Quick Bites

Come now—you didn't think you were going to get rid of me that easily, did you? I have no intention of abandoning this blog quite yet! Things are happening again, and I have things to say about them...I just don't have the brainspace to develop full posts about them. So here's a sampler platter.

After-Action Report: Star Wars Land/Star Wars: Galaxy's Edge/Batuu/Black Spire Outpost

What a mouthful! As Jenny Nicholson points out, the latest addition to the Disneyland map has no less than four names in common usage, representing, in this order: 1) An informal description of the area; 2) The official name of the area; 3) The fictitious planet represented by the area; and 4) The specific location on said fictitious planet. That's a lot of lore to absorb, just in what the place is called.

It kind of lets you know what you're in for with the land itself.

Is Star Wars Even “Disney” Enough?

Sorry about the clickbait-y title up there. What with the opening of Galaxy's Edge mere weeks away and May the Fourth having just been with us recently, I've been thinking about Star Wars a little more than usual. I've never made any secret of my misgivings about the union of the Lucasfilm franchise and Disneyland, but only recently have I started to put my finger on the cause(s) of them.

I just don't think Star Wars is very “Disney.” Not that the company hasn't done right by the franchise—for the most part, the new films are quite good—but it doesn't sit well alongside what you might call Disney's more traditional fare.* The Platonic ideal of “a Disney movie” is an animated fairy tale, or maybe an adventure story with animal characters. Obviously there are plenty of exceptions, but that's the baseline most people think of.

And that is not Star Wars. It may be a fantasy, but it's no fairy tale. The main difference is one of size. Disney fairy tales (and fairy tales in general) tend to be pretty small. The stakes are low, with the protagonists trying to save themselves, or their families, or at most a small kingdom (and not necessarily from something as dire as literal destruction). Their actions have little to no effect on the larger world and the larger world does not intrude upon their stories. Moreover, for most of them, the main plot takes place within a relatively small area and/or a compressed timeframe. And finally, they are self-contained stories. You start the movie, and 90 minutes or so later, they all live happily ever after, The End. What happened next is left to the realm of justly loathed direct-to-video sequels. Or fanfiction.**

None of this describes the Star Wars saga, a claim which can be handily proved by the fact that you aren't questioning my use of the word saga. The scale of it is huge—it's a story that spans generations and star systems, that's been being told for over forty years, via ten theatrical movies (and counting!), several TV series, and an inestimable number of novels, comic books, video games, and other supplemental media.

I mean, that is nuts. Do you have any idea how nuts that is?

My point is that Star Wars is vast. They could give it its own entire Epcot-sized theme park, and still only have room to explore a fraction of what makes it so compelling to audiences of all ages. And they decided the best thing to do with it is stick it on the back end of Frontierland? I'm sure Galaxy's Edge is going to be monstrously popular and remain so for the foreseeable future. I am also sure that it represents missed opportunities. A remote corner of Disneyland Park, Anaheim, CA is not the optimal location for this sort of concept.

From the point of view of the park as a whole, Galaxy's Edge represents a major departure from the kinds of themes that have historically been assigned to lands. (Note here that I am talking about lands, not individual attractions. Nor am I talking about any other parks.) Better bloggers than I have spent hours and pages trying to pin down the overall theme of Disneyland Park, but however you choose to phrase it, there has always been a sense that no matter how wacky and wonderful the environment was, you can get there from here. This is our history, our future, our shared imagination, our world.

Star Wars is decidedly not our world. Does it take place a long time ago from where we sit, or from the perspective of someone even farther in the future? The answer is that it doesn't matter, because it takes place in a galaxy far, far away. We, ourselves, are entirely out of the picture. Earth might not even exist in the Star Wars setting, and the “human” characters might actually be aliens that look indistinguishable from humans à la Superman.

Is it just me, or is there something inherently...askew about this? Disneyland has always been about the best aspects of the world we know. The tropics are full of adventure! The Wild West was a time of heroes! Fairy tales can come true, and so can cartoons! The future is bright! Spinning Star Wars into its own land kind of feels like...giving up. Like saying “Actually, the world sucks and always has. Our history is full of irredeemable villains, our mythology is pointless, and it's only going to get worse from here no matter what we do. Our only possible comfort is in the prospect of running away to another universe entirely.”

