Too much Toy Story? About This Page:

[iamgrumpy]

We enjoy Toy Story and it does fit in well with timelessness!

Don't forget DHS now has Block Party Bash as its "parade" and that is FULL of PIXAR characters. So Don't fret you can see plenty of Incredicbles, Bugs Life, Toy Story, and Monster Inc Characters.

[kimkdmm]

we toy story!!!
it was the first movie i took my ds to

[lukesmom]

I agree- never too much Toy Story. DS loves this movie.

[tndisneyfam]

Originally Posted by Happymommy

Too much Toy Story???? That's just crazy talk! There can never be too much Toy Story (IMO)--- I would even love a Toy Story meal!


As far as Disneyfying attractions (that already exist) I usually really do agree (although I like Nemo/Living Seas). I would not want Cars added to Test Track (love that just the way it is)--- but I do think "Cars" would be a great enhancement to IndySpeedway.

I totally agree!!

[Dave Marx]

Overall (and this practice goes back long before Pixar was on the map), Disney takes its time incorporating its films into permanent attractions. The same happened with The Jungle Book, Lady and the Tramp, The Little Mermaid, Lion King, etc. First, they need to be reasonably sure that the film and characters are on their way to being "classic." Second, once that decision has been reached, it can take years to develop and built first-rate attractions based on the films.

I can cite a couple of examples when they didn't wait, such as "Dinosaur" (formerly "Countdown to Extinction") and "It's Tough to Be a Bug." Those attractions opened before the films did. "Dinosaur" did very poorly as a film, the characters had very little traction with the guests, and today, I wonder how many people associate the attraction with the film at all? "It's Tough to Be a Bug" never even got renamed, despite the success of "A Bug's Life." Flik, Hopper, and P.T. Flea participate in the story, but I don't think anyone thinks the attraction is an extension of the film. Altogether, both attractions are good examples of why it's better to wait until you know which characters and story elements in a film have the greatest traction with guests. If the attraction is to be a classic, then it helps to start with elements that are already on their way to being classics.

Meantime, if you have monster hits like Toy Story and Toy Story 2 (and soon enough, Toy Story 3), there's rarely such a thing as "too much." It's like saying there's too much Mickey or Donald. Are there more Toy Story attractions at WDW than, say, Honey I Shrunk the Kids-inspired attractions? (The parades at DHS and DCA feature characters from many Pixar films, so I wouldn't count them as part of Toy Story overload.)

The newer Pixar films? They're in the various phases of being phased-in, but they're hardly absent. Character meets are the easiest and most risk-free to roll out. They're all represented in costume, even before the films are released. Parades usually come next. DCA has now had two different Pixar parades, with one that recently moved to DHS, and Pixar characters were major players in the old Stars and Motor Cars Parade at MGM/DHS, too. Merchandise? No shortage of any Pixar film's merchandise to be found in the gift shops.

There will almost undoubtedly be a Ratatouille attraction, perhaps a hotel restaurant? (It'd be sooo easy to convert Chef's de France/Bistro de Paris to Gusteau's, but it would clash with the authenticity of the World Showcase, which would be a very bad move in my opinion. World Showcase is a place that makes folks want to travel the world, and as a travel writer, I wouldn't want to lose that.) It is still way too early for a Ratatouille attraction. It's not a matter of box office (it certainly was not a flop - it just wasn't a record-breaking hit), but these things take time. A 3D film like Mickey's PhilharMagic, perhaps, with all the right scents and the dynamic "camera" moves they used in the film? Rather than a gift shop at the exit, there could be a dining room (counter service) serving bowls of Remy's soup, and the best vegetarian entree you could find anywhere. "Lightninged" mushrooms, anyone (battered and fried, I'd presume)? All sorts of carry-out foods at the counter to bring back to the old DVC villa... I might be in the minority here, but a really good cheese board would be welcome. That, however, might be a mistake at MK, since I couldn't get a nice glass of wine to go with it.

What about Cars? It's getting an entire land at DCA. I don't see Test Track going "Cars." Far more likely in my book is a re-theming of the Indy Speedway at MK. (Autopia at DL may be too sacred to be converted, though, and with that Cars land nearby, hardly needed.) In keeping with current practices, one of the rides developed for DCA may find its way to WDW.

