I have been investing a fair share of my time learning about George Gershwin and the background of his signature work "Rhapsody in Blue". And with the rise and fall of the piece, I am wondering how a theme park might develop an attraction experience that would honor and present such a piece.
In my first novel '7097-050719' I considered the possibilities of Walt Disney collaborating with the Spanish surrealist Salvador Dali to create a dark ride/art museum experience at EPCOT. While bottom line values would push theme park operators to embrace topical pop culture IP when developing theme park attractions I wonder if the outside-of-the-box community might advocate themed entertainment concepts in established park models that extend beyond pop culture and lend themselves to a broader range of IP.
Outside of bubble gum pop culture, what attraction do you believe might have artistic power in the context and atmosphere of a theme park?
Tweet
Absent any response, the message to the world's theme park operators is "we will only build attractions based upon movies." Good or heinous?
I think the difficulty is that the "outside the box" community is not large enough to cause a giant like Disney to choose a non-pop sensation over a pop-sensation.
In other words, Potter brings in more money than Picasso.
Aside from that though, I think that there could be a way to work artistic styles into attractions at say, Epcot. You could build some sort of attraction that showcases a broad amount of cultural artists and icons from the various countries. Perhaps instead of simply a ride that has famous art in it, having a ride that has a story and is entertaining, but the style of the ride mimics the style of an artist.
But again, more people seem to want Frozen and Ratatouille, over Munch and Monet.
How to honor Rhapsody in Blue? Bring back Dream Flight with United Airlines as the sponsor.
It has just become an assumption that movies are the medium that propagates attractions. What about generating concepts that are independent. I mean, POTC came first ...So?
Movies have a proven track record and proven current interest. Basically, it's a lazy option, but a low risk one.
If you don't have a prominent brand, and aren't in the higher/faster/stronger race, then I imagine your marketing efforts are much more difficult.
Well Rhapsody in Blue was in Fantasia 2000 so.....
Point taken ... Well played.
One thing that was mentioned when Robert Niles interviewed Tony Baxter was that everything that Walt Disney put into the park was actually Disney IP. Now, it might not have been based on a movie, but Walt Disney built TV programming and presentations on certain lands or attractions.
In other words, Walt Disney marketed the hell out of his attractions. There is nothing bad about this.
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.
One of my best friends is well established as a creative giant in themed entertainment (worldwide). And he relishes the opportunity to create engaging and exciting presentations at museums. Education/entertainment.
What was Leonardo da Vinci expressing? Is there an attraction concept that would be accessible to all ages based upon the works of the Marx Brothers or Chaplin? How would Picasso or Orson Wells approach the development of a theme park attraction? Or Warhol?