And isn't that uncharacteristically bleak for the company that gave us “it's a small world”, the Carousel of Progress, and all those Happily Ever Afters?

Just some things to think about.

* The same is true of the MCU, for similar reasons. This is not meant as a knock against either film franchise in and of itself.

** This is why I feel that even though the trailer looks okay, Frozen 2 may be a mistake.

Armchair Imagineering: A Proper “Studios” Park

There seems to be a broad consensus among theme park fans that Disney's worst results come about when it tries to poach Universal's fanbase by creating parks (and sometimes sections of parks) where the “theme” is: movies. The main reason for this consistent failure is, I think, that Disney is too wedded to the concept of “magic.” The thing that makes Universal Studios Hollywood unique is not which IPs it can lay claim to, but that it is entwined with a working film studio, and its centerpiece attraction (as well as various others over the years) is all about showing its guests, in some detail, how filmmaking works, how the illusions are created. Other Universal parks don't have this going for them, but some of the mojo rubs off on the brand.

But Disney won't do that, because for some reason the company hates admitting that what it does is artifice. Maybe the decision-makers actually don't think much of guests' imaginations,* so they assume they have to trick us into believing it's all really truly reeeeaaaaaaaaal or we can't be counted on to purchase Princess costumes and toy lightsabers. Whatever the reason, the “Studios” parks end up being dumping grounds for rides based on movies that don't fit the themes of a Kingdom-style park or Epcot or DisneySea, but they're still movies, so they totally work in a park where the theme is movies, right?

Right?

Does it even need to be said at this point that I disagree?

If Disney really wants to duke it out with Universal, it has to be willing to go all-in—to say not only “Aren't our movies awesome?” but also “And here's how we make them so.”

And then it has to do its rival one better by focusing on not just the most popular movies under its already vast and still-expanding umbrella, but those movies that best demonstrate “movie magic”—the ones that advance the artform in some significant way, the ones that enjoy not just box-office success but critical acclaim. By the same token, the company needs to be willing to highlight the differences in how the various studios it has absorbed tell their stories, instead of just blithely subsuming them under the homogenized banner of Disney-ness and pretending that Elsa, Spider-Man, Chewbacca, and Dory are all natural companions to each other.

This Armchair Imagineering post offers a rough idea of how they might do that in a hypothetical “studios” park.

In addition to this bold premise, I continue to champion the idea that there is a broad middle ground between the biggest bestest most elaborate thrill rides on one hand, and the humble character meet-and-greets on the other, and Disney needs to get back to offering more of that middle ground.

Intrigued yet?

Sentimental Paleontology: Legends of Frontierland

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Disneyland is primarily a locals' park. Management may not like it—they might prefer a scenario where they can keep selling the same old thing to a new batch of rubes every week instead of constantly racking their brains trying to keep an experienced and therefore discerning crowd entertained—but it is what it is. If you ask me, it's for the best. Without the need to impress repeat visitors, would we have gotten the Indiana Jones Adventure with its three potential “treasures” and unpredictable vehicle motion? Without those picky Annual Passholders making up such a large percentage of the crowd, would there be any incentive to keep changing up the parades, fireworks, and live entertainment? If the average guest didn't know where the good off-property restaurants were, would Management bother to ensure quality food options inside the park(s)?

And sometimes, that drive to keep the locals enthralled produces results that are just plain...well, enthralling. Pure magic. In the summer of 2014, they achieved just that, and in perhaps the unlikeliest of ways, with a temporary attraction called Legends of Frontierland.

Blogiversary Special!!! The Last Three Years in (Brief) Review

Today marks the third anniversary of the launch of the Disneyland Dilettante. I know, right? Looking back, this blog has certainly had its ups and downs…but then so has the Disneyland Resort.

Is it time to go year by year? I think it’s time to go year by year.

2015

The big deal in 2015 was, of course, Disneyland’s Diamond Anniversary, which this blog celebrated with the 60 Diamonds project. My aim back then was to find something enjoyable that began at Disneyland each year it had been in operation, and—crucially—that was still there to be enjoyed in the present. I made it, even if I had to fudge the definition of “began” from time to time…but in pretty short order, some of my Diamonds started dropping off the map. Looking through the list now is a pretty sobering experience.

