Ask a Disney Parks fan how they feel about movie-based attractions and you are not getting a simple answer. You are getting a full monologue, three examples, one deeply personal EPCOT grievance, and possibly a dramatic sigh. This debate has been simmering for years, but lately it has started to feel a lot less like fan speculation and a lot more like Disney’s actual blueprint.
Remy’s Ratatouille Adventure
That is because Disney has not exactly been coy about where things are headed. In 2024, Bob Iger said that “almost all” of Disney’s investment in park lands and attractions would be built around IP. Then, at Disney’s 2025 shareholders meeting, the company highlighted a pipeline packed with IP-driven projects, including Cars and a Villains land at Magic Kingdom, a Monsters, Inc. land at Disney’s Hollywood Studios, and Tropical Americas at Disney’s Animal Kingdom with Encanto and Indiana Jones in the mix. In other words, this is no longer just a fan fear, or a fan dream, depending on which side of the argument you live on. It is very much the plan.
And that is exactly why this conversation keeps getting spicier than a snack booth hot honey drizzle.
Love It
For a lot of people, Disney Parks are supposed to feel like walking straight into the stories they already love. That is the whole magic trick. These fans are not showing up because they want a lecture on thematic purity. They want to pilot the Millennium Falcon, race through the Grid, step into Andy’s backyard, and hear that one song from Frozen that will now live in their head until the end of time. A lot of readers are totally fine with movie-based additions, especially when Disney still leaves room for some original ideas, too.
Frozen Ever After
That feeling makes sense. Familiar stories are emotional shortcuts. They get kids excited. They give families a shared point of reference. They make a land or ride instantly legible in a way that an entirely new concept sometimes does not. That is a huge part of the appeal, especially at a place like EPCOT, where some fans feel characters like Remy or Anna and Elsa can act like a gateway into a pavilion rather than a distraction from it. For the pro-IP crowd, that is not Disney losing the plot. That is Disney speaking the language its guests already love.
Toy Story Land
Although EPCOT is one of the most controversial spots for Disney movie content, a few readers said that they enjoy the new additions to EPCOT, such as Remy’s Ratatouille Adventure and Frozen Ever Ever. A reader commented that involving Disney movies in EPCOT countries is a great way to engage children in culture: “I love to see movies that theme with EPCOT countries included in those pavilions. It’s a great way to have children understand the cultures on their level [and it’s] something they can identify with.”
Remy in EPCOT
And if you’re a Disney fan who loves Disney movies, why wouldn’t you enjoy them in the parks? This reader said, “I am a Disney fan who enjoys theme parks more than a theme park fan who enjoys Disney Parks. So to me, the animated movies in particular are the heart of what I love most.”
The general consensus among these readers was that bringing Disney movies to life in Disney Parks can add to the park experience, especially if they continue to strike a balance with the old and the new. As one reader commented, adding new properties “helps appeal to all ages and styles.”
Go inside Remy’s Ratatouille Adventure with us!
Hate It
When it comes to readers who hate Disney movies in the parks, it seems to amount to a few big factors. Namely, EPCOT. One reader commented, “While I enjoy Disney movies a lot, I’ve always loved the cultural and educational rides the best. It’s really frustrating to me that they’re getting rid of those types of rides and adding more movie-themed ones.”
Living with the Land in EPCOT
A few other readers commented that it’s acceptable in certain parks, but not others: “It’s fine in Magic Kingdom [and] Hollywood Studios. But self-promotion doesn’t fit in EPCOT and Animal Kingdom. EPCOT should represent the world around us or the future; Animal Kingdom should represent the animals and their environment.”
Tree of Life
And many readers thought that relying on Disney movies for new content is just, well, lazy. One reader commented, “Basing practically everything off existing IP shows an extreme lack of creativity and imagination. So many great park rides and attractions were original ideas, such as Journey into Imagination, Soarin’, PeopleMover, Space Mountain, and the list goes on. We just don’t see that anymore which is disappointing. Clearly some attractions will be based on existing Disney movies and characters but there appears to be no room for original content.”
Space Mountain
If you prefer original content in Disney Parks, you might also feel disappointed by the additions of Disney movies, and many DFB readers agree with you!
Stop what you’re doing and flashback to EPCOT in 1985!
On the Fence
The funniest part of this whole debate is that most people are not actually living at either extreme. They are not screaming, “Turn every square inch into Marvel!” and they are not demanding Disney resurrect every extinct pavilion concept from a 1982 brochure. Most fans are in the messy middle, like one reader who said, “I’m torn. I get they want to promote movies [and the] the original Magic Kingdom was a lot of movie-based rides. But I do like original concepts, like the Jungle Cruise, Haunted Mansion, etc. I like it when they hide movie references in rides. It’s just as fun finding them as finding the hidden Mickeys!”