A Bugs Life has several attractions - It's Tough to Be a Bug at AK and DCA, and A Bug's Land at DCA. Monster's Inc. is covered by Laugh Floor Comedy Club at MK and Mike and Sully to the Rescue at DCA. Finding Nemo has two attractions at WDW, one at DL. Cars is getting its own land at DCA.

The Incredibles... I'm sure something will be announced in the next couple of years. There's way too much great stuff there, and its retro sci-fi style fits in perfectly in Tomorrowland.

So with all that in mind, just how many Toy Story attractions is too much, considering it represents two, soon three films? Buzz (MK and DL), and Toy Story Mania (DHS and DCA)? If you want to look at it as one per film, that's hardly out of line.

[bradk]

DCA has had Pixar Play! for a couple of months now.


Toy Story grossed about $360 Million worldwide ($191 domestic). Toy Story 2 did $485 worldwide, $245 domestic.

Incredibles did $631 million worldwide, $261 domestic

Ratatouille did $621 million ($206 domestic)

so individually speaking, Toy Story wasn't the best performer. but it's proven.

there was a rumor that there was going to be a fast tracked ratatouille themed coaster added to soundstage 1, but evidently Iger discounted that by saying he didn't consider ratatouille a 'franchise.' specifically:

That was the result of a belief that these great character franchises were all brands unto themselves. But nobody was really managing those brands, and decisions were being made in a vacuum. So if we determine that "Toy Story" is a real franchise for the company, then "Toy Story" should get made. Now, you still have to have a great story and great execution - and in the absence of that, you shouldn't make it. And not everything has to be a franchise. I was recently asked whether "Ratatouille" was a franchise. I said no: "Ratatouille" is an extremely good animated film and will be a classic unto itself, but it is not a franchise. You are not going to see "Ratatouille" attractions in parks. When you look at "Toy Story," we're making our third film, we're opening two Toy Story Mania attractions at parks this summer, we have a very strong consumer products line, we have a "Toy Story" musical opening on the cruise line, we have a game in development - that's a franchise.

so basically he's saying he picks and chooses his favorites and he exploits the heck out of them. at least that's my take on it. it doesn't matter what people are really hungry for, if they keep biting at the same bait over and over, the bait isn't going to change.

that's from The Iger difference - Apr. 11, 2008 incidentally

[Caldercup]

Could it also have to do with the "franchise" idea -- a movie with "legs" that allows them to make MORE movies and TV shows (Buzz Lightyear had one) is more marketable for decades over a one-shot wonder, no matter how much it grosses.

Personally, I love just about anything Pixar has put out -- such fine storytelling!
Eileen

[MattUGA]

Toy Story has more likeable characters and such. It's obviously more of a film that people can connect to. A story about a French rat trying to be a chef makes for a great film. No need to force a ride out of it. Bob Iger has done a darn good job so far. He is a much better leader than Eisner. At least Iger can admit with Disney makes mistakes (Caspian release date, repairing the Pixar relationship after Eisner killed it..) Not that Eisner didn't do great things. Just near the end he sabotaged everything.

The Incredibles, though, could easily be a good ride. I'll be waiting for one.

[bradk]

Not going to start an Eisner debate. Eisner (who handpicked Iger) saved Disney. period. There'd be no Disney World without him.

Eisner also brokered the deal with Pixar. Had the opportunity to buy them out early on but passed. Made out better for it. His distribution deal was killer for the company, Pixar didn't like it. Toy Story 3 was coming whether Pixar was on board or not.

Now Pixar plays with Disney's money. Which isn't the most ideal situation, but it's better than what Disney has otherwise.

Honestly, I found incredibles to be a bore. I don't think I've ever seen the whole thing. Toy Story 2 and Monsters, Inc followed a horrible obvious pattern established in Toy Story (right down to the moving van/door/luggage chase scenes). Their animation is top notch, but their scripts and stories are lacking compared to some other companies. I think DreamWorks / PDI's work blows them away in terms of story personally. Antz is just downright clever and hysterical and I can't get enough of Shrek.