The Diamond Anniversary itself was…fine, I guess. I can give—no pun intended—glowing reviews to the Paint the Night parade and the new iteration of World of Color…but on the whole, it paled in comparison to the 50th Anniversary. It just didn’t get anywhere near the same level of celebratory spectacle. I was particularly disappointed with the new fireworks show, Disneyland Forever, which hardly had anything to do with Disneyland per se and deserved neither the title nor the auspicious release timing.

It’s worth noting, of course, that the Diamond Anniversary wasn’t the only thing going on in 2015. Two important rides received important upgrades. The Matterhorn’s Yeti was turbo-charged into a more state-of-the-art, scarier monster, complete with a sense of backstory. Even more momentous, the Haunted Mansion saw the re-introduction of its long-lost Hatbox Ghost…now with technology that, you know, works!

Sadly, at the end of the year, the wheels were set in motion for the construction of the Star Wars themed area (still in progress). I have made my peace with the fact that Galaxy’s Edge is going to be a thing, and I will even allow that it’s probably going to be a very cool thing. But dangit, the loss of Big Thunder Ranch still stings.

2016

I'm going to go ahead and call 2016 The Year of Star Wars Harshing Our Disneyland Buzz. Not only did the aforementioned start of construction result in half of Frontierland shutting down and the Disneyland Railroad going on a long hiatus, but the supposedly temporary Season of the Force overlay in Tomorrowland just hung around for the entire year. Space Mountain became an X-Wing battle adventure, the Carousel Theater became a museum, the Magic Eye Theater started showing something called Path of the Jedi,* and the Jedi Training Academy...continued.

I didn't spend much time in Tomorrowland that year.

The Resort as a whole mostly just chugged along in 2016, but California Adventure finished strong by introducing the Festival of Holidays and World of Color: Season of Light, both of which came back for a second round this past holiday season.

And then they closed the Tower of Terror. It was as if millions of palms suddenly hit millions of faces in exasperation, and were just as suddenly ignored.

2017

If 2015 was a net positive and 2016 an overall holding pattern, 2017 was a mixed bag. Guardians of the Galaxy: Mission Breakfast Breakdance Breakout opened where the Tower of Terror once had been, and was an instant smash hit despite being one of the most pointless attraction revamps in theme park history. Also, John Lasseter announced plans to plaster Pixar characters over the entirety of Paradise Pier and pretend it's a “theme.”

But on the other hand, the Rivers of America and Disneyland Railroad re-opened, all shiny and new and not half bad considering the changes that had to be made to make room for Star Wars. And speaking of shiny...

NO

...they brought back the actual, legitimate Main Street Electrical Parade for several months. As gifts to fans go, that's a pretty sweet one.

On the other other hand...Pirates. Ordinarily, the announcement that Pirates of the Caribbean's infamous wench auction scene would be redesigned to be less, um, human trafficky, would have me thinking “Well, let's wait and see.” But the changes have already taken place in Paris, and reports from discerning guests are that the new version is not only boring and nonsensical, but defeats its own purpose—sure, the redhead is no longer being sold at auction, but neither is she subtly, smugly in control of the situation. I have mixed feelings about the prospect of changing the scene to begin with, but...they damn well better figure out how to reconcile contemporary values with the needs of art before the finest theme park attraction ever built is irrevocably altered for the worse.

So where does all this leave us, as of 2018? Based on the reactions of some fans to the above plans for the parks...nowhere good. People are outright leaving the Disney theme park fandom over stuff like this. Once-prolific blogs are falling by the wayside. I don't want the Disneyland Dilettante to be one of them, but I have to admit that maintaining a weekly posting schedule is nowhere near as effortless as it once was.

That's why I am announcing a new offshoot of this blog: The Disneyland Dilettante on Tumblr! I will still do my best to bring you new content here every week, but whether I succeed or not, I'll be maintaining the conversation with other theme park fans over there.

Here's to the future!

* A retrospective on the film franchise, I think?

Beyond Blue Sky: Collectible Disneyland Minifigs, Part 2

Last week, I had a purely self-indulgent post where I imagined a wave of Collectible LEGO Minifigures consisting of Disney film and TV characters representing the themed lands of Disneyland. This week, I continue to pamper myself by imagining a wave of Collectible LEGO Minifigures consisting of characters more specific to Disneyland: characters originating in the Disney theme parks, prominent Cast Member concepts, and even a few guests.

