"How much time do you have?"

I've got about an hour - fire away.

Well, many imagineers don't want to spend $ on Calif Screamin, er I mean one imagineer doesn't want to spend $ on Calif Screamin cause the ride's so popular.

Oh ok, but every time I go there's hardly any line, and a villians overlay could really be promoted by the challenged Disney Marketing Dept. When did theming a barebones coaster become unnecessary for Disney Co?

Well, Bob Weis is back and he's getting his old plans out for a Mickey's Movieland overlay to the DCA animation exhibit.

Oh ok, so the exhibits don't change, just the street will look different - that ought to pull in the crowds. Disney Co should already own the rights to those plans - did Bob need to come back just for that?

Well, Bob is going to tell specific stories and transport you to a seaside amusement park circa 1920.

Oh ok, but weren't we suppossed to already be transported there with all the seaside amusement park aka tacky theming?

Well, you know $1.2 billion cash is not a lot of money at all.

Gotta agree with you there, especially after merchandise from that "disappointing" Cars movie has already pulled in over $2 billion in one year. Hey Bob - budget  $200mill each for 4 E tickets - open one every two and a half years. That leaves $40mill a year for each of the 10 years to do your story telling. OK, the budget's done and I've still got 56 minutes left...

Nooooooooooo !!!

Changing California Screamin into a Disney Baddies ride is about the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

Here we go again with the "gotta slap marketable Disney faces all over EVERYTHING .... because $55+ a head per ticket isn't good enough and we want you to go home and rent DVDs and watch Disney Channel"

Bah humbug. Let the ride stand by itself as a ride that is NOT themed. Its a friggen classic roller coaster. That IS the reason people like it. (Lower lines lately might be because the thing did um.... CRASH not all that long ago).

If theming is what they just gotta have .... putting pirates on the thing and calling it "At Worlds End" ... might be more fun. Or how about ... "Its A Small World ... The Teen Years".

As for the rest of the park. ... changing the look isn't what is needed. For me.... sitting along the waterside oposite the Sun Wheel right arround sunset just before going dark for the Electrical Parade is one of the most surreal and relaxing places and momments of the whole trip to the entire resort. And I have been going to Anehiem for 30 years. Why change that?  Ok ... so the place isnt packed all of the time and thats a big open area with nothing in it ... so what ... its BETTER that way.

The key is to add more rides. BETTER rides. I mean come on ... for anyone who has been there with the young ones.... one ride says it all ... "Heimlich's Chew Chew Train" .... need anyone say more ... MMMmmmm ... yank that thing outta there.

I like the idea of re-creating the old Disney Studio ... maybe they can also re-build Walts Office that was TAKEN AWAY from Great Momments With Mr Lincoln area and has yet to return. Maybe its still there behind that wall.

Just don't turn the entire park into "Pixar Land", leave the big white Roller-coster  alone and it all should be ok.

Obviously a CARS themed race sorta like a cross between Test Track, Indiana Jones adventure and the old Soap Box Racers at Knotts Berry Farm (circa 1982) would be killer.

Also ... take a BIG section of the place and let it become "Star Wars" land. Then move Star Tours over from Disneyland. Hows that for some big spending.

And one last thing .... nostagia SELLS tickets ... dig a big HOLE in the side of that Grizzly Bear shapped mountain and put in some COUNTRY BEARS !!!. Bugs may be cool ... but the Bears were better.

Interesting article that could have been much more pleasurable to read without all the sentence fragments and typos.  Jim, you REALLY need to hire an editor!

I have a question... because DCA is getting this money over 10 years, does that mean that is all they get for the 10 years, or do they still continue to get money each year from the budget, to upgrade and build within the park?

Here's a wild idea. How about the board sue Michael Eisner for his leadership failure in building this park and trying to short-cut everything. I'm thinking they could get about half their funding right there. Or, maybe they could seek him out as an "investor". Maybe do some arm-twisting playing on the guilt complex and showing him how screwed up this park that he oversaw creation really is.

