actually say no there's a fundamental
difference in how Universal incorporates
IP into its parks and attractions and
that this is actually a fascinatingly
complex topic when you compare and
contrast the two
so in today's video I'm going to discuss
what I think is the changing movie
industry and how Disney is failing to
adapt because of its obsession with
brand and franchises afraid to actually
try anything new or interesting
as a result of extending this strategy
to their parks and treating them like
Billboards for some nebulous Brands
known as Disney rather than well actual
theme parks their new additions will end
up damaging their Park's branding and
accelerate how they age in the public
eye resulting in what I believe will
have to be the inevitable rethinking of
their park strategy
so let's Dive Right In
[Music]
[Music]
by the way before we really begin I
would like to just ask you the favor of
hitting the like button if you haven't
done so already
if you've been keeping up with the movie
industry then you've probably noticed
that it's the middle of a massive shift
right now and that the big franchises
that Studios have relied on to make
money are continuing to see diminishing
audience interest and returns
I think that a general declining quality
in big franchise films is playing a part
in the winning interest in these
franchises but I also think that the
studios themselves have also worked as a
catalyst to change consumer behavior and
therefore the kinds of movies that will
be successful at the box office
for example while I like Indiana Jones
as a franchise and I've heard that the
dial of Destiny is actually a fun time I
just can't really bring myself to
actually go and watch it in theaters at
least at the time of writing the script
if I ask myself why it's because it's a
story that just didn't need to be told
it is instead seen as a safe bet from
Disney because of its brand recognition
even if the film is competently put
together by most accounts
it's a movie that audiences can't really
be bothered to see in theaters but I
think we'll do well in streaming which I
think gets to the core of the problem
there's a lot that can be said about the
decline of the movie going experience as
prices continue to rise but along with
this streaming has offered an
alternative for the Casual movie Watcher
who has no interest in spending the
money for the theater experience that
probably wasn't too appealing to them
anyways
when I think of films that have done
really well relative to their budgets
this year it's because they all felt
like cultural moments that you had to
see as soon as possible because their
ideas were interesting and new
the Super Mario Bros movie is obviously
written around characters just as iconic
as many of Disney's and while I'm sure
that such strong recognition played a
role in its success I think that many
people showed up because they were
curious to see how a massive video game
franchise would translate as an actual
film creating something that felt like
an event
I also think of two movies I just saw
barbie and Oppenheimer both of which
gained attraction not just through the
barberheimer meme but they actually felt
like unique opportunities to experience
something different in the cinema as
cultural moments
mother both helped by Brand's
recognition with Barbie being well
Barbie and Oppenheimer being a
Christopher Nolan film what I predict
really Drew audiences in was that these
just felt like fresh and unique artistic
Blockbusters in a way that established
films like fast 10 or Indiana Jones just
did not
those felt like obligatory franchise
entries that can be missed for streaming
the issue though is that it's being
revealed that streaming just isn't that
profitable and in many cases most
studios are apparently losing money but
continuing to host these services
I can certainly understand why streaming
would be perceived as the future of home
entertainment and I think that it was an
inevitability but when Bob Iger set out
to launch Disney plus with what he
perceived as unshakable juggernauts of
distinct Movie brands he also launched a
streaming War where paramounts Warner
Brothers and universal one of the piece
of the pie two resulting in way too many
options for consumers
if networks and its two competitors Hulu
and Amazon Prime were successful in
turning people against cable because
they provided a lot of content in one
place for relatively cheap then the
studios launching their own services and
pulling their content from these
third-party platforms did the opposite
if you want access to everything then
you have to pay for multiple streaming
services which is Impractical meaning
that people had to pick and choose the
few that they actually want creating all
the competition between them
however it has become clear that this
isn't working and with mergers such as
HBO Max with Discovery plus and Disney
plus with Hulu it's becoming clear to
this new type of Market needs to sort
itself out
however it's also clear that streaming
is not the endless Cash Cow that these
Studios anticipated and that a return to
traditional theatrical releases is still
the way to go
unfortunately many consumers enjoy the
convenience of streaming from their own
homes because of such short theater
windows and are now skipping films in
theaters unless they feel like must-see
events or fresh and novel ideas
