- Sep 10, 2017
- 2,727
- 3,493
I could maybe see a fun little side-attraction for Mario? Like a section in the gift shop, or a regular puppet show based on the 2007 one?
But how many Mickey Mouse rides are there in that resort, let alone the one park? And, frankly, I don’t think there’s as big a visual difference between “new Mickey” and “classic Mickey as people want to believe there is.
Potter and Star Wars are all “one world, one aesthetic.” The timeline for Potter is a little inconsistent, but timelines are easily fudge. Mickey is, definitively, “one world, slightly different aesthetic.” And besides, there’s only one Mickey ride.
Paper Mario would be “two worlds, two aesthetics.” There’s a lot argument and belief that the Paper Mario series is not canon with the platformers (like it matters). But the platformers are the mainline story that the Mario Karts, Parties, and — most importantly— SNW are a part of. It would actually be like Disney building a Tom Holland Spider-Man attraction in the same land as a Tobey Maguire attraction.
I can understand your argument, while I disagree on some points. Fantasmic isn’t a “Mickey Mouse” attraction; It’s a Disney attraction with Mickey Mouse. That’s why it features numerous characters and plot points that are unequivocally separate from “Mickey’s” world. It’s a similar reason why the Princesses can interact in very specific circumstances. Belle and Jasmine aren’t going to visit Arendelle, but can visit each other in neutral locations.This is very, VERY fair, and I completely respect these points,
A few things, though:
The Mickey in “Fantasmic!” is not characteristically like the Mickey in “M&MRR”, in my opinion. Mickey in the ride/the short film that plays in the next-door theatre packs Pluto into The trunk of a car unwittingly. Mickey in the show handily battles the personification of evil. And I’d say Fantasmic is an attraction that might as well count as a ride, considering the hype and the impact it makes on vacation plans.
There’s something to me that is decidedly in a different level of immersion and seriousness in Star Tours and Jedi Training (ESPECIALLY Jedi Training, which is almost an AU if it wasn’t carefully placed into cannon in the way that some episodes of early Clone Wars feel like fanfiction), but let’s say that there is no seam, because technically there is not.
If we are going to go into this “canon” for Mario in any serious way, let’s talk about the forced marriage of Princess Peach in many of the Nintendo games, especially in Odyssey (and the implications of that), and how Mario murders Bowser multiple times to save her. While this is no different in many ways to the storyline of “Sleeping Beauty”, Phillip, Aurora, and Maleficent never played board games together nor went out go-karting.
The idea that “Paper Mario” cannot exist because the story is too different seems to me a little bit silly, considering the inconsistency of the relationship/friendships of the characters in the first place. Presumably, in the parks, the gang will be in “friendly competition”, perhaps with Bowser being a little more bitter than the rest to create some story texture and to nod to the fact that he can be an actual awful monster, but that, I don’t think, precludes the aesthetic of “Paper Mario”, in which the story changes completely with each game, and with Bowser especially shown in a much more positive light than usual (more in line with a theme park spin, IMHO.)
I see what you mean with the Spider-Man analogy, and it’s a really fair point. But I think it’s a little flawed, as Nintendo has made and put it’s seal of approval on all of the Mario games, in a way that Disney has not had control of every version of Spider-Man.
What this really makes me think of is Buzz Lightyear Space Ranger Spin, though. Based on an animated TV show in a world where Buzz Lightyear can indeed fly and is really a space ranger. We enter this “alternate universe”. Go to Hollywood Studios and Buzz is a toy, where the entire arc of his first film was that, indeed, he is not a space ranger. In other parks around the world, both versions of Buzz exist in the same park, as he passes by on a parade float made of toys.
Now, I don’t see a full “Paper Mario” attraction coming any time soon - Nintendo and Universal ought to have bigger fish to fry, and people won’t clamor for it - but I don’t see why in any meaningful DESIGN way that a gateway to the paper world can’t exist. Or even a section of a store that has somehow become two-dimensional and angular.
I can understand your argument, while I disagree on some points. Fantasmic isn’t a “Mickey Mouse” attraction; It’s a Disney attraction with Mickey Mouse. That’s why it features numerous characters and plot points that are unequivocally separate from “Mickey’s” world. It’s a similar reason why the Princesses can interact in very specific circumstances. Belle and Jasmine aren’t going to visit Arendelle, but can visit each other in neutral locations.
Buzz is a toy in every attraction he’s in. Space Ranger Spin is full of toys, including Viewfinders and batteries, so there’s no violation of continuity there either.
But, really, the crux is really why? Why confuse guests with a drastically different presentation of the same characters in the same location? Why, when you’re striving to create a fully immersive world, would you intentionally break continuity? And introducing the Paper Mario aesthetic to Mushroom Kingdom as presented by Universal does exactly that.
