The reveals came during the Disney Parks panel at the Star Wars Celebration event at the Orange County Convention Center in Orlando, celebrating the 40th anniversary of the release of the original Star Wars film in 1977.
Disney's Scott Trowbridge, the creative director who is overseeing the Star Wars project, said the the escape from the First Order ride would be the most epic adventure ever constructed in a Disney theme park. In addition, on the Millennium Falcon attraction, riders will have the ability to control the iconic smuggling vessel, and riders' choices in doing that could affect the way that they are treated by characters elsewhere in the land.
This raises the concept that Disney's Star Wars land will support ongoing narratives that involve visitors in a way that carries on from location to location within the land. Each attraction will not be a separate experience, but a chapter in an ever-developing narrative.
Disney experimented with this type of in-park immersive storytelling with its Legends of Frontierland experience at Disneyland in 2014. Knott's Berry Farm has been expanding the concept with its Ghost Town Alive! experience, which debuted last summer and will return for this summer, as well. We will see how Disney applies the concept with Star Wars land.
We also learned more about the location of Star Wars land within the Star Wars universe. According to Disney publicity, the land lies on a planet "somewhere on the Outer Rim — lying on the edge of the Unknown Regions."
The remote village was once a busy crossroads along the old sub-lightspeed trade routes, but the prominence of the outpost has been bypassed with the rise of hyperspace travel. Now home to those who prefer less attention, it has become a thriving port for smugglers, rogue traders and adventurers traveling between the frontier and uncharted space. It’s also a convenient safe-haven for others intent on avoiding the expanding reach of the First Order.
Disney's Star Wars land also will include as-yet-not-yet-fully-revealed interactive elements, potentially including much more convincing lightsabers than the light-up toy tubes now sold in the parks.
Panelists promised to reveal more about Star Wars land at the D23 Expo in Anaheim this July. Star Wars land is scheduled to open sometime in 2019.
Update: Forgot to add this: Disney also announced that it will add a scene from Star Wars: The Last Jedi into the Star Tours The Adventures Continue attractions at Disneyland and Walt Disney World later this year. The scene will be set on the planet of Crait, which is seen in the new Last Jedi trailer. It's the one with the funky "blood" dust.
TweetA new destination is coming to Star Tours – The Adventures Continue at @Disneyland & @WaltDisneyWorld this year! https://t.co/oCpYFl4SUu pic.twitter.com/dx0nUD7dOd
— Disney Parks (@DisneyParks) April 18, 2017
Disney needs to give Star Wars nerds their own theme park.
I have zero interest in visiting Disney's dumbed down copycat version of Star Wars.
If you choose one planet already known, people would complain about wanting to see a different one. There's no Wookies on Hoth, no Ewoks on Tatooine, no Jawas on Couroscant - But on a new planet, anything can be there, and properly in place. Anywhere already established in the Star Wars universe has rules regarding who should be there, and what it should be like. Somewhere new allows the designers to create an environment to meet the entertainment and practicality necessities of the land.
As for the suggestion that Disney make a theme park land just to make Star Wars nerds happy: Star Wars nerds are never happy.
And I'm speaking as one of them.
This was going to be a huge win with the great material handed to them. But, as is usual, leave it to Disney to screw this up.
The next 10 years + will be amazing for Universal and Disney fans
I have often wondered how you could pull this off in Star Wars. Shopping and eating are not parts of Star Wars mythology the way buying a wand, quidditch gear, or eating at Leaky Cauldron is a part of HP. You can't have hundreds, or thousands of people walking around lopping of limbs with lightsabers. So how would immersion be created.
I think what we know is a good start. I love that the interaction is based on your choices and outcomes of rides. If they pull that off it will be incredible. How are Jedi going to be handled? Lightsabers? The Force? Those 3 things must be handled correctly for all of this to work.
Sadly, hardcore fans are not returning to Universal Orlando, per internal statistics, in the numbers predicted for 2016 and so far in 2017.
