3. It requires extensive understanding and backstory

We’ve heard a lot lately about Disney and Universal and their reliance on the intellectual properties they own or license. Like it or not, CEO Bob Chapek is right when he says that if any of their competitors had their properties, they’d be doing the same thing. In other words, with about $100 billion in acquisitions (ABC, ESPN, Muppets, Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars, and 20th Century are just the tip of the iceberg) in the last three decades, focusing on in-house IP wouldn’t just be illogical; it would be an assault on shareholders!

And like it or not, existing IPs also have another benefit: built-in recognition. While Disney Imagineers and the designers of Universal Creative can, have, and do go to great lengths to develop original world and extensive mythologies, let’s be clear: that puts a tremendous weight on the shoulders of storytellers.

One of the most famous cases has to be the Lost Legend: Alien Encounter. As the story goes, Imagineers had initially drawn up concepts for the attraction that used Disney’s licensing of Fox’s Alien horror film. Upon opting to go the “original” route instead, designers had to develop their own mythology for the ride: an original dystopian company, an original race of aliens, an original cast of characters, and even an original extraterrestrial… then they needed to communicate that backstory, tone, and atmosphere to queueing guests! That’s a lot of exposition to shove into riders’ ears in a matter of minutes, and frankly, that “Franken-story” is probably the root of most of the attraction’s issues.

And though we love it in its own way, this is also the problem that plagues Universal Orlando’s last original attraction – the Declassified Disaster: Poseidon’s Fury. When the attraction opened, guests reported being totally flummoxed by its incredibly convoluted story, its unclear characters, and even their own motivation as visitors. A total overhaul after just a year or two completely rewrote the story and its characters, but the attraction remains… well… a mythological mess.

EXCEPTIONS: Disney has proven the ability to tackle world-building on a global scale… For example, while the Modern Marvels: Tower of Terror and Mystic Manor both have decidedly simple and straightforward stories themselves (easy to grasp without any prior knowledge), they intertwine in a massive, cross-continental frame story that serves as a scavenger hunt for Imagineering fans around the world. Both rides are evidence that even complex original stories can create rides more compelling and beloved than their accessible-IP counterparts.

4. It’s a character vehicle

No, not a vehicle shaped like a character… In Hollywood, “star vehicles” are movies designed from the ground up with the primary purpose of leveraging a particular celebrity or star. Think of Dwayne Johnson’s Scorpion King, Miley Cyrus’ The Last Song, or TV series like Roseanne, Home Improvement, or Seinfeld. Rather than creating something and then casting a star, these films start with the celebrity and work backwards to a product. Sometimes it works; sometimes it doesn't. And unfortunately, we know that that happens with Disney Parks, too.

Monsters Inc. Laugh Floor doesn’t exist because it’s a great concept; it doesn’t make sense in Tomorrowland; it doesn’t make use of the infrastructure of the attraction it replaced; it doesn’t add much capacity or quality to the park’s lineup. It's clear that Imagineers started with a mandate to include Monsters Inc. in Magic Kingdom and worked backwards using the limitations of the space and technology to develop the final product.

Unfortunately, we have to admit that that’s also true of The Many Adventures of Winnie The Pooh at both Magic Kingdom and Disneyland, which are ultimately fairly dull and uninspired dark rides that each replaced a classic (the Lost Legends: Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride and Country Bear Jamboree, respectively). Why? Because Pooh (and his accompanying gift shop) needed a place in the parks.

Don’t get us started on Universal’s abysmal pairing of Fast & Furious: Supercharged and Race Through New York Starring Jimmy Fallon, which are two depressingly and frustratingly short-sighted additions that exist entirely to market their stars without any semblance of care toward long-term fit, quality, or balance.

EXCEPTIONS: Don’t misunderstand: Disney Parks are filled with “character vehicles” that are totally successful and enjoyable attractions, ranging from fun asides (Turtle Talk with Crush) to beloved favorites (Muppet*Vision 3D) to full-on anchor attractions (Toy Story Mania) whose primary purpose was to get a hot IP into the parks quickly. The idea of drafting a ride up because a character is popular isn’t inherently bad… but the lesson we can learn from “character vehicles” is that the concept, experience, or ride system really should be able to stand on its own before the IP is added to the mix…