Joshua

All the time really. The Abyss and Robocop are amazing movies with great moments and brilliant scores. Personally, I think it's important for films to have a presence in both formats. Not everyone has the best internet available to them, sometimes there's outages, availability can just as finicky in digital market as in the physical market (as in that Amazon quietly stopped selling WB titles on Prime Video for a few weeks), apps/services are down (I'm looking at you X-Box Live) and also a lot of times it is simply cheaper to buy the physical media. The average digital price is between 9.99 and 14.99 for catalog titles*. The average price for a catalog title on DVD/Blu Ray is below 9.99 and you can often buy bundle collections. Also, I firmly believe a film should be available regardless of whether it is popular and I believe we should be supporting brick and mortar stores, especially books stores, another casualty of the digital market. *For reference, a catalog title is a title that is no longer hot, usually older (sometimes even by just a few years). For example, IT: Chapter Two, because it's current, wouldn't be considered a catalog title, but the original IT miniseries would.

I wouldn't get hung up on Robocop, that was just an example of an MGM film currently distributed by Fox. My thoughts are on lesser known films The market is going to digital, which is unfortunate because physical media is better. Digital isn't reliable. Recently, Ultraviolet went out of business and there are situations like what happened last year where Amazon Video pulled Warner Bros. titles from its service due to a dispute. A lot of streaming services like Netflix are focusing on original content and there is recency bias in their selections. (Prime Video seems to have the best Pre-2000 selection, including silent films and Laurel & Hardy shorts.) There's also the fact that when you buy films digitally, you don't own them. There are instances, though I believe they are rarer than many claim, of purchased titles disappearing from their library due to licensing issues. It also potentially affects licensing deals with Shout Factory and Criterion, showings at revival and arthouse theaters, the price of digital copies (Disney charges more for digital copies on their catalog titles than other studios, even when they're on sale), and the availability of the film itself. Keep in mind that not every film has been made available on the digital market. For example, The Abyss is technically out of print and can't even be purchased digitally.

I don't think Disney owns the IP itself. But this does affect DVD/Blu Ray releases of the original films. Fox has home video distribution rights to a massive selection from MGM/UA's library, basically every MGM film made since the mid-80s and the majority of films produced by Orion Pictures (including the Robocop trilogy, Silence of the Lambs, and the first two Bill & Ted films), while Warner Bros. (via a previous Turner deal) has the distribution rights to most MGM films produced prior to 1986. But even then, things get a bit muddled. MGM/Fox keeps hold of a number of MGM war classics, including Battle of Britain and The Great Escape, as well as the entirety of the 007 and Rocky franchises. Yet, WB owns the first Poltergeist, released in 1982, but MGM/Fox holds its sequels, released in 1986 and 1988. Plus, despite being an Orion film, WB has Caddyshack. But the IP itself is still in the hands of MGM and their contemporary output is distributed by whatever studio they have a deal with at the time. For example, when Robocop was remade, Sony was handling the theatrical distribution for MGM at the time. But if you look on the Blu Ray, the disc was distributed by Fox. As of today, MGM has joined with Annapurna Pictures to form United Artists Releasing and No Time to Die will be the first 007 film released under that agreement.

Agreed. I love Disney films, but the 20th Century Fox acquisition is worrisome. Sure, Fantastic Four and X-Men come to Marvel Studios, but my thoughts are on the entire Fox library, especially catalog titles pre-2000 and the MGM/UA films not acquired by Turner (which includes Rocky, Robocop, and countless others). All of these seem to be at the mercy of whether the new regime feels like releasing them on new discs, and Disney's recent history with catalog titles hasn't been great (ex. "Disney Movie Club Exclusive," VOD only, etc.).

A significant part of the park's signature skyline is going to look barren without Vortex.

There is also some free space near Wolf Pack and closer to Banshee, but I can't remember what the land is like in that spot. But I also think Timberwolf is hogging some good real estate and to tell you the truth, I'd much rather see that go than Wolf Pack.

Possibly to fit another attraction, such as a flat or dark ride, at Wolf Pack's location.

I can concur. I was in line for Top Gun the summer it opened. It was around the entrance and was over 3 hours. I keep looking back at this map and am wondering about the possibility of shortening The Bat's line. Does anyone know if it is possible tear up the queue to just beyond Wolf Pack and moving the entrance there?

The Beast, with my dream house being The Haunted Mansion.

IIRC, the reason why the station is "weird" is to accommodate the complicated land The Bat sits on. If anything ever replaces it, it's likely to have a similar queue. But I wonder if it's possible to level and re-work the first portion of the path, the Blackout/Wolf Pack area. By the looks of it, if you take out SOB's queue, there appears to be enough room for a small attractions or two if they also use that space near Banshee's station. Adding some sort of permanent attraction there might alleviate some of that "weirdness" and maybe, just maybe not make that trek to The Bat's station such a chore.

Wouldn't it be more efficient to send your minions to work the Rivertown Freestyle?

It is the choice of the new generation. Source: Pop Rewind

The entirety of Orion will now be one long tunnel.

Maybe their houses were built over cursed burial grounds?

They could tear down the SOB queue, put in a flat or dark ride in that area and maybe build a station to a coaster on the other side of those turnarounds.

Yeah, I really don't empathize. These people had options and trust me, there are plenty of families out there who wish they did and would gladly live in a cozy McMansion by an amusement park.

Plus, it has the splash bridge which is a great feature. Personally, I'd like to see it stay. To tell you the truth, I don't want to see anything go. Especially since there's space elsewhere not currently occupied by rides, including the Tomb Raider, Action Theater, Vortex, and there's even some Son of Beast land left to work with.

I've mentioned this very thing before. As a film score enthusiast, I loved hearing it. Unfortunately, that was the only year I ever rode it, so I never got to experience it as any but Inception: The Unofficial Ride.

At the time it was installed, its location wasn't so dumb. Amazon Falls completely matched the jungle safari theming. Personally, I'd much rather see the removal of Timberwolf than Congo Falls.

I never rode KC. I was old enough, had plenty of opportunities, but for whatever reason, a standing rollercoaster intimidated me as a child and it was removed during a period where I rarely went to KI.

Sadly, these days the area feels more like a continuation of International Street than its own section of the park, so I think there's a good chance that when AZ does get re-themed, it will be something new and Oktoberfest will remain as it is or completely dissolve into IS.

With this being its own thread, it'll be pretty easy to reference when that "conspiracy" talks kicks back in.

Racer looked so much better without them. I feel like I've asked this before, but why were they added?

I always enjoy reading your stories. The best discussions here are about the park's history. When I first joined, there were active threads on historical photos, defunct rides, and lingering remnants. I'd love to see a little bit more of that around here again.