Universal Creative is already addressing a question they thought wouldn't have to be addressed so soon after the WWofHP expansion...
How do we reignite attendance at the Universal Orlando Resort?
Could this same question arise for Walt Disney World soon after STAR WARS land opens?
"Generic Star Warsy location" doesn't really do it for me if that's what it'll wind up being.
I do worry about the "interactive elements" being hinted at by Disney. WWoHP wands are elegant, small, and don't usually interfere with the casual visitor's enjoyment of the land. The natural lines that form around the windows do clog certain areas, but it's not too bad. However, if Disney is going to market full size interactive lightsabers to guests that can "battle", they would really need to consider creating exclusive areas for the "battles" to occur, almost like a Laser Tag arena. Having little kids swinging around lightsabers in a crowded area is a recipe for disaster. Even using roped off areas can introduce a level of liability if kids cannot control their lightsabers.
@24.205.29.101 - Perhaps you could provide some data to support your assertions. All reports seem to indicate WWoHP is doing quite well on both coasts. The winter fan event at UO continues to draw crowds during a typically slow time of year, mostly from the hard core fans.
@Anton - How do you pull off walk-around characters when virtually every one (at least most of the important ones) is most recognizable by their facial features? Perhaps you could pull off Dumbledore, especially since he's already been played by 2 different actors, soon to be 3, but unless you're able to find look-alike's, Emma Watson, Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Robby Coltrane, and Alan Rickman have more important things to do than pose for pictures at a theme park making minimum wage (sadly Rickman's no longer with us, so that's a non-starter). You could have generic teachers and students to pose for pictures, but those people already exist in the land, and snapping photos with them doesn't seem too popular, especially when the park sells intricate-enough clothing that guests can themselves dress as a person from the Wizarding World. I don't think Rowling placed any restriction on character meet and greets, it's just not practical nor realistic.
It's no secret attendance at UO and UH missed projections. It's been covered on this blog, as well as other blogs and in analysis of Comcast's NBC/Uni quarterly reports. The evidence is readily available, if you want to believe it.
Further factual evidence are the steps Universal has taken to offer reduced admission prices and removing blockout days from Annual Passes. Not to mention, reintroducing passes previously eliminated based on attendance projections. Again, the evidence is readily available, if you want to believe it.
You should also understand, missed attendance projections are also effecting WDW and the Anaheim properties. Again, the evidence is readily available, if you want to believe it.
I ask simply because I do have a child with Asperger's Syndrome, part of ASD, when he is finished with something he is finished with it. If he was to ride the same ride consecutive times he still regards it as the first time. How are cast members going to react to someone like this who may react as if they are being attacked by strangers, how will this lead to a positive experience for others in that party or for other guests in the immediate area who witness it. Based upon what we know about SW land to date it appears to be an area that Disney does not wish to have all people enjoy or that some may simply have to avoid because of one person not being allowed.
I'm looking forward to Pandora. Disney may have taken their good time in putting the expansion to AK together, but does anybody other than an internet troll really believe that Disney won't knock it out of the park with this new land? The movie may have been outrageously silly, but the theme park land will be stunning.
Toy Story Land/Pixar Place - whatever it ends up being called is going to be good if not great. And if you naysayers don't think so, maybe you should check out how happy it is going to make the pre-teen audience who are going to think of it as the Fantasyland of DHS. Right now, DHS is one big MEH for just about any age group, but add in a Toy Story land and the little guys are going to be happy, and then the table is set for the big dog to howl, because.....
Star Wars Land is going to be phenomenal. Honestly, can any other IP be any more "can't miss" than Star Wars? Some of us have been waiting for nearly 4 decades to immerse ourselves in the Star Wars environment, and while Star Tours is a nice attraction, it's only an appetizer, and now we want the entrée. Sure some people are going to be disappointed that they didn't get the exact Star Wars environment that they fell in love with, but most of us are going to walk away ecstatic and looking forward to our next visit.