I think part of the reason for this is
that the heavy focus on franchises which
also happen to be declining in quality
have resulted in over saturating the
movie landscape to the point of becoming
tedious obligations
I think back to the many movies I've
seen this year whether it be Renfield a
movie about a bear that YouTube wouldn't
want me mentioning the title of and
Megan which all have unique promises
that feel new and interesting
granted these were all films that could
be categorized in the horror or thriller
genres and were all released through
Universal but at a time when Disney and
Warner Brothers are doubling down on
franchises when consumers are feeling
fatigued with the current slate
Universal is really positioning itself
with its smaller budget films to see
decent box office returns
I think that there's a lot of
uncertainty with how consumer interests
are changing at the box office but if
you look to different historical Trends
in Hollywood that are no longer relevant
such as movie star driven films or films
sold on The Prestige of certain
directors those eras have long passed
so too do I think that Studio's
obsessions with Brands and franchises is
coming to an end and I think that more
creative smaller budget novelty films
may end up becoming the primary seller
within the next few years
Studios and especially Disney have
counted on consumers to always love
their favorite franchises but when you
beat them over the head with it
especially by pumping out TV show after
TV show to desperately get streaming to
be profitable it just oversaturated the
entertainment landscape in a way that is
tiring and exhausting
if you design your streaming service
around Brands like Disney plus has the
irony is that the rise of streaming has
also changed consumer Behavior at the
box office and now those big franchises
are becoming less profitable to make
because your target audience is choosing
to skip them
I think that Studios might either have
to just write off streaming as an
expensive loss and partner with others
to achieve profitability or they have to
risk completely abandoning big
franchises in favor of more unique and
Novelty films
we have yet to really see what kind of
shift may be occurring or if Studios can
adapt their franchises to this new
Behavior but what they're doing right
now is clearly not working and when you
have a company like Disney which has
done nothing but flood its parks with
Disney movie IP the results could really
backfire on them
if you're visiting Hollywood Studios one
of the busiest areas of the park is
going to be Galaxy's Edge
still though is this truly popular or is
the park just so ill-equipped to handle
capacity that this is where people tend
to gravitate
the park otherwise only contains a
handful of attractions in Toy Story Land
Star Tours runaway Railway the Tower of
Terror and rock and roller coaster among
what is mostly just a lot of dated and
uninteresting shows
for seeing such expensive investment
over a three-year period from 2017
through 2020 the park is still
incredibly underbuilt and its attraction
lineup feels underwhelming
I think that put into the context of
Disneyland though Galaxy's Edge does not
fare nearly as well
I think it's telling that I continue to
hear Disneyland locals refer to this as
the quiet area of Disneyland and when
you stack it up against the many awesome
attractions located in the park I think
it's no wonder that it's often forgotten
I wouldn't say that it's unpopular as
there's always a fair number of people
back there but I doubt that it's seeing
the financial success that Disney has
anticipated
so if that's the case why
I've said this many times but I think
that Disney sequel Trilogy just does not
resonate with most audiences because
those films are so narratively
unsatisfying
as a consequence solo which was a decent
film did poorly at the box office and
despite being a Star Wars branded show
even something as excellent as Andor did
pretty poorly on Disney Plus
the only reason that I think people are
turning out for other shows is because
of previously recognizable characters
such as Obi-Wan Kenobi and while I still
really liked the Mandalorian I think
that grogu's market ability has allowed
the show to last for much longer than I
would have anticipated
the fact is is that the Star Wars brand
has very much been damaged by Disney and
as it continues to pump out more content
it in turn only continues to dilute that
brand and people forget about the
original films that they liked so much
in the first place
was designing Galaxy's urge to be based
around Disney's Trilogy before it was
even over a smart idea
absolutely not and while rise the
resistance is a decent ride I think that
it has very much lost the hype Narrative
of being the best attraction ever
designed as those kinds of people have
now moved on to saying the same exact
thing about Guardians of the Galaxy and
Epcot
they're both fun rides but they just
don't resonate with me and others in the
same way that many of Disney's Classics
Like Pirates or the Haunted Mansion
still do
while the Star Wars brand has
unfortunately been damaged and
disinterest continues to rise I have to
wonder then how does something like
Galaxy's Edge age
to me it's already stale and now that
the newness has worn off I think that a
lot of other people see it as a hollow
and unsatisfying experience unless