©Disney
They are fine with IP when it fits. They like it when it feels organic. They do not mind stepping into a beloved story if the result is immersive, thoughtful, and actually right for the park. What they do mind is when the choice feels obvious in the least flattering way, like a boardroom picked it because the merchandise mockups were easy. A lot of readers aren’t anti-IP so much as anti-laziness. They wanted balance. They wanted the classics protected. They wanted new ideas to feel earned.
TRON Lightcycle/Run
One reader noted that added properties should be “organic and immersive,” and that Hollywood Studios “is supposed to celebrate movie making yet the Star Wars area is presented as a real place, not a movie set.” Another reader commented that “the parks need find the balance of keeping the classics while finding a way to grow and change with the generations and new movies they bring out.”
Millennium Falcon in Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge
As with most of life, not everything can be all one thing, and it’s complicated! Even if you understand WHY Disney has chosen to add certain Disney movies to the parks, it doesn’t mean you have to love it.
Read more about Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge in Hollywood Studios here!
View from Disney Leadership
Here is where things get especially interesting. In May 2024, Iger said that after seeing the returns Disney got from IP-based expansions, the company decided that “almost all” of its investment in lands and attractions would use IP. That is a pretty blunt statement, even by executive-speak standards. Then, in February 2026, he doubled down on the value of Disney’s story library, saying Disney did not need to buy more IP because it would “continue to create our own,” while pointing to the company’s existing franchises and their value across parks, film, and streaming.
©Disney
So no, Iger did not literally stand on a parade float and shout, “Everything is IP from now on!” But the direction of travel is not exactly subtle. Disney’s official messaging has been built around leveraging stories, expanding franchises, and turning popular films and characters into big physical experiences. The company’s own investment strategy has framed growth around stories first, and by 2025 Disney was openly touting an all-star list of upcoming projects rooted in existing brands.
©Disney
That does not mean original ideas are dead and buried under a pile of FastPass signage. But it does mean fans hoping for a sudden wave of brand-new, non-IP lands should probably not hold their breath until they turn the color of a Haunted Mansion wallpaper panel.
NEWS: Bob Iger CONFIRMED All Future Disney Parks Projects Will Be IP-Based
So, who’s right?
Honestly, both sides have a point.
The pro-IP crowd is right that Disney movies and characters are part of the company’s DNA, and when Disney does this well, the results can be spectacular. Nobody is going to look you dead in the eye and claim Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge or Cars Land would be stronger without the stories attached. But the anti-IP crowd is also right that Disney’s parks became legendary because Imagineers were once allowed to swing for the fences with original concepts. That kind of ambition built some of the most enduring attractions in theme park history.
Haunted Mansion
So the real question is not whether Disney should use IP. Of course it will. Of course it should, sometimes. The better question is whether Disney can still surprise us. Can it use familiar stories without flattening every park into the same franchise smoothie? Can it make room for new ideas, weird ideas, park-specific ideas, not just the cleanest synergy play on the spreadsheet?
Because that is what fans are really arguing about. Not whether they like movies. Not whether Disney owns a lot of stories. They are arguing about whether the parks still feel imaginative, or whether they are starting to feel a little too pre-packaged.
©Disney
And judging by what Disney has announced, plus what Bob Iger has said out loud, this argument is not going away anytime soon. The IP wave is still rolling in. Now fans are just waiting to see whether Disney rides it with creativity, or lets it wash out some of the weird, wonderful magic that made the parks special in the first place.
Whether you’re okay with Disney movie content in the parks or not, you can see how the situation is complicated! It doesn’t seem like Disney movie content is going anywhere in Disney Parks, but we’re interested to find out what could happen in the future. Keep reading DFB for more Disney news!
Join the DFB Newsletter to get all the breaking news right in your inbox! Click here to Subscribe!
WE KNOW DISNEY.
YOU CAN, TOO.
Oh boy, planning a Disney trip can be quite the adventure, and we totally get it! But fear not, dear friends, we compiled EVERYTHING you need (and the things to avoid!) to plan the ULTIMATE Disney vacation.
Whether you're a rookie or a seasoned pro, our insider tips and tricks will have you exploring the parks like never before. So come along with us, and get planning your most magical vacation ever!
Do you agree with any of our readers? Tell us in the comments!
Our handy (and portable!) ebook guides make sure you get the best deals and can plan a vacation of a lifetime.
I love a GOOD, IP ride. Toy Story Mania, Mickey & Minnie, Frozen* It amplifies a story that you already know.
*Frozen, the refit from Maelstrom cut loading zone in half and I love that the characters *do stuff* rather than just act like a painting.
I DON’T love IP takeover like the current trend. As the commenter stated in article, it lacks originality, and some of the best rides are completely Disney Parks origin.
I also don’t like how half of the new rides are not only IP, but Star Wars. I don’t like ANY star wars. Music, theming, etc. The new trend alienates me from enjoying half the new rides (I know I feel like I’m in the minority here).
IP’s are extremely limiting. My biggest frustration with Buzz is the laser. You cant see it. You just aimlessly are pointing, but it works just like Buzz’s laser.