Like one of the above posters said, "The next 10 years + will be amazing for Universal and Disney fans." So true. Grab your seat and get set for the ride!
I doubt a CM would run up to a guest and shout, "You were AMAZING flying the Falcon", though I suppose it's not out of the realm of possibility. I'm not sure where you're getting that Disney is trying to alienate anyone. On the contrary, they appear to be attempting to make it more inclusive and personal than any themed land on Earth.
Your explanation on why Disney can't do a specific location sounds like an excuse. Flexibility for Disney means not having to stick to any canon. They just add and mix to fill any void.
Disney easily could've made Star Wars into a third theme park in Anaheim or one shared with Marvel properties.
The very first poster couldn't be more wrong about Cars Land. Disney nailed that area and the crowds have shown up to enjoy it.
And how do you know diehard fans are no longer returning if you ha a disappointing experience? That's quite a lot of people we're talking about here.
And how does reduced Annnual passes prices and reintroducing passes that were once eliminated support the claim that Universal isn't doing too hot right now (specifically, WWOHP)?
I wasn't arguing that Disney shouldn't do a specific location, merely pointing out the advantage they've gained by choosing to set the Star Wars lands in a generic location. It gives Imagineers flexibility, and it also gives guests the freedom to make the space anything they want with only subtle references to the actual places appearing in the Star Wars movies. Tying the land to a specific place and time in a universe that will continue to expand for at least the next 5-10 years would be foolish. While making a Mos Eisley Cantina would be a no-brainer, youngsters just now being introduced to Star Wars wouldn't understand any of the references. A generic "bar on the Outer Rim" could have winks and nods to the Mos Eisley Cantina (and Maz's Place) while not tying it to those specific places and times in the event future movies change the direction/tone of the Universe. Disney is not creating a Star Wars museum or walk-around movie set, they're creating an immersive world that they want guests to inhabit and develop organically. If guests reject certain aspects of the land, Imagineers can easily make changes to improve the experience.
I have yet to see anyone reject a Marilyn Monroe walkaround and she was is often shown in her role in "The Seven Year Itch" at USH. Neither are Charlie Chaplain, Groucho Marx, and Lucille Ball. None are perfect lookalikes and everyone wants a picture. USO had the Blues Brothers for years. Don't think they are mere characters. Their portrayal by John Belushi and later replaced by his brother Jim Belushi, and Dan Aykroyd are easily distinguishable. Their portrayal by tribute performances are good enough and they been around in both parks.
As for Star Wars, the Imagineers get only one chance at it. They can't or won't be able to fix it for years if they fail. Thus, your concern about creating the opposite of expectations is just a big risk for Disney. You think they are mitigating the risk.
Oddly, you think the public will reject actual Harry Potter walkarounds while Disney will have plenty for their extreme immersive environment while not even being an accurate portrayal of Star Wars. A bit twisted in reasoning.
I think Imagineers do have lots of flexibility, and I never said the Star Wars land would not be "accurate". It just won't be a representation of a real place depicted in any of the Star Wars feature films produced to date, which I think is an advantage. While the overall layout of the land could not be changed without re-engineering it, the set dressing, CM interaction, and other aspects of the land could be easily redone based on guest reaction, feedback, and future films/source material. You seem to think by setting the land in a "generic" location on the Outer Rim, means it's in some alternate dimension or whitewashed Imagineering Star Wars blender. It's not.
Disney is creating this real place IN the world of Star Wars where real Star Wars characters go, and while the location has not appeared in any movie (perhaps it will in the future), it should have the look and feel of a real place in that universe. If it doesn't, then guests will reject it, and Imagineers will need to fix it.