you're going specifically to ride rise
of the resistance or buy a lightsaber
it lacks the detail of a lens like
Pandora it lacks the fascinating
Intrigue of something like the Wizarding
World
at its core Galaxy's Edge is a
non-distinct land designed as a brand
vessel meant to sell merchandise and
reinforce Disney's iteration of Star
Wars which audiences have now made clear
that they are creatively disinterested
in
I think that Galaxy's Edge will continue
to remain fairly well traveled for the
next few years at least but what happens
when it isn't
part of the push for IP integration in
the Disney parks was that these were
Timeless stories that would appeal to
everyone and so has that been successful
do people enjoy the tackiness of Pixar
Pier
is Avengers campus a popular place
does shoving characters into Epcot allow
Disney to not have to put forward
meaningful investment into its future
I would say no and as audiences lose
interest in these Brands and franchises
the parks are only going to age only
accelerating the problem that Disney
leadership was wildly off base and
trying to fix
what exactly do I mean by this
well let's take a look at what this has
done to Epcot
[Music]
in one of my older videos I took a
detailed look at the many former
attractions that defined the early years
of Epcot Center
over time a narrative has risen around
the park asserting that its attractions
have focused on the future were
unsustainable as technology quickly
caught up and made the futurism theme of
the park irrelevant
but is that actually the case
it's obvious to me that it isn't and
that the people who continue to pair
this message around have long forgotten
what this park used to be
in that particular video I explored
these attractions in depth and made it
clear that the majority of them were
focused on the history of a particular
subject with their futuristic
predictions being vague and not specific
enough to not really date themselves
world of motion was not trying to sell
you on the idea of jet packs and flying
cars but instead concluded with a
message about the importance of
transportation and how bold's new ideas
would allow us to travel quicker and
farther into the future
what made these rides so great was not
the relevance of their technology but
rather their details atmosphere and
inspiring messages that made you feel
like you were part of something bigger
and more important than yourself
these were Classics that resonated as
strongly as attractions Like Pirates The
Haunted Mansion The Great Movie Ride Etc
that would probably be seen as essential
Classics like spaceship earth today if
they were still around
so how did the outdated Epcot myth end
up becoming so prevalent
well while I agree that Epcot probably
needed more variety as most of its
attractions were dark rides and thrills
would have been welcome the major
Catalyst for change was Michael Eisner
and his desire for more thrilling rides
and relevant IP
while not all of this was bad as I
actually think that Ellen's Energy
Adventure was better than the original
Universe of energy I see a lot of failed
projects like the overly intense but
underwhelming mission space replacing
Horizons the pointless incorporation of
Nemo into the living seas and the
destruction of magic Journeys and
journey into imagination in favor of
Captain EO and later Honey I Shrunk the
Audience with journey into imagination
changing the fit into its theme of the
imagination Institute too connected to
the show
ironically what aged Epcot was a lot of
new underwhelming rides a very 90s
interventions and inappropriate
placement of intellectual property or
star power that lost relevancy pretty
quickly
not to say that Michael Jackson is
irrelevant today or that you can't enjoy
the Honey I Shrunk the Kids franchise
but it wouldn't say that these
attractions would currently resonate
with audiences in a way today that the
original journey into imagination still
would
I don't dislike mission space but its
intense novelty has not aged nearly as
well as I anticipate that Horizons would
have
so Epcot aged not because of its
original iteration but because removed
those iconic attractions in favor of
stuff that was seen as more relevant to
contemporary audiences which ultimately
revealed itself to be a short-sighted
move
so with a broken apcot how do you fix it
with Igor and jpeg their response was to
double down a Disney IP believing that
it was a Timeless fix so that they
wouldn't have to touch the park for
another decade failing to realize that
this was exactly the problem that led to
it becoming a mess in the first place
I think that the original Epcot would
have benefited from thrill rides and I
think that the original test track was
actually one of Disney's best
attractions ever created but it would
have made more sense to go with ideas
like the Swiss Pavilion with a
Matterhorn roller coaster rather than
something so alienating to many guests
like mission space
has Ratatouille Frozen the Guardians of
the Galaxy or the soon to open Moana
water Trail really working to fix this
park
is this an exciting place to be with
must-see attractions
returning back to the potential for
audiences to lose interest in certain
brands how long until these new
attractions begin to date themselves in
the same way that Honey I Shrunk the
Audience did and how will people look
back at Iger and chapek as people who
