Disney's attempts to make film franchises out of its Disneyland rides have been a mixed bag. "Pirates of the Caribbean" spawned three blockbusters with a fourth on the way, but "The Haunted Mansion" and "The Country Bears" fell flat. "Haunted Mansion" is getting another try with Guillermo del Toro, but it seems Disney is fed up with the piecemeal approach and is moving ahead with a film based on the whole Disneyland theme park - "The Magic Kingdom." The word came down yesterday that Jon Favreau is on board to direct. Gee, what could possibly go wrong?
In general I don't mind product placement movies. The "Pirates of the Caribbean" films were a lot of fun, and I can see the potential for interesting things coming out of the Hasbro toy and board game properties currently being prepped for big screen treatments. The concepts behind "Transformers" and "Battleship" are sound, even if they're obvious plugs for the toy company. Disneyland, on the other hand, is a whole different can of worms. I have the privilege of being intimately familiar with the theme park since I grew up in Southern California. Several school and social functions involved trips there, and every time relatives came to town, I ended up playing tour guide. And knowing what I know, I can not wrap my head around a Disneyland movie.
The idea of theme park rides and characters coming to life after hours is not a new concept. The "Night at the Museum" movies would be the obvious model for Disney to follow. However my problem with applying this to Disneyland is that many of the attractions are based on Disney film properties, and will present some adaptation challenges. How do you bring a place like Toontown to life, which was an adaptation of the 2D animated world found in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit"? Would they use 2D animation or CGI visuals? Maybe character suits? Would the familiar Disney characters like Mickey and Donald, who are supposed to be residents, have to make the transition too?
What about transplants from animated films like Tarzan's Treehouse (originally the "Swiss Family Robinson" Treehouse, but let's go with the current Disney branding) and Sleeping Beauty's castle? Do they come with a Tarzan and Princess Aurora played by live actors? The more cartoonish the character, the less well that works. Do they follow the continuity of their original films or are we getting new versions? Would Dumbo be in CGI or would they try a live action baby elephant? Which version of the Mad Hatter would you use? What of Indiana Jones? What of Tinkerbell? With all of the different properties to juggle, how on earth would you keep the style consistent?
This could end up being another massive crossover property among the different Disney film franchises the way "Avengers" is going to be for the Marvel superhero movies, but I doubt Disney is that ambitious. My guess is that they're going to focus on the attractions that aren't connected to any other Disney properties, like Space Mountain, the Jungle Cruise, and Thunder Mountain Railroad, and just stuff in as many cameos as they can for the rest of the park. This will also be a way for them to test out the feasibility of spinning out some of the lesser know rides into their own films, and possibly setting up the ones that they've already decided to go forward with, like "Haunted Mansion."
I can't say I'm totally opposed to the idea. I still love Disneyland even though much of the shine has worn off for me. I remember the old Disneyland television specials of ages past, which would give celebrities the excuse to run around in the real Disneyland, sing a few songs, hug the guy in the Tigger suit, and trot out their promotions. It was obvious corporate shilling, but at least it felt honest. "The Magic Kingdom" will doubtless make no effort to hide its aim to draw more visitors to the parks, but with a big movie budget behind it, the stakes will be a lot higher and I expect the end result will be a lot further from reality. And I can't help feeling uneasy about how far Disney is going to push the marketing and blur the lines between the park experience and the movie.
On the other hand, I still remember Disneyland adult tickets being under $20 in the 1980s. Now they're over $75 apiece and climbing. Consequently, I can't remember the last time I actually went to Disneyland. An $8 movie ticket for a brief glimpse of a hassle-free, souped-up version of the park sounds like a perfectly acceptable substitute to me.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment