I actually really like "Disney's Hollywood". Much better than "Disney-Pixar Studios" for sure. A working title like "Disney's Hollywood Studios" is just fine. I was kind of disappointed when I heard they were renaming MGM, because to me, the park should always honor and pay homage to Hollywood and movie-making, than just simply Disney and Pixar. So I really like this name and idea! It'd be nice if they went even further with the Old Hollywood theming, in my opinion.

Here here megustajake ! I totally agree with you. I'm so glad Disney chose not to sell out by re-naming the park Disney*Pixar studios.

I'm in agreement.

I HATED the idea of "Disney/Pixar Studios"

Disney's Hollywood could be cool, IMO. Maybe they could add a large mockup of the Hollywood sign somewhere?

Let's just pretend this whole thing IS a movie.  My reaction?

"It was perfefct until the hat, and it was all downhill from there. What a terrible ending. Oh, well -- it sure started out great! Final rating: 2 stars."

I hope Jim is right and the park does end up named "Disney's Hollywood"...which sounds a lot better than "Disney's Hollywood Studios".  I have always thought a name like "Movieland" would be appropriate for this park, and "Disney's Hollywood" is something akin to that.  Now if only they would get rid of that hat...

I uess I'm the only person in Earth who doesn't mind the hat?

WDWTITAN24- yes, you may be alone :-)  Just kidding...

I just think the hat should be moved OUTSIDE the park (a la the lighthouse at IOA).  20's Hollywood (just like Main Street) is a great opener to mythos of the park.  Plus, just as Walt grew up in a place like Main Street, 20's Hollywood seems like the sort of place that gave birth to Steamboat Willie.  It just makes the place work.  The only remaining HUGE problem is the mausoleum that is the Animation Studio.  Unless really for real traditional animation is produced there (and I'm not holding my breath), the facility is giant, anachronistic buzz kill.  

The Sorcerer's hat was probably a reaction of one of Eisner's marketing guys realizing that Grauman's Chinese Theatre -- although a thematically perfect fit not only as a focal point to the Studios, but also as a natural departure for the Great Movie Ride -- was NOT owned by Disney, and deemed a terrible focal point for the park.  Imagineering takes a back seat to profiteering.

Blocking Grauman's with the Sorcerer's hat is just part of the roll-out-the-duct-tape-let's-fix-this-on-the-cheap managerial style of Michael Esiner.  Under Mike's stint, the only one trusted making money by bold, creative desicions was M.E. - everyone else was limited to saving money by cutting costs.

Grauman's is the perfect focal point for the Hollywood that never was, and always will be.  A reproduction of Hyperion Studios or the El Capitan won't have the same recognition or emotional impact.  Disney doesn't own Star Wars or Indiana Jones either - maybe we should just count ourselves lucky that M.E. didn't put giant hats of Donand Duck and Goofy in front of those rides.

Maybe they could then morph the name into WALT Disney's Hollywood....oh wait, that's what their going to do at California Adventure.

But if it works there, why not build 12 Walt Disney's California Adventure parks around the world. The savings by duplicating the idea would make each park very cost-effective - hang on - flashbak - Eisner's retired.

I prefer "Disney's Hollywood" over "Disney's Hollywood Studios", just for the fact that the park is not a studio anymore.

But, Jim's artcile made it seem like nothing was ever filmed at MGM, but "Mickey Mouse Club" (the 1990s version) and I believe "The Golden Girls" were both filmed at MGM.

MMC and Star Search were both filmed there when I was a CM.  The occasional movie shot a scene or two there as well, but as Jim points out, it was never a consistent thing and certainly not at the level that they envisioned.  We sat in on a Star Search taping or two (Hey-yo!) and had friends who worked backstage at MMC.  That was in the Christina/Britney/Keri/name your boy band era, but of course no one knew who they would turn out to be at that point.  Disney constants amazes me with their ability to churn out the kid stars...

Oh, and FWIW...  I always was partial to TDS (The Disney Studios) and always have referred to it as that.  It's going to take an effort for me to break that habit, but Disney's Hollywood is not bad IMHO...

Disney's Hollywood. Fine. Now that we have a name,let's see some new attractions.

I don't mind the hat either, and the real test...my kids ...they love the hat.

Still my least favorite park of the whole bunch, no matter what you call it. Anybody else feel that way? I know a lot of people love the place. I just don't get it.

I think, becasue I work in TV, the whole "magic of television and movies" thing doesn't exist for me. Imagine working in a bank, and going on vacation to a theme park based on banking.

