Does anyone else think Galaxy’s Edge is a misfire?

[KaliSplash]

View attachment 896523View attachment 896524View attachment 896525
View attachment 896526View attachment 896528View attachment 896527
View attachment 896529View attachment 896530

No

 

[Tha Realest]

Didn't stop Hoth... Endor.. and countless other SW destinations from making names for themselves. Heck, it's basic SW formula to introduce new worlds and then explain them after the fact.

Batuu is Temu Tatooine. It’s not been a presence in their major TV and film productions, and has a smattering of references in books, comics, and video games.

 

[Pizza Moon]

No

Why?

 

[Andrew C]

Yes. It was a misfire. Feels lifeless. No energy. Sterile. Things promised were not delivered.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Batuu is Temu Tatooine. It’s not been a presence in their major TV and film productions, and has a smattering of references in books, comics, and video games.

Translation: it’s

Add it to the long…but distinguished list

Don’t get me wrong…they spent and worked hard on it.

They just missed that the fanbase isn’t infatuated with “desert junkyard/bounty hunter/spaceport” motif as has been mistakenly believed. It’s probably the least interesting locale…which totally scans as it was done on the tightest budget originally. It just goes to pattern if look at the franchise superficially for 5 Minutes

“Let’s do that bounty hunter thing and make it all look old and broken down…a spaceport…yeah! They love that”

Mmmmm…not quite that much

 

[Basil of Baker Street]

GE feels bland and SR is garbage. I'm not walking to GE to ride Rise when I can ride (to me) a better trackless at the center of the park. They would have been better off to build an omni or boat or both in place of SR.

It's that bad.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Introducing a new place in a movie is completely different than introducing it as a theme park land, to my mind. A movie is a narrative vehicle where you know an explanation or description is forthcoming, so if it doesn’t arrive right away, that’s just slow pacing.

Except that’s not at all how Star Wars introduces or even experiences locales.

The idea that a theme park can’t introduce something new is just nonsense. It is not an inferior storytelling medium that requires external introduction like the franchise mandate dictates.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

GE feels bland and SR is garbage. I'm not walking to GE to ride Rise when I can ride (to me) a better trackless at the center of the park. They would have been better off to build an omni or boat or both in place of SR.

It's that bad.

Trackless has its purposes for sure…very good system for family style rides

But is it NOT exciting. And sorry…that’s what you needed to do for that IP.

In a way…it goes back to Disneyland in 1986. Star tours was kind of an imagineering punt. They choose climate control and space over what Star Wars needed.

Speed. Gravity. Earth type stuff that triggers the Brain stem.

Star Wars needs something that moves. Build the X Wing coaster and they’ll actually have the crowds that the idiot bobs ripped out benches for…all will be forgiven.

To me…the rise of the Abrams is just an unimaginative update of star tours. It has alot of high end effects…but combined with the trackless and the mechanically necessary 5 second simu-drop…it’s not a “thrill ride”. If anything it’s kind of a mimic of more of a universal dark ride.

The mistake that George, Disney, et al keeps making is assuming that star wars is for 7 year olds. But it’s not. It may have gotten you at 7…but it stuck with you as you changed. This is the like the “meaning of life” answer for Star Wars fans. It was tone, texture, score, etc that made it arguably the most popular movie franchise ever (arguable…but not too much)…

The “lands”’are a reflection of how big shot Bobby and his analysts didn’t do their homework…
And by “homework”…talk to about 50 gen xers:
Might have taken a few days…but I’m sure they could have gone to Panera for a break a couple of times.

Like John Q Public…not JJ Abrams…who was a fan of uncle Steven’s clout and wallet…not uncle George’s movie franchise. He’s paid the price too. Kind of a has been…his daughter is a bigger deal now. You mess with the Star Wars “bull”…ya get the horns

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Except that’s not at all how Star Wars introduces or even experiences locales.

The idea that a theme park can’t introduce something new is just nonsense. It is not an inferior storytelling medium that requires external introduction like the franchise mandate dictates.

It’s ridiculous based on how they operate. It’s all IP facades now…and they screwed up the one where people WANTED the movie sets

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

Personally I would have included a stage show centered around the Christmas Special.

Because. Why not?

 

[DisneyHead123]

The idea that a theme park can’t introduce something new is just nonsense. It is not an inferior storytelling medium that requires external introduction like the franchise mandate dictates.

It's not inferior but it's different.

Imagine if there were no Harry Potter books or movies, and you built a room with the Sorcerer's Stone in it. Now you have a room with a random rock in it.

Externally dull settings can work if they are absolutely imbued with meaning that park guests bring to the experience. The teen girl watching the first Twilight movie does not see a strangely blue-tinted, unremarkable forest. They see the scene being set for Edward The Sparkly Vampire to appear, squeee! Now imagine there were no Twilight movies and someone made a theme park land that was just a blue tinted forest, sans context.