It would be like having one shop in Galaxy’s Edge having The Clone Wars aesthetic while everything else is the films. It would stand out in a not good way.
Back to speculation...
One thing that I think this park REALLY could have going for it, are their shows. Disney crowds LOVE their shows, as do most families and parents as its a place to rest, and when well done can actually be a draw. To me, obviously other than the highly themed environments more like Diagon, the shows here are whats going to make EU different than any Orlando park. These have the potential to be highly highly immersive in their settings, special effects, HHN people working on the Frankenstein show, Dreamworks id hope is collaborating on the HTTYD show, and they've nailed everything with Potter thus far and to a degree I don't expect that to change. Shows in my eyes not only take up time (you'd be surprised how many people just want "something to do" on their theme park vacations) and if they are the proper 25 min shows, thats nearly 2 hours between waiting for the shows and actually sitting down and watching them. Thats a huge chunk of time.
To add to that, shows help spread out your theme park. I remember when we'd go to Lost Continent when Sinbad was open (I was a teen and didn't hate it don't judge), we'd always end our day at Sinbad, then head over to Mythos for dinner. That took us like 2 hours each time!! Im not one who looks to fill time, but I'm very aware many families who go on theme park vacations do. Shows add time, keep their kids seated, and its something ANYONE of any age, mobility, or thrill level can do and see. If well done I feel this will make these themed environments 10x more immersive then they're already trying to present them. Shows add a lot Imo, Universal needs more of them. I can't help but imagine one more show in USF makes USF a full day park w/o Diagon. Not entirely sure it is now unless you realllyyyy take your time. Same goes for IOA, although IOA has always somewhat depended on water rides when trying to make a full day or two out of that park. IF IOA had just 1 show in Toon Lagoon, or Lost Continent, or Seuss Landing besides the Holiday's, IOA is very easily a 2 day park imo.
Main point being, while I get most people just go to a park and don't necessarily go to get everything done, shows can really extend a families day at a theme park. If guests are loving these really well themed environments, along with the shows, Imo this will make EU, easily, a 2-3 day park even for the average guest. Maybe I'm overthinking it and am just personally excited, but having gone to Disney and seeing how popular those shows can be I expect this to be a major plus for EU in helping to recruit more families.
Id expect scarier and less campy, but who knows. I don't think there are any rumors for what the show will entail but since we know the setting of the land, leaves the mind to wonder haha.Hard agree.
I wonder how hardcore the Monster show will be. How much scarier than “Horror Makeup”, I mean.
I don't think it would be scary at all. Well "purposefully" scary. These parks are still family parks, and the show will reflect that since the ride will probably have a decent height requirement.Hard agree.
I wonder how hardcore the Monster show will be. How much scarier than “Horror Makeup”, I mean.
Let's see if it has any staying power first.
*A Citywalk storeAnimal Crossing would be a huge boon to add to the park...just saying.
That may be, but it isn't a cultural touchstone. It's something gamers know, not the general public who doesn't play games. I'm not a gamer, but there are certain game things that I know because they've integrated into pop culture. Everyone knows Mario and Donkey Kong. It's only in the past 8 weeks I've ever heard of Animal Crossing. You don't spend hundreds of millions of dollars on building theme park attractions unless you know the audience is there now and will continue to be there in 10+ years. There are so many theme park attractions that were based on something that just went away-- look at Barney, Fievel, Jimmy Neutron, etc. They were all HUGE properties at one point...Just to show the growth of this last one. How big of a deal is 'Animal Crossing'? It had the biggest launch of any Nintendo Switch game, including 'Mario' and 'Zelda.'
View attachment 12209
I think the difference there is that Barney, Fivel, and Jimmy Neutron were pushed really hard but faded out, whereas Animal Crossing has been steadily growing and growing over the years.That may be, but it isn't a cultural touchstone. It's something gamers know, not the general public who doesn't play games. I'm not a gamer, but there are certain game things that I know because they've integrated into pop culture. Everyone knows Mario and Donkey Kong. It's only in the past 8 weeks I've ever heard of Animal Crossing. You don't spend hundreds of millions of dollars on building theme park attractions unless you know the audience is there now and will continue to be there in 10+ years. There are so many theme park attractions that were based on something that just went away-- look at Barney, Fievel, Jimmy Neutron, etc. They were all HUGE properties at one point...
I picture an indoor store where you can interact with the towns people by knocking on doors (think Sesame Street at SeaWorld)Unless you’re building a store or some kind of meet & greet or walkthrough Animal Crossing doesn’t really lend itself to a theme park. It’s a life simulator and the fact that it came out during COVID lockdown was just a perfect storm for huge success. Not saying it wasn’t already popular but it’s an easy thing to grasp for why it’s done so insanely well.