Umph, they should just make up their minds for once on something. Why having "Studios" on it now, to just dump it in a few years? I don't think anybody who's going to Disney's Hollywood will say at the end of the day: "How dumb, there were studio in there and it didn't even say that in the park name!! I hate the park now, not ever never ever going to Disney's Hollywood anymore. Stupid Disney."

I agree that if they plan on having a name years in the future, forget having a temporary name and just go straight to the "final" one now.

And since disney is a major movie (and TV) company, why don't they just put the studios to use?  I can see why filmmakers wouldn't necessarily want to be forced into using those studios, but why not at least do TV productions there?  With the huge amount of TV product on many different stations, it seems like they could do some game shows or reality shows or kids' shows there.  Just use the darn studios since you went to the trouble of building them.

cbarry123, mgm is my least favorite park as well. maybe it's because i don't go on rock n' roll or TOT, but i don't go on other rides at the other parks and i find them better.

not sure what it is...it's just lacking something...

MGM is my most favourite park, perhaps in part because Fantasmic is my favourite show.

Here's an idea for an interim name:  Disney's MM Studios, MM of course Mickey Mouse. In this way all they'd have to do is get rid of the G in all of the signs, save some money, then roll out the final name later.

How do you compete with Universal Studios if you don't have "Studios" in your name?  I guess they could call it Disney's Universal, but I imagine that would lead to some trubbles.

Maybe they can call it Disney's Hollywood of Adventure!

How long until we see big letters out front of the entry gates that spell H-O-L-L-Y-W-O-O-D a la DCA?

I think they decided to keep Studios in the name so that they can just keep the signs on the buses reading "STUDIOS". :-)

Meh. I liked it being called MGM Studios...It was nice because I'd just say "Hey guys, let's go to MGM today!" instead of having to say the full name. Now what will I do to be lazy? Call it Hollywood? I can't see people actually calling it "Disney's Hollywood" no one calls Animal Kingdom "Disney's Animal Kingdom".

Hollywood does fit the park though. Much better than Disney/Pixar Studios. Ick. MGM has always been my favorite park, excluding the Magic Kingdom. I love the feel of it...The hat doesn't bother me that much. It does seem to be out of place though, at least in my opinion.

This is retarded. Why not just change the name to Disney's Hollywood now? Why the transition? Sounds needlessly expensive. The explantion doesn't make any sense. If I'm getting this correct, they don't want to remove "studios" until there is no studio activity going on? HUH? There is no studio activity going on! Secondly, who's to say that they still couldn't use production space within Disney's Hollywood? What would prevent that? Someone needs to bring this up at the next shareholder's meeting before this is 100% carried out.

How about Disney's HollywoodLand?

It sounds cheesy at first, but it works for a couple of reasons. Many of you are probably not aware of this, but the Hollywood sign originaly read HOLLYWOODLAND. By naming the park this, it's a wink to the classic era of Hollywood.

Secondly, it kind of represents the fantasy Hollywood that they've tried to create, moreso than just calling it Disney's Hollywood (which --for those of you who have actually been there-- aint so wonderful). This park is not a recreation of Hollywood past or present. It is a fantasy version of Hollywood.

Lastly, it fits in with the whole DisneyLAND, FantasyLAND, FrontierLAND tradition of Disney Theme Parks.

The HBO series "From the Earth to the Moon" was also partially filmed at MGM - (gotta get used to not calling it that) there were Tom Hanks sightings and everything.

I've no problem with the change other than why not drop the studios now and call it a day? Folks will cope.

Now just dismantel the hat (or move it elsewhere) like they've dropped the gastly arm for Spaceship Earth and all will be forgiven (Going to WDW next month and can't wait to see the armless SE.)

I actually would prefer Disney's Hollywoodland.  Working full-time 've been asking guests what they thought of "Hollywood Studios" and they usually think it's kinda lame because it's not the Hollywood of California.  Now Hollywoodland, that alludes to the classic era and the idealization that MGM was supposed to represent.  Also, they need to bring Feature Animation back there and maybe shoot some Disney Channel stuff.

Finally:  I've never heard of anything being filmed at Universal Studios.  Just saying...  they're being stupid.

TNA iMPACT! Wrestling is filmed at Universal.

I wont be surprised, when the name changes occurs next year, if "Studios" is quietly omitted.  There really is no point to include it now only to drop it later unless they want to baby step the public into the new name..."see we took Disney MGM Studios and replaced MGM with Hollywood.....and made Disney a possesive..but its really the same place"

http://www.raymation.net

Apparently someone else already suggested Hollywoodland over on the MiceChat boards. I just wanted to acknowledge this so it would not look like I was trying to steal someone else's idea and present it as my own. I guess great minds think alike.