All you can legitimately critique Eisner for is eliminating what he was directly responsible for himself. There may have never been a Toy Story without him (or at least any other Pixar film) and he was directly responsible for the rebirth of the animation studio by bringing in Katzenberg (who was unable to replicate the same success at DreamWorks IMO)

[MattUGA]

Eisner saved Disney but only a Eisner acolyte can deny he went downhill after the death of Wells. And Eisner did pick Iger after sabotaging 10 previous. Regardless, Eisner did NOT make this deal with Pixar. That's completely wrong. Pixar refused to even make a deal with Eisner. Disney would have been better buying Pixar early on that the price they eventually had. Disney could have owned Pixar as far back as when Katzenberg was there.

I can also blame Eisner personally for costing me, a stockholder, a lot of money with breaching Katzenberg's contract and the windfall payout to Ovitz.

Eisner was a genius for a long time. Then he became the worst kind of CEO. The kind that took millions and millions as the company lost money and then thinking he was the only one who could do that job.

There is no denying Eisner's saving the company. There is also no denying that he almost ruined it again.

No reason debating facts... We can debate Dreamworks and Pixar quality though. ha ha

[bradk]

the deal I was referring to was the distribution deal that existed prior to Disney purchasing Pixar. Eisner brokered for.. 4 pictures I think? Disney handled the advertising and distribution of the film and took 50% of the profits (and then some). He then extended that deal to a total of 7 I believe (Cars was set to be the last one if I'm not mistaken). Jobs wasn't happy with Pixar's cut and Eisner refused to negotiate. That's the rift.

[Eeyore Tattoo]

Love toy story & Nemo

[stephluvsdisneyworld247]

I do not think that there is to much Toy Story but I do think they should put Cars and Incredibles into something. I love the idea of incorporating Cars with Indy Speedway. I am sick of Finding Nemo but I like the idea of a Toy Story Meal

[Dave Marx]

The notion of only exploiting "franchise" films is a bit overstated, since franchises are very, very rare, and nearly all franchises are made, not born. Absolutely, Toy Story had all the potential for franchise right out of the box - you can't do better for spin-off merchandise than a film that invents a whole bunch of new toys that are integral to the plot. However, without a hugely successful first film, there is no second film (remember, Toy 2 was supposed to be a direct-to-video release, hardly the earmarks of a planned franchise), no Buzz Lightyear aisle at Al's Toy Barn, and maybe one ride in one of the parks.

POTC wasn't a franchise for what, the first 35 years? Before then, it was a successful ride replicated at four Disney parks. Then the first Pirates film was produced as part of an ititiative that also spawned a Tower of Terror movie, a Country Bears movie, and a Haunted Mansion movie. I doubt anyone thought the first POTC film was part of a franchise until it happened.

The interview with Iger may have been intended by Bob to play well on Wall St., but I seriously doubt it represents institutional thinking at the Walt Disney Company. The company can't afford to wait around for sure things. The existing franchise is The Walt Disney Company, with a particularly successful sub-franchise called Parks and Resorts. They can't and don't sit around and wait for the next big phenom to strike the public's fancy - they create their own opportunities. New films and new attractions are needed all the time. Since nobody has a 100% "hit" rate (except, perhaps, Pixar), it's necessary to introduce new concepts on a regular basis.

No Ratatouille attraction because it doesn't have franchise potential? Then why do we have such non-franchise attractions as Splash Mountain (when's the last time they made a Song of the South spin-off, or a DVD release of the original?), Mr. Toad's Wild Ride, Mad Hatter's Tea Cups, Dumbo, Swiss Family Treehouse, Tarzan's Treehouse.... Build a ride, and you help keep a film and its characters in the public eye. When it's time to re-release, release to video, or produce a spin-off, you've got a ready-built audience. Choose to not build an attraction, and you turn your back on the possibility of turning a single film into a franchise....

So, perhaps Bob didn't love Ratatouille, so perhaps he's not yet ready to go out on a limb and commit to a franchise attempt. Big deal. If the DVDs and spin-off merchandise keep selling, someone's going to come to him in a few years with a marketing study that supports the notion that an attraction will help further build on the phenomenon. And at that point he'll come on board, because he's no fool.

There will be a Gusteaus!

[Starla4436]

I love toy story so it isnt to much for me....I also really enjoyed all the Pixar moviesand look forward to Wall-E