I suppose a reiteration of the rules is in order here:

• I have to come up with 18 concepts for minifigs.
• There will be two minifigs per land (including the upcoming Star Wars area—although I had to break this sub-rule last time), one male and one female.
• Each minifig must have an identifiable connection to the land where I assign them, not just fit in a general thematic sense. This should be easier to manage here than in last week's project, since I'm using characters specific to the parks.
• Each minifig must be original. Last time, that meant no repeats of characters who have already been made into minifigs. This time, it's going to be even harder; LEGO has produced minifigs for a vast variety of themes over the years, many of which cover similar ground to the themed areas at Disneyland.
• Not a rule as such, but more of a consideration—when crafting the character set last week, I made sure to think about the desires of LEGO collectors and Disney fans who aren't so interested in the parks per se. In other words, even though my goal was a minifig set specifically tied to Disneyland, I wanted it to be something that people outside that narrow fandom could enjoy on its own merits. I'm aiming for the same thing with this one—these should be minifig concepts that anyone can find a use for.

Think I can do it again? Let's find out!

Beyond Blue Sky: Collectible Disneyland Minifigs, Part 1

I'm going to talk about LEGO again. If that's not your thing, please examine the sidebar for other websites you might enjoy for the next two weeks.

Remember last year when I was getting all excited about LEGO minifigures of Disney characters and the Cinderella Castle set and the prospect of more theme park sets to come?

Well…we haven’t had any more theme park sets, but the character minifigs were enough of a hit that we expect to get another wave of them. The speculation about which characters will be included in Round Two has been madder than a Tea Party…but you can probably guess where my mind is going in all this. As long as we're going to have collectible Disney minifigs...why not collectible Disneyland minifigs?

Think they wouldn't sell? I beg to differ. I can't really think of any minifigure concept that is so specific to Disneyland as to hold no interest for the adult LEGO fan community at large. “Disneyland minifigs” potentially fall into two main categories: 1) Disney characters, which have already proven their appeal, and 2) general characters, whose potential appeal can be demonstrated by...basically all the other non-licensed waves of collectible minifigures.

To further illustrate what I mean, I offer this hypothetical set of minifigs designed to satisfy fans of both Disneyland and LEGO, so that the true breadth of their appeal will be evident.

In fact...I'm going to offer two sets: one for each of the two main categories mentioned above. I'll cover the pre-existing Disney character this week and the others next week.

Kidnap the Magic: The Art of the Disneyland Font (Part 2)

So I called a general meeting of the blog staff, which was pretty easy since this is a one-woman show. We—that is, I—came to the conclusion that we should move the weekly post from Sundays to Mondays. The benefit to us—me—is that if I'm running a little low on inspiration, I have the whole weekend to cram instead of just Saturday. The benefit to you is that this post is up now, instead of six days from now.

I am assuming, of course, that anyone is still here. So...is anyone still here? Sorry to leave you all hanging like that, but you know how the holidays can be. What was I talking about again? Oh, right—fonts you can use for Disneyland-related printed projects!

Imagineering Theory: The Third Gate Solution

As construction on Star Wars Land continues, shutting down much of Frontierland (and leaving us long-time fans with a nagging sense of dread over whether it will be satisfying when it re-opens), I've been thinking about the commonly proposed “third gate” solution to all this Star Wars and Marvel and Pixar nonsense. Most of us agree that these IPs don't sit well alongside most of the existing themes in Disneyland and California Adventure, but their profitability is too great for Management to resist. A third park, designed from the get-go to include them, seems like the perfect compromise—fans of these franchises get to play with them and the company gets the money, while the rest of us don't have to cringe at the awkward mismatches with the rest of the parks.

Here's the main problem with that idea, though:

What would be the theme of this third theme park?

Beyond Blue Sky: Disneyland Alignment Chart

Please bear with me; I've gotten into a weird mood and I'm short on ideas again.

In your online travels, dear reader, you may occasionally come across a peculiar graphic: a three-by-three grid, each square containing a picture of a person or character or something, and each labeled with a two-adjective phrase, the phrases arranged such that each square in a given row or column has one word in common. At least nine times out of ten, the words so mixed and matched will be: Lawful, Chaotic, Good, Evil, and Neutral. The other ten percent of the time, a different pattern will be followed…but Neutral will always be included. Run into enough of these, even if you never see one using characters you recognize and have no idea what is up with this funky Punnett square, and you will likely come to the conclusion that, okay, this is a thing. A meme of some kind. Okay, whatever, the internet is weird.

