Possible Imagination Overhaul

[Andalasia]

Everybody who says IO should go in Cranium Command's spot either:

1) Hasn't seen the movie yet
2) Has never actually physically done CC

Inside Out much, much closer to the original iteriation of "Journey into Imagination" than "Cranium Command". Pete Docter even did an interview recently with the Disney blog who questioned him about it. He worked on CC's animation when he was an intern with WDFA, and remembered it about a year into making IO. He initially thought, "This is exactly like Cranium Command!" and then said it ended up "not even being close". And, well I agree with him.

Not only do the emotions never deal with any body functions, but Headquarters looks NOTHING like the CC theater, which by the way was tiny and only sat 200 people at best. Even if you drastically changed the set, and added animatronics of the emotions, which btw would face away from the audience, you'd be ignoring Inside Out's best aspect: we rarely looked at Riley's POV (the basic centerpiece of Cranium Command), but instead the filmmakers were much more focused on what was behind that, the world of her mind.

The entire Imaginationland sequence and Dream Productions felt so much like the original JII that they even threw in a Figment cameo in there. (fittingly enough, as a doll on a pile of rubble) The movie also has "the train of thought" that runs thru Riley's mind. The attraction writes itself.

So why would Disney struggle to get a pavilion back from festivities, one that which has been gutted and is rapidly aging, just to radically redo a tiny theater space that barely seats anyone as a use of their newly acquired hit Pixar IP when there is a perfect fit attraction just begging to be retired and replaced that would work so much better?

Imagine walking into Riley's mind... navigating the corridors of Long Term Memory as the switchbacks. A mind worker AA (which would be insanely easy to make) talks to guests, sets up the world and maybe is interactive while you wait. Then maybe a Headquarters pre-show using pepper's ghost with the emotions (who are very animated and cartoony), and then you get whisked away through Riley's mind via the train of thought and visit all the personality islands, Imaginationland (which COULD have an appearance by Figment and Dreamfinder), and Dream Productions. They could revive the Image Works upstairs to be a Headquarters you can interact with, with lots of IO-related interactive exhibits. The possibilities are endless with this IP and this pavilion.

And I know people are sick of Pixar, but if you've seen the movie, you would want this too. Inside Out is amazing... way better than Frozen.

I agree with everything you said but I don't see what Frozen had to do with any of it...?

 

[Ryan]

People are really sheepish about another new Disney IP coming to Epcot after what is currently happening with Maelstrom/Frozen. I can see where they're coming from, but I personally think this is a better fit.

 

[JungleSkip]

Sorry, but I don't see the Pixar hate for Epcot. It's already happening, so we might as well accept it. The current Imagination ride is atrocious.

Yes, god forbid we ask for our parks to have some semblance of their original point and purpose.

Sorry, I won't "accept" a far inferior direction for a park. I don't care how good a movie is.

 

[Ryan]

Then... don't go.

I'd rather come to a compromise then throw a fit about a fairly obvious change that you can not stop. Right now it's about getting the best fit with the best IP.

It's kind of like the TCM refurb of Great Movie Ride. The ride needed a sponsor, and although I know people would've preferred it getting a sponorless, magical redo... well it wasn't going to happen. But what did happen was actually the best of a bad situation.

 

[JungleSkip]

Then... don't go.
.

I don't.

It's kind of like the TCM refurb of Great Movie Ride. The ride needed a sponsor, and although I know people would've preferred it getting a sponorless, magical redo... well it wasn't going to happen. But what did happen was actually the best of a bad situation.

It's actually nothing like that, as I don't know of anyone who was against the TCM refurb, but whatever.

 

[Ryan]

It's actually nothing like that, as I don't know of anyone who was against the TCM refurb, but whatever.

People were against the rumors that Disney was going to change the ride scenes for modern audiences using deals with other studios. (there were lots of GMR rumors... like the Disney villains one) Instead they chose a sponsor who is all about classic cinema, perfect fit. It didn't allow for the ride to get a sparkling refresh of all the scenes, but it was a good fit.

Can I ask you... do you like the current Imagination ride that sits in Epcot? Do you think that Disney would really just reinstall the old one?

 

[JungleSkip]

Can I ask you... do you like the current Imagination ride that sits in Epcot? Do you think that Disney would really just reinstall the old one?

No and no. But that doesn't mean I have to lower my standards for the park to allow for something that shouldn't be in the park.

 

[Ryan]

No and no. But that doesn't mean I have to lower my standards for the park to allow for something that shouldn't be in the park.

So what should it be? A new attraction with Dreamfinder and Figment? With that IP versus one like Inside Out, what legitimate case can you make to Disney to not capitalize on it. Wouldn't it seem redundant to do both? Dreamfinder and Figment could very, very easily be incorporated into an IO attraction.

I get that people have their passions when it comes to original EPCOT Center, and you are more than welcome to sneer at Frozen in Norway and shed a tear at the construction of the third Soarin building. Yet I don't get that people are so stubborn and unwilling to come to at least a compromise.