You really can't "introduce a new world" in the above scenarios and get the same emotional impact, because park lands are experienced differently. Movies contain far more exposition and action, park lands have to give you a very immediate, visceral sense of where you are without much further explanation (or, alternately, rely on the fact that park goers already know the story of where they are.)

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Personally I would have included a stage show centered around the Christmas Special.

Because. Why not?

…you’re on fire this week

 

[Pizza Moon]

It would've been a weird choice to make Toy Story Land set to the "carnival" in Toy Story 4.

Instantly dated and tied to a weak movie and not as interesting a concept.

 

[flynnibus]

You really can't "introduce a new world" in the above scenarios and get the same emotional impact, because park lands are experienced differently. Movies contain far more exposition and action, park lands have to give you a very immediate, visceral sense of where you are without much further explanation (or, alternately, rely on the fact that park goers already know the story of where they are.)

Yet everytime Disney creates a new land or ride based on IP we get the endless choruses of 'Why doesn't Disney create any new orginal attractions anymore???'.

This isn't an 'either or' kind of thing.. your argument is 'lack of familiarity' is a problem.. when in reality familiarity is just often used as an accellerant or a 'shortcut' for the story telling. The idea of a 'hidden rebel base' and numerous constructs from the struggle between the Empire, it's oppression, and those opposed to it are the familar constructs Batuu is structured with. You say "it has no backstory" -- The SW Galaxy is it's backstory.. this is just a new spot in it we are introduced to.. with it's own unique things.. just like is done in virtually EVERY Star Wars story.

 

[flynnibus]

Batuu is Temu Tatooine. It’s not been a presence in their major TV and film productions, and has a smattering of references in books, comics, and video games.

Originality is dead for you?

 

[Pizza Moon]

…you’re on fire this week

I miss this so much. Obviously wouldn't make sense in the land except for special events, but it just celebrated Star Wars.

I kind of miss the world I grew up in, honestly.

 

[Pizza Moon]

Yet everytime Disney creates a new land or ride based on IP we get the endless choruses of 'Why doesn't Disney create any new orginal attractions anymore???'.

This isn't an 'either or' kind of thing.. your argument is 'lack of familiarity' is a problem.. when in reality familiarity is just often used as an accellerant or a 'shortcut' for the story telling. The idea of a 'hidden rebel base' and numerous constructs from the struggle between the Empire, it's oppression, and those opposed to it are the familar constructs Batuu is structured with. You say "it has no backstory" -- The SW Galaxy is it's backstory.. this is just a new spot in it we are introduced to.. with it's own unique things.. just like is done in virtually EVERY Star Wars story.

I don't know how you do it, but you make endless false equivalences.

You clearly are stuck in a mindloop and it won't change.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Imagine if there were no Harry Potter books or movies, and you built a room with the Sorcerer's Stone in it. Now you have a room with a random rock in it.

The philosopher’s stone predates Harry Potter by centuries.

You really can't "introduce a new world" in the above scenarios and get the same emotional impact, because park lands are experienced differently. Movies contain far more exposition and action, park lands have to give you a very immediate, visceral sense of where you are without much further explanation (or, alternately, rely on the fact that park goers already know the story of where they are.)

What you and so many others miss is that the locales shown in Star Wars do not have a strong sense of place. Go actually look at Mos Eisner. It’s a lot of beige stucco with very minimal ornamentation. It’s largely placeless because the where is largely immaterial to the story. Over and over again the locales can be described as things like desert, ice, swamp or forrest. That existing attachment doesn’t create a space that is enjoyable to experience (and even more so when the place is supposed to hostile to the protagonist). People aren’t interested in seeing the stucco of Tattoine or the trees of Endor, they want to go on an adventure where they see aliens and robots, things not actually tied to the physical space.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I miss this so much. Obviously wouldn't make sense in the land except for special events, but it just celebrated Star Wars.

I kind of miss the world I grew up in, honestly.

Ok…that’s weird

But you are NOT…under any circumstances …getting slave girl Leia every again…no deal there

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

The philosopher’s stone predates Harry Potter by centuries.


What you and so many others miss is that the locales shown in Star Wars do not have a strong sense of place. Go actually look at Mos Eisner. It’s a lot of beige stucco with very minimal ornamentation. It’s largely placeless because the where is largely immaterial to the story. Over and over again the locales can be described as things like desert, ice, swamp or forrest. That existing attachment doesn’t create a space that is enjoyable to experience (and even more so when the place is supposed to hostile to the protagonist). People aren’t interested in seeing the stucco of Tattoine or the trees of Endor, they want to go on an adventure where they see aliens and robots, things not actually tied to the physical space.

This sounds like how a non-star wars fan who works for a corporate monolith would try to summarize Star Wars before they blow their “experiency” o-ring