At the risk of outing myself as an even bigger nerd than you probably already thought I was, I would like to inform you that this is what’s known as an alignment chart, and has its origins in…get ready…

STAR WARS DAY BONUS! After-Action Report: A Tale of Two Tours

This post is sort of an After-Action Report and a Sentimental Paleontology in one. You can most definitely go to Disneyland and ride Star Tours in the present...but it's on its second incarnation, which is different enough from the original to almost be considered a new attraction. Whether it really is or not is a matter of opinion and perception, but it seems like Disney is counting it that way. Either way, such a major change to a long-standing E-ticket level attraction inevitably invites a Before vs. After comparison. And that's exactly what you're gonna get here.

It might surprise you to learn that I even have a preference vis-a-vis the two versions of Star Tours, after I thoroughly decried the presence of Star Wars material in Disneyland at all, in large part because I'm just not into the franchise. But here's the thing: I don't hate Star Wars. I can appreciate the importance of this film series in terms of its effects on the art of filmmaking and popular culture as a whole. I can understand why people find it so cool. I can even, from time to time, enjoy watching the movies, although no more than a chunk or two at a time.

And I do, for the most part, enjoy Star Tours. It's effective both as an adaptation of its source material and as a fun ride in its own right. Do I ride it every time I go to Disneyland? Heck no. But I ride it often enough to intelligently weigh in.

Armchair Imagineering: Theme and the Tomorrowland Problem

Today, I'll be talking about that most vital yet hard-to-define of Disney park concepts: Theme. As Walt Disney explained while developing his revolutionary idea—and as we fans are quick to remind people—Disneyland and its successors are not mere amusement parks but theme parks...but what does this actually mean?

The basic definition of a “theme” is a unifying idea, principle, or motif. Walt Disney's disgust with the filth and disorganization of the amusement parks and fun fairs that were standard in the first half of the 20^th Century led him to imagine his own park as a place that would be kept scrupulously clean and logical in design. He settled on a handful of themes he wanted to express and gave each one its own area of the park. Everything in each “land”—the architecture, landscaping, Cast Member costumes, food and merchandise, and of course the rides and attractions themselves—was designed to match the associated theme. Even when he ran short of time and money to complete the park, Walt managed to preserve his designated themes so that the areas were recognizable and consistent.

It is common knowledge which themed areas were present when Disneyland opened, but it still bears repeating. Main Street, USA functioned as the introduction to what was at the time a brand-new concept, and provided familiarity and a friendly atmosphere with its theme of the American small town circa the 1900s. Adventureland was a wild tropical jungle composited from all the jungle areas of the world—Africa, Asia, South America, the South Pacific. Frontierland was a tribute to America's Westward Expansion period of the 19^th Century. Fantasyland was a place of fairy tales and children's stories...especially as featured in the animated films of Walt Disney Studios. Tomorrowland was a vision of the future and the excitement of developing technology. All these themes were easily distinguishable from each other, and all loomed large in the American imagination of the time.

So far, so good. But how have the area themes fared as the park has continued to grow and evolve? Main Street, USA has remained more or less the same—with few specific attractions, its theming hangs almost entirely on atmospheric elements such as building design and Cast Member costumes, and these have changed very little. Adventureland has also held onto its theming pretty well. Its palette has been broadened but mostly remained in tropical jungles—the one exception is Aladdin's Oasis. Frontierland has weathered the decline of the Western gracefully enough without losing its focus. (It helps that the parts that diverge the most have been spun off into lands of their own—New Orleans Square and Bear/Critter Country.) Fantasyland's theme has expanded without necessarily being diluted (a trick perhaps to be examined in a separate article). And Tomorrowland...

Ah, Tomorrowland, we hardly knew ye.

Mickey's Toontown vs. “Star Wars Land”

Here we go. This one's not gonna be much fun, but it needs to be said.

So it's official: The Mickey's Toontown area at Disneyland will be demolished to make room for a “Star Wars Land,” in order to capitalize on the upcoming new trilogy of Star Wars films.

To say this decision disappoints me falls far short of reality. To say it enrages me might be overstating the case, but only a little. I think it's a wretched idea, for several reasons which I shall now enumerate, running roughly in order of most personal to least personal.