have damaged this park with a lot of
pointless and expensive projects
you cannot rely on your brains and
franchises to carry what are otherwise
an interesting half-baked experiences
especially when the consumer landscaper
films actually appears to be losing
interest in this
[Music]
oh
[Music]
am I saying that incorporating IP into
theme parks is an inherently bad idea
well certainly not because they think
that they can work as a catalyst for a
lot of really interesting Concepts
I very much enjoy the money small dark
rides located throughout Disneyland's
Fantasyland based on their classic films
and the reason for that is that the land
itself was purpose built to Showcase and
celebrate these properties in a way that
makes thematic sense
however while some of these attractions
follow scenes from their respective
films others manage to move Beyond those
narratives and create something new
[Music]
the original Snow White scary Adventure
focused on creating fear as its theme
and my favorite attraction there Mr
Toad's Wild Ride is hardly based on the
film at all instead taking the concept
of an out of control Mr Toad terrorizing
the English Countryside in his
automobile and putting you right into
the chaos
another good example of Ip
implementation is Pandora at Animal
Kingdom
I've spoken at length in another video
about how incredible this land is and
while it's not perfect it very much does
transcend the Avatar IP and becomes its
own distinct experience that stands
without it
it fits into Animal Kingdom themes such
as conservation and is an intriguing
impressive land to explore independent
of you having any context from the film
franchise
every element is placed with purpose to
tell a story in a way that Galaxy's Edge
is lacking and I think that's why this
land is so incredible
yet I think that conceptually basing a
land around Avatar and placing it in
Animal Kingdom was a stupid idea
Bob Iger proposed this because he saw
the box office numbers but failed to
realize that despite being the highest
grossing movie of all time it still
managed to have a low cultural impact
its sequel has not helped Pandora as the
land and according to the latest theme
park numbers from the themed
entertainment Association it seems as if
Animal Kingdom has reverted back to the
lowest attended park at Walt Disney
World
I think the reason for this is that
despite people still really enjoying the
land itself and people still raving
about flight of Passage because it is a
truly well-developed experience the
Avatar franchise is just not strong
enough to bring people back to this park
especially when it's still so massively
underbuilt and Disney has let one of its
better rides fall into disrepair
threatening to eventually replace it
with zootopia
I think that really gets to another core
problem though
does a zootopia ride in Moana area
really make sense for a park like this
I think that while you'll see a lot of
excitement from non-parks people and
children these ideas are generally
off-putting to money because
conceptually they're inherently
nonsensical and rely on your saying hey
that's the thing I'm familiar with
instead of putting meaningful effort
into creating interesting rides and
themed spaces
again though if consumers are changing
their behavior at the theaters then this
might very well backfire on Disney
going and seeing a movie is obviously
expensive especially when you're
bringing young children or your entire
family and so this is another reason
that streaming has really taken off
because it's an easier and less
expensive way of exposing said children
to that content
a good example would be in Kanto where
its box office was abysmal but its
streaming presence is excellent with
what I assume are young children
watching it on repeat
now granted the film was released on the
tail end of mask mandates so I'm sure
that played a part but I still think
that parents are opting for Disney plus
over actually bringing children to
theaters
when consumers are opting for Disney
plus to watch theatrical films over
actually going and seeing them in the
theaters though
well I think you see the problem
with streaming potentially bringing
casual moviegoers and young children
away from theaters then that also
results in diminishing interest in
Disney or Pixar branded films which is
exactly what has been happening
so when you create poorly conceptualized
Theme Park attractions and cannot rely
on your Brands to draw people in that
leaves you with dated irrelevant and
uninteresting theme parks that appeal to
No One Like with what happened to Epcot
Disney IP certainly has its place but
the important distinction is that it has
to result in a fantastic experience that
feels like a cool idea because it's cool
and not because it's brand synergy
while I am disappointed that California
Adventure never got its land themed to
Classic Car culture Cars Land is still
an incredible addition because so much
effort went into creating a detailed
land that stands on its own even if you
were not familiar with this franchise
the town itself is full of interesting
shops and dining and its supplemental
attractions are fun kinetic additions
that add needed capacity
however the land's major e-ticket
Radiator Springs Racers is a well-paced
well-detailed atmospheric and cleverly
executed attraction that has been rare
since the Eisner era
if California Adventure were not full of
