Gonna let this one slide without comment, mostly because I couldn't possibly come up with anything more clever than what I suspect you'll offer in the comments.
Tweet
DO THE RIGHT THING AND BOYCOTT THIS CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!
WORD
Did the movie/gum companies pay for the advertisement? Perhaps they'll use some of that money to put back into the parks?
I guess I just don't understand what the big deal is.
Or if the seat in front of you in Seaworld's Manta had a little poster showing food from Red Lobster?
Or little stickers advertising Jolly Green Giant spinach at the center of Popeye's barge at Islands of Adventure.
Ugh. nonononono!!!!
That said, Disney used a Light Cycle image on the side of the monorail, which I thought less intrusive than the straight-up billboard SFMM's put on the Ninja cars. I don't have a problem with cross-promotion in theme parks. But I do have a problem with uninspired design. This promo could have been executed in a more creative, and engaging, way.
So far, the crack about Ralph Macchio rolling over in his career's grave is winning for best snarky comment so far. C'mon, folks, surely someone can top that. Didn't I just write something about being creative and engaging? ;-)
But Alex is right! They are trying to make a couple of bucks! They need the money of course!
That being said, I think it's pretty ridiculous to market this movie on Ninja. But even then the design of the skin is pretty generic. Coulda been better basically.
As a business guy, I understand their motivation to make money, especially if they can do it without further taxing the customers wallet. I get that they want to appeal to more sponsors, and find ways to offer up more advertising space. In this case, plastering advertisements all over the coaster cars just smells a little of corporate sellout. I prefer organically growing the business by expanding attraction, food, and gift offerings, and promoting and maintaining brands, rather than dotting the parks atmosphere with intrusive advertising. Yes, sponsors and ad revenue is good. What comes into question is the way they promote them. It's almost as if the park is willing to divert attention away from their attraction and it's brand for the sake of ad revenue. That's where my philosophy differs.
Designing and presenting a park isn't just about the attractions or even the themes, it's also about psychology. Theme/amusement parks are all about escape, and everything down to the smallest detail should be designed and presented to generate a positive response from people. In a park, people should be removed as completely as possible from the outside world, which includes keeping out or disguising those things that they see every day during their drive to work...like say...movie and gum advertisements. They should be drawn into attractions, either by themes, music, or the design of the train/queue house, and not be distracted from it. People are bombarded with sales pitches and advertisements every day, and they don't really like it at all. Now instead of riders being focused on the anticipation and thrill of boarding a Six Flags roller coaster, they are now looking at a giant commercial pulling into the station, and are now distracted from what they should be feeling. The ad has certainly done it's job, but at the expense of the complete visceral roller coaster experience. The same could be said for the whole park if intrusive advertising is being used.
People might not completely get what I'm talking about, but I've said it before and I'll say it again. The greatest, most successful parks and attractions in history were designed by or ran by people who were entertainers at heart. They also had business sense, or a partner that had business sense, but it was always about the integrity of the product. Money isn't the only focus at the end of the day for those kind of people. For that very reason, their operations will be successful, provided they are smart with money or employ people that are wise with money. Running a park with a corporate/profit maximizing mentality is a disaster waiting to happen, and if Six Flags continues in this manner, they'll be right back in bankruptcy court in a few years.
Complete escapism equals revenue and profit (see Disney World). If you can create that environment, most people will either gladly or unconsciously pay to get in, buy things while they are there, and leave only wanting to come back. In the case of the Karate Kid coaster and all the other advertising coasters, the integrity of the attraction is diminished, and they are helping to prevent their customers from achieving that complete escapism. Reading some of the comments above, it seems my opinion is not unfounded. Not the wisest of precedents to set in my opinion, because people are reacting negatively to it.
BTW, I think that the real Mr. Miyagi...aka Pat Morita (God rest his soul) is spinning in his grave right about now. Hollywood has been trying to remake these massive box office hits from years ago for a few years now, and I'm not sure I can recall a recent one that even holds a candle to the original.
On your point of the "Tronorail" it is Disney's movie and it is outside the parks itself. So it's not as bad in my eye as this. If they want to advertise, just put some A-frames or banners. It makes me sad that Six Flags is stooping to this level. Anything for a quick buck I suppose.
I've heard a lot of talk and people being unhappy with the changes they made to the actual roller coaster at Kings Dominion. That I could see being upset about if it changes the ride design/experience. I've never much paid attention to the color of the cars, etc.
Hollywood has been doing remakes forever... it's just that there's more to work with now than there ever was. In the 40's, only about 2000 movies were around in the US. By now, there's over 30,000 movies in history released in the US. Original movies are there, but have to be found.
Is Lord of the Rings a lesser movie trilogy because it's based on a book? I say no. It's an adaptation, but I think that's similar to what a reboot is... a newer adaptation of older works of art/film/books, etc.
Two bad movies, Point Break and Fast & The Furious, are almost the same movie, but I like Point Break better, not because it was first, but I just find that it's just a ridiculous and cheezy movie while FatF tries too hard to be cool.
I'm not saying that this will be comparable to the Dark Knight, but this Karate Kid isn't a scene for scene remake. And how much money a movie makes isn't always an indicator of quality... yeah I'm talking to you Spider-Man 3, Indiana Jones 4, and Transformers 1 & 2.
But from what has been presented so far, I'm ok with it. Not loving it, but I'll still watch the movie.
I like Joshua's "wax on, wax off" bit the best.
This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