I like a mix of both. However, it’s becoming a non-issue with me because with the (expensive) changes made – the cost of annual passes, the Genie+ and elimination of the Fast Passes, having to make reservations just to get into the park, etc. – I don’t know that we’ll be coming back after I’ve used up our points on our Disney Visa card (we are awarded points we can use at the parks – so it covers our annual passes, meals, etc.). Sort of a sad break-up. But, maybe it’s time to look at Universal.
Originality doesn’t appear to be much of a priority anymore. Remember how we were amazed at Sully’s fur in the first Monsters? Now look at the level of animation in Coco and the one about Bruno.
Today, just telling a PC story with ‘anything’ up on the screen passes for entertainment. Runaway Railway replaced an enthralling ride about cinema’s legacy. Backlot, ALL about making movies, ran it’s course. The fantastic World of Animation became, what, a meet & greet spot? At least Indiana Jones still supports the ‘how movies are created’ theme. DHS appears to be just another patch of real estate to put stuff – not, like KC said – anything to do with the making of entertainment.
Not arguing that things should forever stay the intelligent way they were, but that simply rehashing movies that did well is such a sad devolution from the level of creativity we used to see. Maybe all of the truly genius new concepts have been used up.
A blend of two approaches would be nice. Look at Pirates of the Caribbean and The Haunted Mansion – they spawned IP outside the park. I miss the old Journey into Inner space (I don’t remember the name of it! It was that long ago in Disneyland.) I always loved the whole science fact/science fiction aspects of it. I kind of wish they would bring that back. Heck, they could use Antman as the attraction to the ride, but use it to teach about what we know now about atoms and quarks and so forth. I’m shocked that they haven’t done that already. It’s a no brainer.
I miss that they changed the old (Captain) Nemo ride for the new (Finding) Nemo theme. It was cool hearing James Mason’s voice. And I still miss the Swiss Family Robinson tree house attraction at Disneyland. Surely they could have done a separate attraction for Tarzan.
Oh well.
This isn’t really a shift in direction as much as a continuation of existing policy – when was the last time Disney was building new non-IP based attractions in the US parks? 20 years ago with Soarin’ and Expedition Everest? I’m struggling to think of a more recent one.
They’ve refurbished existing attractions that aren’t IP based, but I think the days of Disney dropping $100 million on an attraction without an IP tie-in are behind us.
I think IP is fine at MK & the Studios, but it does not belong at Epcot & Animal Kingdom. If all they’re going to do is recreate scenes from movies Imagineers need to change their name. There’s little imagination involved in that.
As out of touch as I may be… I don’t even know what “IP” refers to. MK and the Studios are fine hosting movie tie ins to the attractions, but I agree, AK should be about the animals and this great big beautiful planet we share with the, loosing the Dinosaur tie in was a huge lost opportunity to educate young and old and Disney blew it. My grand children are over the top interested in Dinosaurs when at 3 years old they can name dozens of Dino toys and figurines by name. I have to admit, at 70 years old, I would have loved an expansion of the Dino features. They just did not grow that franchise. And EPCOT was the biggest world’s fair ever, and the learning aspect for young and old was over the top. the Land, Universe of Energy, and all of the countries was Disney Genius. Now Epcot is nothing more that an eating and alcohol drinking experience with a few attractions that don’t fit in. Men my daughter was 5, we attended the Fire Prevention exhibit at the communicore. I was a volunteer fire person in my home town and it was a great learning experience for her. From there, she became a Fire Cadet back home, then began fire support volunteering to riding the ambulance, which let to her becoming and EMT-I , which lead to a career in Nursing where she married a Doctor. You can see where one little spark from Epcot changed her life forever. Epcot does not do that any more. Now it is an eating, drinking thrill park. The attractions do not teach the young any more. A glass slipper that Disney had in there had. A lost gem squandered by Bob Iger. To bad.
I get what people mean about non IP attractions, but what would happen if Disney did make a new attraction that wasn’t affiliated to a film? People would then be saying that it doesn’t fit with Disney and could be built in any non Disney theme park. I love all the non IP attractions that are there now, but a lot are from a time when people didn’t question why it was there. There is so much more information available these days and we can compare many different parks online. The reason these rides are still popular are because they have been there for a long time so have become legendary and nostalgic.
I don’t care if disney does movie rides just make them great. What I do like is that they spread things out over the four existing parks so no one park has too much. They do need to add more to AK and keep the park open later. Equal things out more. And make it easier to get to AK. Extend the monorail and the skyliner. Only having one disney transpo option is ridiculous. MK and DL have stayed true to their themed area so what’s the big deal with the other parks. They’re not walt’s original idea so outside the realm of theming – imo. I think the rides in epcot fit in nicely where thy have been installed. Even GotG – it’s space themed, futuristic. Some people are just too picky and remember – you cannot please everyone and you have given the complainers something to complain about so deep down they probably are happy:)