tons of misplaced IP shoved into it I
would be willing to overlook that car's
land is thematically inconsistent
because of its Arizona location because
it's just so good it stands independent
from the IP that it's based on
in fact if it wasn't actually based on a
film it could conceivably work as a
California themed expansion which is
what distinguishes it from other weird
additions in the park like Monsters Inc
Pixar The Little Mermaid and the
Avengers
so I am certainly not against the idea
of Disney IP in its Parks when it makes
sense but it actually has to reach a
quality standard that it used to expect
from the company and not exist as
half-baked brand Synergy which is pretty
much everything that we're currently
getting
foreign
[Music]
of Toy Story lands being anything other
than a cheap addition to quickly add
capacity and expand the part footprint
of Hollywood Studios but this is exactly
my problem with it
I like Toy Story Mania but over time it
has devolved into a sea ticket that does
not justify its wait times and alien
swirling saucers in Slinky Dog Dash are
incredibly subpar editions along with
the rest of this quickly slot together
land
still Toy Story as a brand is popular
and Slinky Dog in particular seems to be
one of Disney's largest marketing pushes
for this park
while myself and others enjoy Toy Story
as a franchise though I think that our
Goodwill has been extended for long
enough
Toy Story 4 was really pushing it but
Bob iger's plan for a Toy Story 5 is
absolutely ridiculous and I think that
there is the very real chance that it
too is likely to suffer from franchise
fatigue however I'm of the opinion that
even if early entries are good
oversaturation of any particular
franchise has the very real chance of
souring you on those original films and
a Toy Story 5 could have the same effect
that Disney Star Wars has had on
diluting the interest and influence of
the george lucas films
so if consumers lose interest in Toy
Story because they've been beaten over
the head with it does Toy Story Land
stand on its own
well no the attractions are
underwhelming and the IP becomes dated
just like the many films and attractions
that the park once offered before it was
transformed
pivoting off of this to Universal the
advantage that I think they have is that
their new attractions are much more akin
to stuff like Pandora or Cars Land
I'm of the opinion that you don't have
to be familiar with the Harry Potter
franchise to appreciate hogsmeade Diagon
Alley or their respective attractions
in fact I would even say that Escape
from Gringotts is rather mediocre but
it's elevated because it exists within
the context of daigon alley which is
fantastic in terms of atmosphere
Intrigue and exploration
having experienced Super Nintendo World
in Hollywood I think the same very much
applies there as well even if you're not
familiar with the Mario franchise and it
seems as if all the lands in Epic
Universe are shooting for this level of
ambition too judging from the more
credible rumors out there
while Universal has had a pretty rough
history of too many poor attractions and
oversaturating its parks with what
essentially Mount simulators I have
continued to argue that they have really
worked to turn things around
hagrids which premiered in 2019 is
arguably the most popular attraction in
Florida is just so strong in so many
different aspects ranging from the
quality of its theming to its layout to
the clever use of track elements and
thematically satisfying ways
the strength of its attraction design
outshines the IP it's based on which I
think is the trend with a lot of these
newer Universal Editions
you don't need to care about or have
seen the Jason Bourne franchise to
appreciate this spectacular stunt show
it is someone who does not care at all
about Jurassic world I am very much a
fan of their new Jurassic World rides
the velocir coaster is an excellent
roller coaster first and the theming
while it is admittedly minimal is still
icing on an already excellent cake
the Jurassic World attraction adds new
Thrills and animatronics to the former
Jurassic Park ride in Hollywood and
while many people myself included prefer
Jurassic Park as a film I personally
prefer this ride because it keeps the
spirit of the original intact but
refreshes it in meaningful ways
regardless of the strength of its
attached IP
the Jurassic World attraction in Beijing
is incredibly Innovative and far more
impressive than needs to be and I know
that it has essentially become a meme at
this point but I still can't get over
how good the secret life of pets is in
Hollywood
I would argue that it's one of the
cleverest well-designed dark rides in
decades and even though the film it's
based on is just kind of okay the
attraction design far outshines it
the only real negative I have about
recent additions is villancon but even
then I think it's a matter of failing to
execute its gameplay well and not the
actual run concept which is at least
interesting on paper
when I think about epic Universe I
already know that Super Nintendo World
will resonate well with people and when
I think of rumored lens even they sound
strong Independence of the IP that
they're based on
one of these rumors is of course
centered around Universal monsters and
my assumption is that a land based
around these classic franchises will
likely try a new interpretation