For the same reason Harry, Hermione, and Ron don't walk around Diagon Alley, guests won't see Han, Luke, Leia, Anakin, Lando, Rey, Finn, and Ben (Kenobi or Solo), because those would need to be "face" characters. While each of those iconic characters has a definitive look (like Lucy, Marilyn Monroe, et. al.), a character dressed up in a tan robe with a white beard would not be any more Obi Wan Kenobi than he would be generic old Jedi. You'll likely see generic Rebels, X-Wing Pilots, Jedi, Imperial Officers, and the like as "face" characters (if Disney chooses to dress CMs up in the land), along with "head" characters to meet and greet like Darth Vader, Captain Phasma, Kylo Ren, Boba Fett, Chewbacca, and others in the land to make it even more authentic.
NOT ACCURATE means exactly that. Not in the movies and not found any where. Its a fake Star Wars Land. That you think this is acceptable while walkaround characters will be rejected for not looking specifically like their film counterparts is weird reasoning.
BTW, I happen to think the public will eat it up anyways.
If the location of the Star Wars land is featured in a future movie, does that mean it's "fake" until that movie is released? Come on, you're being completely ridiculous. Again, Disney is not building a movie set, they're attempting to build a place in the Star Wars Universe where guests can come and immerse themselves in the atmosphere. Whether that land is on Tatoine, Hoth, Courisant, Jedha, Kashiik, or the dozens of other planets already featured, it's the aesthetic and feel that will sell it to guests as authentic and "accurate". If the Imagineers can capture that, even if it's a place that has yet to appear on a movie screen, it won't really matter.
I think my positions on both topics are perfectly consistent with each other. Walk around representations of actual film-depicted characters (non-animated) are difficult to pull off, and both Disney and Universal are wise to bill these people as generic wizards, rebels, or Jedi instead of specific named characters like Harry Potter, Jin, or Obi Wan, respectively. With a CM's face completely visible, it would be a tough sell because guests have a preconceived notion of what these characters should look like beyond their clothes and accessories. Certainly the HP canon has some more leeway since it's originally sourced from books, but both franchises became world-wide phenomena because of their visual movie portrayals. Similarly, trying to create a land that has not appeared on screen gives Disney the flexibility to make it however they want (within reason of course) while still making it feel like it could exist in the Star Wars Universe. If the land can accurately capture the aesthetic (or an exact replica at some point lands on a movie screen one day), it will be as accurate as a the brick by brick recreation of Diagon Alley.
@24.205.29.101 - FACT CHECK - That Rey was a look-alike brought in especially for Celebration, and not intended to be a permanent walk around/meet and greet character (likely a dedicated cosplayer). To be honest, I would not be surprised to see cosplayers show up daily to WDW to take photos with guests (already happens at WWoHP from time to time and is already a mainstay of Star Wars Weekends at WDW), assuming Disney would allow it beyond special weekends (perhaps they even sanction it by hiring some on a rotating basis). That's what actually made the Star Trek Experience in Las Vegas so cool - the cosplayers would show up and interact with guests and CMs as if they were actually living on DS9.
However, taking a photo with a cosplayer is different than a meet and greet with what is being presented as the actual character.
Why do Disney prevent cosplayers at all? Even they get requests for photos. I'm more than sure a Princess Leia or Han Solo walkabout character will get much attention. If Disney presents them in a "Thor-like" meet and greet presentation, people will easily want to see them.
Star Wars Land is unprecedented in that people need to get used to the unfamiliarity of the new Star Wars Universe. Asking people to take that leap, which they WILL do while not giving them any anchors to actual characters is like Harry Potter in reverse. No, you're not consistent. The main theme will be Stormtroopers, the Millennium Falcon, the music, and many minor characters to tie it up. The buildings and sets are derivatives.
Harry Potter Land is accurate, but needs a bit more heart.
