Last
week, I identified the problem: Audiences love Pixar movies and
therefore so does Disney's upper management, but the most easily
marketable ones don't have a natural place to belong in the
Disneyland Resort. There is serious tension between the profit motive
and artistic integrity, and in the current business climate of the
parks, artistic integrity gets kicked to the curb. Pixar IPs are
slung into the Resort willy-nilly, and we're lucky if a flimsy
justification is included.
Unfortunately, it can be hard to get the average guest to realize
this is a problem. “So what?” they might say. “The kids
like it.” An entire generation has come of age in the post-Pressler
era, with no memory of what Disneyland was like before the synergitis
metastasized. Those who are aware of the mismatch—fans of the art
of theme park design—tend to have trouble coming up with a tidy
solution.
You see, it's not just that individual Pixar movies don't gel
with Disney's traditional theme park areas...the entire studio's
storytelling style is a bit askew from its parent company's. This is
in no way an indictment of Pixar, whose commitment to quality is so
great that we even get excited about their sequels. However, people
who think that because their movies are animated and have a castle
logo at the beginning, Pixar = Disney...well, let's just say they're
obviously not film students.
I am not a film student either, but if today I awoke from a ten-year
coma and all I had to watch during my tedious physical therapy was
Disney and Pixar's respect animated outputs from that past decade,
with the studio bumpers removed, I'm pretty sure I could sort them
correctly...not even counting the blatantly obvious ones like Winnie
The Pooh and Toy Story 3.* Perhaps because I am not a film
student, I have a hard time pinning down the essential Disney-ness
and Pixar-ness that make it so easy to tell the two apart, but I know
it when I see it, and it might be the key thing keeping Pixar IPs
from meshing well with Disney theme parks. Said parks are designed
from the ground up to capitalize on and explore Disney-ness, even in
the case of non-branded attractions.
Some of the aforementioned theme park fans recognize this—or are at
least aware that merely having a Disney label doesn't make something
“True Disney”—and try to come up with a solution to the Pixar
Problem that involves sequestering the Pixar stuff off in its own
little area away from everything else. “What we really need,”
they'll say, “is a dedicated land/park for the Pixar stuff,”
perhaps followed by some elaboration of the concept.
It's an idea with its heart in the right place, but I'm going to be
the jerk here and say that a themed land or a full park just
for rides based on Pixar movies—a Pixarland, if you will—would
not be...very...good.