Card Walker did not want Disney characters in EPCOT, because back then a Disney park that wasn't Disneyland-styled had never been built before. Their movies were failing, their product was fading, laughed at for being "kid's stuff". Back then, it was absolutely imperative to keep Disney characters out of EPCOT for business reasons, so it would stand out and be taken more seriously. It was a business decision, not one that was part of the original EPCOT mission statement. That, by the way, was about the exploration of discovery and world culture.

Inside Out is an property that's all about creativity and discover along with the emotional stuff. I don't see the fact that it's Pixar going against what EPCOT stands for.

 

[JungleSkip]

A new attraction with Dreamfinder and Figment? .

Doesn't have to be. That's what I'd prefer, but it doesn't have to be.

Wouldn't it seem redundant to do both? .

Disney has Toy Story in 2 parks, Nemo in 2 parks, Lion King in 2 parks, Mermaid in 2 parks, Beauty and the Beast in 2 parks. There'd be nothing wrong with having 2 rides of different properties with slightly similar setups in 2 different parks.

Yet I don't get that people are so stubborn and unwilling to come to at least a compromise.

For me, I just want a differentiation in feel. EPCOT, DHS, and MK will all have similar feel as we move all 3 more and more into IP-focused rides. It just makes it a lot easier to cut EPCOT out when it really offers me nothing different than the others.

 

[Ryan]

Disney has Toy Story in 2 parks, Nemo in 2 parks, Lion King in 2 parks, Mermaid in 2 parks, Beauty and the Beast in 2 parks. There'd be nothing wrong with having 2 rides of different properties with slightly similar setups in 2 different parks.

Different uses of IPs doesn't equal oddly similar attractions. Imagine if they made a WALL-E interactive shooter ride, again in space... it'll feel oddly redundant. That's why Midway Mania and Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters works in an odd way, they're both the same IP, but different takes on the interactive ride. In a way, it works.

Personally I am not a fan of the fact that IOA has Spiderman and USF has Transformers. It doesn't prevent me from enjoying the parks, but it does feel... weird.

As for the rest, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Universal is enjoying success because of its heavily IP-focused attraction base (and yes, I know execution means everything, but in the end...) and Disney is going to sprint in that direction. Original attractions are sadly a thing of the past and if people do not want to accept that its Epcot's fate, then that's fine, as you said yourself, you don't even go. Test Track 2.0 was helped by its sponsor and being essentially an R&D test for Shanghai's Tron ride, and that's a unique little miracle that doesn't happen everday.

I want Epcot to be able to at least deliver great attractions that build on the theme of discovery. As long as it does that, I don't mind if its IP-focused.

 

[Brian G.]

People do realize when people say they want Inside Out coming to WoL, they're not expecting an exact re-do of Cranium Command.... right?

 

[Ryan]

People do realize when people say they want Inside Out coming to WoL, they're not expecting an exact re-do of Cranium Command.... right?

Except that I've seen people say that everywhere recently, not just Orlando United. It must be the most repeated thing that anybody says on the internet relating IO to the parks. "Oh there was that attraction in Epcot called Cranium Command that was just like this. Maybe they could redo that for Inside Out! It would be perfect!"

Twitter, facebook, reddit, YouTube, IMDB, other theme park forums, actual internet articles about the two... seriously everywhere. Hell, I've even seen some insane people say that they should actually bring CC back and put a sign over the entrance stating, "See the Attraction that Inspired Inside Out!" :bang:

In the end, I don't think it even fits the pavilion. IO is not related to the body: it's strictly psychological and about the mind. It's a much better fit for the pavilion that dealt with the creative process: Imagination.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

I refuse to believe in fatalism. WDW's parks are headed in a basic cable like direction of losing identify and separation.

 

[Brian G.]

Except that I've seen people say that everywhere recently, not just Orlando United. It must be the most repeated thing that anybody says on the internet relating IO to the parks. "Oh there was that attraction in Epcot called Cranium Command that was just like this. Maybe they could redo that for Inside Out! It would be perfect!"

I mean... they share similarities. They are different however. It's not unfair for people to come to that conclusion.

Twitter, facebook, reddit, YouTube, IMDB, other theme park forums, actual internet articles about the two... seriously everywhere. Hell, I've even seen some insane people say that they should actually bring CC back and put a sign over the entrance stating, "See the Attraction that Inspired Inside Out!" :bang:

That's a bit much, and I don't think any sane person would buy into that.

In the end, I don't think it even fits the pavilion. IO is not related to the body: it's strictly psychological and about the mind. It's a much better fit for the pavilion that dealt with the creative process: Imagination.

Last I checked... mind is related to the body? WoL was a pavillion that housed 2 attractions. It doesn't need to be entirely dedicated to IO, but there's no reason why it can't be an updated version and very different from CC. Epcot needs to add, not replace.

Figment needs to stick around, but he's not going anywhere anyway. I think a fair compromise of this argument would be to keep Figment involved and the ride gets a renovation, and Inside Out takes over the EO spot.