I like the Disney-MGM park a lot, but it's always felt...unfinished. And it never lived up to its potential. I mean for crying out loud it had the name MGM in it...but very few properties belonging to the old MGM Studio were anywhere in the park. Why didn't Disney utilized MGM's version of "The Wizard of Oz"???? Now, you talk about a property that BEGS to be made into a theme park (and other companies have tried, most recently in Kansas), and yet it after all these years the concept languishes. What a pity. Ted Turner really lost out IMO, and so did we Oz fans.

As for the new name...good enough, I guess. But I hope the place gets fixed up so it really looks old Hollywood - with the Brown Derby and so on. Plus it'd be great if Spielberg would forget his petty quarrel with Disney and let Roger Rabbit be brought into it, to represent the classic cartoons of the Golden Age of Hollywood. That would sooooo rock!

The Wizard of Oz was used for a major scene in the Great Movie Ride.

I assume they didn't do a whole ride around Wizard of Oz because they only had a temporary licensing agreement with MGM. I would expect that they will change several of the MGM scenes from the Great Movie Ride (Wizard, Aliens, Casablanca). If I recall correctly, the Gangster, Cowboy and Indy-type scenes are more "generic" scenes that represent a genre and not specific movies. I don't know about the Busby Berkeley scene in the beginning.

("Alien" franchise belongs to 20th Century Fox, and "Casablanca" is a Warner Bros. picture.)

Like most people I was extremely surprised to read on this site that the new Studios name would contain this whole new Hollywood tag. Even though it’s not exactly the worst thing to happen to the Studios I can’t say I was happy with this news, and I don’t think the possibility of dropping the “Studios” from the official title in future makes things any better.

Firstly I just don’t like the whole “Hollywood” link being in the actual title. I love the vintage Hollywood angle contained within the park from the Chinese Theatre down to the Boulevards themselves but whilst I can’t quite put my finger on why I feel this way at the moment – I just don’t like the sound of Disney’s Hollywood / Studios.

Also, as Jim quite rightly points out, over the years the ability to label itself as an actual Studio has been on the decrease & subsequently there’s a chance that this tag will eventually be dropped. Whilst this is probably the “right” thing to do seeing as the park will only include stand-alone attractions as opposed to genuine movie-making of any sort I still prefer the sound of it being a “Studios”.

Universal doesn’t seem to worry too much about not having any genuine studio-related stuff in their Florida park but that also throws up another curve-ball. Whilst us Theme-Park buffs will always know which park we went Back to the Future in or where we watched the muppet film but many casual tourists who I speak to frequently can’t remember which park was which when it comes to the two “Studios”. As people know how much I enjoy visiting the parks they often discuss their experiences but over the years it's become apparent that they often get MGM & Universal mixed up. I just wonder if Disney & Universal are aware of this kind of confusion & if so would the next few years be a good time for Disney to address it ?

I certainly don’t have the answer to this or even a name that I’d be happy with & I may come around to the new name but I'm certain that the highly paid folks who dream up names for the parks

"("Alien" franchise belongs to 20th Century Fox, and "Casablanca" is a Warner Bros. picture.)"

I guess I should have done my homework before posting here. I just assumed that they were MGM properties, being that this was Disney MGM Studios (you know what they say about when you assume...).

So this begs the question, what did the MGM partnership bring to the deal? Obviously Wizard of Oz was a key asset (which was woefully underutilized). But if the other films in GMR were from other studios, what was the point of the partnership? It's not like there's a lot of MGM presence in this park. Star Wars is Fox and Indy is Paramount. I was always surprised that Disney never took advantage of the James Bond franchise that MGM has had forever. Modern MGM doesn't crank out a whole lot of hit films, but Bond is a major character/franchise. I'm guessing that it was a royalty issue, or it goes back to the whole temporary nature of the MGM agreement. Maybe Jim can fill us in. Do you read these boards Jim?

Yeah, I know there's a scene from "Oz" in the Great Movie Ride. But it sucked IMO. BTW, The Great Movie Ride, next to the decrepit Star Tours, is the ride most in need of either a HUGE refurbishment or to get ripped out of the park altogether IMO. They are both sooooo HOKEY!

Star Tours is classic IMO.

An if it is refurbished, I hope it's not a *flippin* pod-race.

The way Jim Hill hears it, "Star Tours 2.0" could be just the start. Hill shares what he's heard about a possible "Lucas Land" area going into Disney's Hollywood Studios as well as Mickey's efforts to land the broadcast rights to George's new "Star Wars"