Sorry, I just get really irritated everytime I think about and hear all the problems DCA has. Especially, when almost everybody in the world (even Jim Hill), except Michael Eisner knew even before the park opened that it was destined for failure. So, now we're stuck with fixing it so that someday it will hopefully live up to all the expectations that everybody had for it. And, hopefully, this will be money well-spent that will bring some kind of return within say, 20 years.

Thanks again Michael!

BTW: I hear Six Flags needs some help, maybe you should go see if Mark Shapiro would like a hand managing there theme park business, that seems like it would be more your caliber.

Why change/move the animation dedication section?

I adored the DCA version entirely because of the central lobby, where you could just sit for a while in nice a/c while the best Disney songs and scenes play in short bits to remind you of just how good they can be at their best.

The Florida version, modeled after "Dopey Drive and Mickey Ave" (the Burbank studio) before the rebuilt version, was completely missing this experience and it really hurt for it.  Plus it forced you to go through the now ancient Mushu character design review before you passed into the central museum.  (And to make matters worse still, the core of the museum was entirely dedicated to CGI works - Chicken Little, Robinsons, and Cars - and only in a back room was there any stuff related to the classic works.)

The element of choice, the ability to not bake in the sun while waiting to get into the building, the ability to skip the "making a character" film you've seen 10 times already, and the incredible lobby area which shows just how much can be done with just a little light, a little music, and a handful of tv screens, makes the existing DCA version a MUCH better experience than just having the outside of the building look like the classic studio.

Sorry, but to me, that Animation room in DCA was the biggest thing they actually did right.  (And it's a great place to relax while avoiding Tower of Terror, which my wife loves but I will never ride!)

I like DCA. The problem is that they built it right next door to Disneyland which was a mistake.

So basically what you're saying is that people are disagreeing on things.... Isn't that life?

This screams sensationalist journalism. Imagineers "up in arms" because they don't agree on everything! "I know a guy who works there, and he says people are disagreeing." Oh no! When really, the only story is that some people want to do one thing and some another.

I appreciate the new insights on the DCA redo, but trying to turn it into some big controversial piece is hilarious.

I agree with acroyear. That entrance lobby in the Animation building is one of my favorite places in the park. I was at DCA in January with my nieces, and we sat there for like 30-40 minutes just watching the movie clips. The room totally immerses you in the movies, and that's what I expect from Disney.

I have to say that with the exception of the abandoned food court building by the Monsters, Inc. ride, Hollywood Backlot doesn't need a lot of help. Maybe they could replace Muppets with something better, but that area looks fine to me.

And instead of dropping thrill rides all over the park, how about coming up with something on the level of Pirates or Haunted Mansion? That's what DCA really needs: an E-ticket family dark ride. The Monsters, Inc. ride is best compared to a Fantasyland dark ride, and there's nothing wrong with that. The kids like it. But I'm talking about a classic Disney ride. ::COUGH:: Maybe something that was designed by Marc Davis but never got built ::COUGH:: I'm just sayin' :)

Okay, short response: $ 1.2 isn't enough, they will never equal DisneySea with so little, board of directors seems to not get the whole "quality perspective" of an amusement park.

(And 'hmm'.. Was that even necessary? Just be happy it wasn't about Pixar, jeez.)

Jim, you're off your rocker again.

If memory serves me correclty all of DCA, Downtown Disney AND the Grand Californian AND all the infrastructure cost $1.5 Bln. Of which the park didn't receive more than half the money.

$1.2 Bln with inflation is more than enough to take this decent theme park and turn it into a star.

Here le me help you back onto your rocker...

I was just about to say the same thing, GFYDady.

$1.2 Billion is a darn good chunk of cash. . .if spent well.  Please, Disney, no more movie screen shows.  Whatever happened to animatronics?  We need more rides like The Jungle Cruise or Expedition Everest.  I play enough video games at home!

I wonder, would "Mickey's Movieland" involve replacing the Muppets with Philharmagic?