Thor and Captain America are very different than the Harry Potter characters (and many of the Star Wars "face" characters as well). Firstly, Captian America has a partial mask, which makes him playable by a wide range of actors since a majority of the actor's face is obscured. Also, there have been multiple visualizations of these characters over the decades, and while a majority of people will associate Chris Evans and Chris Hemmsworth with those characters, there are animated versions and comic visualizations that many people have seen as well. For Harry Potter characters (and Star Wars), there are some book visualizations, but most guests are going to connect the looks of the characters to the films. However, the biggest reason characters like Thor and Captain American can appear in parks while the HP and SW "face" characters cannot is that the Marvel characters look very different from the characters they're typically juxtaposed against. Harry, Hermione, and Ron dress exactly like their Griffindor classmates. There are only subtle differences that would set those characters apart from other lesser characters in the HP universe. That means that if you set up a meet and greet with "Harry Potter", any male, brown haired CM with glasses would have to clear out of the land to ensure the person guests were standing in line for was THE Harry Potter. Same with the others. By inhabiting the WWoHP with just "generic" wizards, teachers, and muggles, Universal can avoid the complexity of having to identify who is the real deal and who just happens to look like the real characters because of their natural features and what they're wearing that day. I've seen it happen with guests in Zonko's that swore the CM behind the counter was Harry Potter because he had similar features. Add to the fact that the visual representations of the characters that everyone connects with the Harry Potter universe actually appear in the attractions so designers have already established what those characters look like in the WWoHP. The illusion of the real actors appearing in the attractions and then some other CM portraying them in a meet and greet would break the illusion of guests actually inhabiting the WWoHP. Just because you can't touch/talk to the namesake characters doesn't mean WWoHP lacks heart. If you really think meeting some CM dressed up as Harry Potter would give the land "more heart", then you're truly missing something.
A similar situation would happen with Star Wars. If there's a meet and greet for Luke Skywalker, how are guests supposed to confirm that he's really Luke versus a generic X-Wing Pilot, Jedi, or Rebel they saw a few minutes earlier in the "bar" or on the streets of the land (or perhaps even on one of the attractions)? I'll give you Leia because her wardrobe is decidedly iconic and differentiated from other characters, particularly if she were in her white dress or bikini. However, put her in the camouflage rebel gear, and the character would just look like a generic rebel with long hair. Most of the other Star Wars "face" characters would simply fade into the background of a world inhabited by dozens of others that would look too similar to say the character guests are waiting in like to meet was unique and worth waiting to see.
What's unfamiliar about the "new" Star Wars Universe? JJ Abrams was roundly criticized for The Force Awakens being a shot for shot clone of A New Hope, so I don't think there's really anything truly new. Everything about the new movies has been very familiar with crossover from many of the original characters. The new characters and locations fit squarely in with the existing mythology, meaning it should be easy for Disney to create new off-script characters and settings that would only exist in the new lands (not on film). Disney had been introducing characters and locations to Star Wars even before they bought LucasFilm through Star Tours. Weren't you ever curious that the imaginary port where the ride originates has new droid characters that don't appear in any of the Lucas-directed films (all with their own action figures BTW)? Also, while some of the original destinations Star Tours went to may have been planets in the existing Star Wars universe, very few put guests in or near specific locations on those planets shown in the films (especially before "The Adventure Continues" upgrade). With Star Tours, Disney has already demonstrated success in using generic locations within the universe to portray the aesthetic. A lot of hard core fans were really annoyed when Star Tours first premiered and it was discovered that guests boarded a generic ship (not the Millennium Falcon or an X-Wing), yet that doesn't seem to have affected the attraction's popularity. By using the generic ship, Disney can create and change the narrative whenever they want and still stay in the Star Wars Universe but not tied to specifics. The same thing will occur in the new land.
If Darth Vader, Kylo Ren, Chewbacca, R2-D2, C3PO, BB-8, and Darth Maul are "minor" characters, then perhaps you should go back and watch the movies again. All of those characters are currently appearing in the Launch Bay beyond the Stormtroopers, and would presumably continue to appear in the new land. Also, you seem to forget that the Millennium Falcon is a pretty major "character" in the films (George Lucas is on record saying the Falcon is a character), and appears to be a focal point of one of the new land's attractions. Again, your distortions of reality and hyperbole you're using to make your argument only furthers to invalidate it.