 

[Ryan]

Well yes, the mind is related to the body is the widespread scale of things, but the movie is extremely metaphysical. Aside from maybe mental health, there's very little things biological or medical about the film, if anything at all. (the closest it gets is a small joke at the end about puberty) And WoL isn't even an attractions pavilion anymore... I think it's a lost cause, and should be demolished and a new pavilion put in its place.

As for the Imagination pavilion, my argument is mostly that to make Inside Out a theater attraction (especially a played-out 3D one) is a complete waste of the IP. I think the attraction should be a ride if made. I think you could actually do a crossover element and have Figment still involved. I understand that people are looking at the grand scheme of things, but I think this is a special situation where, unlike Frozen/Norway, the IP and the pavilion fit hand-in-glove and could work to rid of an awful attraction currently in place.

Now, none of us are in charge of WDI, and none of us are going to affect what actually happens. Although the rumor mill is very strong relating Imagination to IO. Whether or not it means the theater or the ride, that remains to be seen. (regardless, either one would make EPCOT purists mad as hell anyways) Personally, I'm hoping for the ride. And I hope it happens.

 

[Brian G.]

And WoL isn't even an attractions pavilion anymore... I think it's a lost cause, and should be demolished and a new pavilion put in its place.

That's a cop out argument. What it is now does not impact what it could be in the future.

Look, IO was very successful in its 1st weekend, but let's not treat it as a Box Office juggernaut just yet. It's about to enter a very tough period of films with Terminator & Minions coming out, let alone more competition from Jurassic World. Let's see how much legs this thing can have before we start saying it's a "special" situation.

 

[MrRoamer]

In Inside Out Imagination Land was a place in the mind yes, but very little actually occurred there and the emotions were not linked to it and in fact didn't even know it existed. The movie focused around emotions, how they relate to the human body, and memories; all very real things.

Spoiler

In fact you could almost go as far as saying most of Riley's imagination was destroyed by the end

This had a very similar feel to CC, yes it was different and yes I have both seen the movie and been on CC multiple times. Like Brian said we do not want an exact remake of CC but that pavillion had a very similar presence as what Inside Out would do here.

Heck if it would make people feel better to have it next to Figment then put it in Innoventions West or that other building of nothing over there. It would be really interesting to get a total number on wasted space in Epcot, I'm confident it would be a staggering realization.

For the character argument, we lost Future World to them ok fine that sucks but its done. World Showcase was the last holdout of the original Epcot (yes we lost a little bit with 3 Cabelleros) but Frozen was a death knell to it. Inside Out is more than welcome in my opinion to take over WoL.

TLDR version: Figment should be properly redone to something that can hold a candle to the original. Inside Out needs to plus not replace.

 

[Ryan]

Look, IO was very successful in it's 1st weekend, but let's not treat it as a Box Office juggernaut just yet. It's about to enter a very tough period of films with Terminator & Minions coming out, let alone more competition from Jurassic World. Let's see how much legs this thing can have before we start saying it's a "special" situation.

I didn't think I was going to have to talk box office in this thread, but: the movie really has little competition until Minions, and is already doing some fantastic numbers, and has the family market on the lucrative July 4th weekend all to itself. I think it will hit $300 million domestically compared to what Pixar films have done in the past. It hasn't, however, opened in the bigger markets overseas, that's the one of the main questions as WDW does like to cater to international visitors. I'm remaining optimistic.

Although if Ratatouille can get a hugely expensive trackless ride made (even if they were attempting to cater to the local market), then anything is possible in relation to IP attractions, I guess. Heck, Cars Land was made strictly on merchandise sales alone. Cars 2, when adjusting for inflation, is the Pixar film with the lowest gross ever. There's a ton that goes into these decisions, and I'm not demanding for this to happen, I would just really like it to. And this is coming from someone who loved the original Journey Into Imagination.

If Disney decides to put IO in WoL in some sort of capacity, well I'll be hesistant, but I'll also be disappointed if they left Imagination in that state. That's my main concern at this point, as is the thread title.

...can we all agree it would be better than a Phineas and Ferb attraction?

 

[Ultranel]

OK forum, I have a few questions. 1. Is it a FACT that WDW is currently talking about building an attraction for this movie? (and when I say attraction, I'm not talking about a M&G, show, or a store) 2. Was it really that sucessful? I know it did great, but many movies do great, that's does not make them Iconical. I mean, I'm seeing plenty of Dinos lately but not IO "excluding your typical comercials on TV to promote the movie". Look how long it took them to build a ride for Nemo and that's a true Iconic little clown fish, so why this rush for IO all of a sudden?... even Frozen had to wait. And 3. How hard is it to understand that the structure once called WoL is just a structure that can be re-themed or ball wrecked at anytime? You can turn that building into "My Little Pony Adventure" if you really want to, but it still just a structure that is quickly turning into an eye sore.

 

[ThemeParks4Life]

Inside Out had the highest opening weekend of any original movie beating Avatar. This will be one of Pixar's highest grossing movies.