I sure hope not. Sure, it would fit the theme better, and I like Philharmagic, but...come on, man! Muppet*Vision 3-D was the last film Jim Henson ever directed, and to this day it's the funniest and best thing at any Disney park. I just hope that they don't get so full of blind Eisner fury that they close down the best thing he ever did for any Disney park. Cut corners by leaving that fantastic attraction well enough alone.

Carland sounds like a winner, they'd probably have to build it in the Timon lot; it's a shame the Route 66 gift shop is on the other side of the park. They'd either have to knock out some of the Grand Floridian for Carland (unlikely; even if they could clear the space, how would afternoon nappers feel about the noise?), move/re-open the gift shop (far less unlikely) or accept the startling incongruity (which would be unfortunate, but seems to be keeping with upper management policy nowadays)

I personally think that most of what the park needs is some seriously nice theming, the reason Disneyland is such a nice park is because it is full of lucious and awesome theming, like tons of great plants and flowerbeds, and just plain nice trees and designs, and just, more grass." they need to install some more grass, and just, make the park more beautiful, I think this is a good chunk of change they are giving the park, I love it the way it is right now, and this will make it even better.

It needs it all.

As for those of you complaining about the budget.... Get your heads out of your butts and stop thinking about yourself for once.

#1 - Disney is a large corporation with more to deal with then just theme parks.  Theme parks were never were of that much interest to Micheal Eisner other then that they were profitable.  He took more interest in the companies hotels then he did the actual theme park.

Also as a large corporation, their goal is to make money... not loose it.  They adjust their budget to what they felt was reasonable for the park and would also allow them to get what they needed done and still turn a profit at the end of the day.

That's the idea.  Be happy DCA got the budget it deserves... besides if the new additions are a hit then who knows what other kind of money will be thrown at this park after the first 1.2 billion is up.

Patience.  DCA will have its day.

It's interesting, I have never been to DCA. I want to go. Someday I'll make it out there. However, I 've always read how everybody hates this park.

This is one of the first group of postings I've read, anywhere, with several people uttering the words, "I love this park." It's an interesting twist.

So to paraphrase Elizabeth Swan, my question is "Is this the theme park I've read about or what?"

so, I have a question. How many of these Imagineers that Jim spoke with are pro-Lasseter or Anti-Lasseter... Hey, I'm just asking...

I agree that 1.2 billion should be plenty of money to fix this horrible park (well... 90% of it is horrible). And if it's not... well, I should think that it will drastically improve it and make it a place where more than the 3-4 people on this thread who like it, will actually want to pay money to go to.

And I can't imagine why anyone would think that CA Screamin is a good rollercoaster? It's a run-of-the-mill wooden coaster!!! If you've ridden one, you've ridden them all. I say plaster villians all over the stinkin thing.

PS - Ratatouille only did about $7,234,000 this past weekend and is only at $179,683,000 Domestic / Worldwide:  $217,180,000. I wonder what Disney/Pixar exec will get fired first for this miserable flop?  ;o)

A great family dark ride could be themed around the gold rush.  It could be placed in between GRR and an expanded San Francisco area.

I think the theaming for Screamin' needs to be mainly in the queue.  They could put things in the tunnels and have more tunnels and other facades to block out the outside world.  

Ok Hook,

Answer these questions.

How many ... "run of the mill" wooden roller coasters can you find in a Disney Theme park?

And um ... how many "run of the mill" wooden rollercoasters have you been to ANYWHERE ... that start off with a LIM (Thats a LinearInduction Motor) that shoots you from zero to 60 in 10 seconds?

And .... how many otther "run of the mill" wooden roller costers have a track thats 6072 feet long ... ranking it it 9th longest ride in the world?

Oh ... and did anyone mention that California Screamin' isn't made of wood at all. It's a steel roller coaster. Thats what enables it to have a loop... a LIM, and one of the smoothest rides you will ever find. (Incidently ...its the 6th longest steel rollercoasterin the world).

There is no reason to fix things that are not broken.