resulting in something that feels more
original and specifically tailored to a
theme park land not dissimilar to the
various Halloween Horror Nights houses
that have taken a lot of creative
Liberty with this franchise
another strong rumor is that the
Wizarding World will likely come to this
park Loosely based on the streets of
Paris from the Fantastic Beasts films
well I know that those films have done
poorly at the box office the idea of
walking around the streets of Paris with
intriguing Magical elements to discover
sounds appealing even if I haven't seen
those films because the idea seems
interesting independent of the IP
if we go back to toy storyline though
and removed the Toy Story IP what's left
nothing really other than unshaded
walkways and an underwhelming attraction
lineup
if you removed familiarity with a frozen
franchise from Frozen ever after is this
a ride that's still well designed and
interesting to experience
I would say probably not
if you removed the Guardians of the
Galaxy from cosmic rewind I feel that
very little would change because it's
actually a pretty solid version of a
Space Mountain which I think attests to
how pointless the incorporation of the
IP is there
the fundamental difference between
recent Universal attractions in Disney
is that Universal attractions are
interesting regardless of the strength
or implementation of their IP whereas
Disney builds mostly weak attractions
that rely on IP as a crutch due to a
lack of interesting design
if audiences lose interest in franchise
films or if Disney damages their brands
no matter how good the originals were
well whose attractions are more
interesting
foreign
[Music]
if you've watched through to this point
in the video then you've probably
recognized that this is one of my more
Messier scripts but the overall point of
this video is to recognize that Disney
just does not build great attractions
anymore and realize far too heavily on
their IP integration to cover up for
their lack of effort and care
and chapek have embraced a park strategy
that relies on people coming and
embracing their favorite franchises in
an extremely superficial way treating
these attractions as vessels of brand
Synergy and completely discarding any
meaningful part messages or thematic
cohesion
if a symbol of a popular franchise can
be slapped onto a generic attraction or
land plague Avengers campus then current
leadership will absolutely do it because
things have gone into a weird obsessive
realm of Disney branding Beyond just
Basic Marketing
people may be disillusioned with
Jurassic world but marketing a themed
attraction like this still promises an
exciting dinosaur-themed Adventure
yet who exactly was Pixar Pier intended
to appeal to
are people clamming for a Moana water
Trail or a half-baked San Francisco
the decisions are often bizarre and
incorporate IP because of some out of
control and nonsensical mandate and
while Universal obviously Embraces IP as
well it always feels like there is a
purpose behind it like experiencing the
Mushroom Kingdom in a real physical
space or creating an impressive
technologically advanced stunt show
using Jason Bourne as an appropriate
vessel
these attractions also stand on their
own as well developed in interesting
experiences regardless of whether you're
familiar with the IP or not and while
liking that property certainly helps
their existence is still Justified
yet when I walk through Avengers campus
it superficially attempts to appeal to
Marvel fans which is all that it really
has going for it
at a time when the Marvel Cinematic
Universe is waning at the box office
though Disney may very well be stuck
with an entire land that's appealing to
absolutely no one
it happened to Epcot and it can happen
here
it can happen to Galaxy's Edge
it could happen to any of these rides or
lands unless you design them to exist as
fun and creatively engaging spaces and
dependent of the IP that they're based
around
what happens when your Target
demographic of brand loyalists lose
interest at the box office or Worse
begin showing interest in Brands like
Nintendo and start going to Universal
this slate of costly yet meaningless
Park investment is something that I
think will come back to buy Disney in a
very expensive way and while we have yet
to understand how a shift in moviegoer
tastes will play out and do predict that
the current status quo is something that
Disney is not equipped to handle
instead they've chosen to double down on
the strategy as if the ship wasn't
sinking at their feet now predicting
that this oversaturation resulting brand
fatigue will backfire on all the
expensive yet cheap feeling editions
that they made to their parks
so if you made it here to the very end
of the video and have it left a like
that's a really good way of helping
videos like these reach a wider audience
as always if you have not yet subscribed
and hit the Bell icon you can do so now
so as to be alerted to new videos as
they release
foreign
[Music]
foreign
[Music]
Посмотреть больше похожих видео
Why Disney is Falling Apart | Video Essay
"Greatest Act of Brand Suicide" - How Disney Destroyed Its' Reputation & Lost $200 Billion in Value
Is Going Woke Killing Disney... we ran the maths
Film Theory: Disney is FINALLY Dead, Here's Why
Disney - An Empire In Collapse
Disney are in Trouble: The 4 Huge Problems
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)