Darth Vader continues to be a minor character since he was played as a lead as Anakin Skywalker. He has a minor role in the original trilogy. That's why I refer to them as minor characters. Yes, Luke has an iconic look in the 4th original episode as if you forgot. It's the white robe outfit. Your wild interpretation of what the public is willing to accept is far out. Every single character has a distinct look and dress. Padme can dress without makeup in her disguise as a servant in Episode 1.
That's true, yet if Disney chose to have a meet and greet with Padme, how would guests know it's Padme, and not her decoy Sabe (played incidentally by another famous actress, Keira Knightly)?
I wouldn't say Luke's ANH/white robe outfit is that iconic. There are people in Mos Eisley that are wearing practically the same thing. Dressing a 5'6" male cast member with scruffy blonde hair wielding a blue lightsaber does not Luke Skywalker make. Disney is far better off paying homage to the lead "face" characters with other rebels and Jedi that may look similar, but don't have to live up to the critical scrutiny of being Luke or Han. If the public is so willing to accept it, than why hasn't Disney (or Universal) done it? Do you think they'd be stupid to miss out on the opportunity, or is it perhaps because they realize that it's really hard to pull off these "face" characters?
Darth Vader is a "minor character", LOL!!! That's the funniest thing I've read in quite a while. You crack me up Anton. You seem to equate total screen time to the importance of a character. It's like saying Valdemort is just a "minor" HP character because you barely see him through the first 3-4 films/books.
I'll concur that Darth Vader has significantly less screen time than the three protagonists of the original trilogy, but he is the most essential character of the original Star Wars universe. Without Vader, there is no SW, no conflict, no Obi Wan, no need for Luke to train. Every yin needs it's yang, and while Vader does not appear in as many scenes as Luke, he's just as important and an obvious "major" character. I would be hard pressed to find any character imagery (posters, ads, trailers, or merchandise) from the original trilogy that doesn't include Vader in it.
"People can only accept so much more of the same which is why I say it's a risk."
So instead of trying to offer guests a SW experience in a unique land, one that could change and evolve over time, you think Disney should simply build a static brick for brick copy of an existing scene from the existing movies (movie set recreation)? Yes, Disney is taking a risk, but is it really that much of a risk when you're talking about the most profitable IP on the planet? I think by creating a unique world in the SW universe, Disney is opening up possibilities in theme park experiences that haven't been attempted before on this scale. The ability to tell new stories outside the theatrical presentations as the land evolves. The ability to present new characters or further develop truly minor characters that haven't been fully fleshed-out on screen. The ability for guests to write and explore their own SW story instead of being stuck in a recurring mythology.
Certainly you'd get tons of oohs and ahhs from guests walking through a perfect recreation of the Mos Eisley Cantina, but there would be certain expectations from that space. Guests would want to see Gredo, Han, Figrin D'an and the Modal Nodes, Ponda Baba, and others, while the characters would be forced into an endless loop of a three and a half minute scene. Instead, with a new space with stories yet unwritten, Imagineers can weave their own tales and lore surrounding the space and allow guests to create their own, encouraging longer stays in the space (meaning more money spent), and return visits. You can still use some of the same characters and queues from the original Cantina, but are not bound to the requirements of the space, lending to variable story lines and an ever-changing guest experience.
You defeat your own argument. No other person wearing the white robe in Mos Eisley would have a light saber and the chances of another having blond hair and blue eyes are rare. Luke befriends many different species. His childhood friends could be Biggs Darklighter or Wedge Antilles, but they don't have blond hair and definitely not Jedi Knights in training. Plus, Luke is unique as he is hidden from the Empire (being a descendant of Darth Vader.)
As for not knowing what a minor character is, you still don't get it. Villains are often supporting characters. Just because they bring drama doesn't mean they are the main story.
Nice that you acknowledge Gredo. We won't confuse Gredo with his brother or a stranger or will we? We only have one Wookie named Chewbacca. One Jabba the Hut, no Miss Jabba ever, right?
This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
