What makes a Disney franchise? Iger discusses theme park future
Bob Iger was recently quoted on CNN Money as saying the following:
“And not everything has to be a franchise. I was recently asked whether “Ratatouille” was a franchise. I said no: “Ratatouille” is an extremely good animated film and will be a classic unto itself, but it is not a franchise. You are not going to see “Ratatouille” attractions in parks. When you look at “Toy Story,” we’re making our third film, we’re opening two Toy Story Mania attractions at parks this summer, we have a very strong consumer products line, we have a “Toy Story” musical opening on the cruise line, we have a game in development - that’s a franchise.”
Of course, this nips in the bud the many rumors of a Ratatouille “wild mouse” coaster in Disney Hollywood Studios, a clone of the Crush Coaster from the Paris park. Which is too bad, since I think a wild ride through the sewers of Paris as a rat might have been fun. I feel Ratatouille is one of the better Pixar films.
But the real problem is the reasoning behind this. I can certainly live without a Ratatouille coaster, but i don’t want all future attractions restricted to those of a franchise. Does everything have to be based on the Princesses or Toy Story? Yes, I know Expedition Everest is not a “franchise” based attraction, not a pirate to be found anywhere. But that seems to be the exception to the rule these days. I hope this is not a sign of the end of original attractions like the Haunted Mansion or Soarin’ being imagineered. Lets hope not!