The Sorcerer's Hat - good, bad, or feh?

[mkfan1992]

I think it's good because Disney wanted something more large and distinguishable to use for the park. However, it blows that they have that beautiful theatre sitting right behind it. I don't think I'm on either side; I'm happy either way.

[Yensidaj]

I had also heard that Disney wanted a trademarkable icon similar to the castle, tree, and Spaceship Earth Globe that would represent the park on promotional items (ie. T-shirts) They obviously couldn't get away with using the Theatre. I agree that they should have used the Ear-full Tower and leave the view of the theatre alone. Now if they had made it as large as SSE and put a ride in it I might be apt to change my opinion but just having a big hat that does nothing but double for a pin trading spot is pointless.

[Amy]

It was pretty but I liked the old unobstructed view of the theater better.

[aboden]

I actually talked to a few CM's about the hat. None of the CM's I talked to had nice things to say about the hat. However, it does not appear like the hat will be coming down anytime in the near future. Apparently what I was told is that the people who own the real Mann Chinese Theater demand royalties from Disney copying the building. By obscuring the facade with the large hat, Disney has been able to keep royalty costs down. From what I was made to understand, Disney had to obscure the facade or change the building around. This is only a rumor from a CM, so I don't know if it is the truth.

I've seen the original and the one there and while they look alike, they're not necessarily identical. But can you copyright/trademark a building appearance?

That's why I find the story tough to be believe. However it is interesting that Disney never did get the rights to secure the Mann or Grauman name. Finally, the hat went up towards the time frame when the name change was taking place. People have been quick to discount this as a myth, but do keep in mind this went up during the 100 years celebration for 2001-2002 and the real theater name changed back to Grauman's for 2002. The park was built when it was owned and run by Mann theaters. I also did some research and this information is floating around on the web.

Here is an excerpt from thegreatmovieride.com: Legal Issues Arise

It has been rumored that there was a legal dispute, in the late 1990s, between the owners of the original Grumann's Chinese Theater in Hollywood and the Disney company. As a result, Disney entirely lost its ability to use the theater in promotional materials. It also prevented the celebrity handprint events that occured in front of the building. To remedy the legal issues, Disney built a large replica of Mickey's sorcerer hat, from the film "Fantasia."

Don't know if someone has said this but it could go under "Intellectual Property" since the design of the facade is unique it could be classified as art and fall under that. But to me it seems to have gone along so long till they put that up. If they had an issue with it I think it would have been brought up much earlier. But maybe the courts are that slow lol

[MadEye]

The theater, along with the other Mann properties and the Mann brand name were sold in 2000 to Warner Brothers and Paramount Pictures. Probably has something to do with why the big ugly hat is still around.

[aboden]

Interesting, I wonder if they bought it if they could have made Disney put the hat there. I would think anything done prior to the purchase of something, even as iconic as the theater, would be grandfathered in and exempt. But really if we still aren't sure if what they are telling us is the truth we'll probably have to suck it up and we may never know. Throw this into the same category with the real reason they dismantled Horizons lol. I do think though even if there was no legal backing if one of the owners screamed loud enough Disney would back down then face court and litigation. Just easier to build the hat and be done with it.

My main gripe is that I have to walk around it now instead of directly up to the theater lol

[MadEye]

My main gripe is that I have to walk around it now instead of directly up to the theater lol

You would have to had walked around a planter where the hat is now anyway. It was where they used to put the Christmas tree and I remember seeing the Armadillo from Armageddon there one trip.

[aboden]

My main gripe is that I have to walk around it now instead of directly up to the theater lol

You would have to had walked around a planter where the hat is now anyway. It was where they used to put the Christmas tree and I remember seeing the Armadillo from Armageddon there one trip.

lol I guess it's been there so long I forgot but your right I remember that now.

[Mr.ToadWildRider]

I agree it's not bad just misplaced. The Earful Tower was the icon of the park for a long time, but I have to say I think I have to agree with what I'm assuming is Disney's view on the issue; the Earful Tower is not viewable from many places in the park. The idea of an icon is to be a centralized or welcoming, eye catching, dominant structure in the park; the Earful Tower never accomplished this. I think Disney was at times confused itself as to what MGM's "icon" was, as the Earful Tower generally made it on the merchandise, but I remember signs having an icon of the Chinese Theater.

I don't really buy into the lawsuit thing. The facade still exists, and just because it's blocked doesn't mean that that would alleviate much. My only thought that maybe supports the lawsuit rumor is that I could see that Disney may potentially have to pay royalties for promotional materials that depict the theater, and since most of the ads marketing DHS include that entrance shot straight down Hollywood Blvd. it could potentially help remove the claim that each of those shots is focusing on the theater as it's now blocked.

I think the reality is more likely that someone in marketing said "We have nothing really solid to use for DHS merchandise/advertising, we need something big and central" and they decided to add the hat under the guise of Disney's 100th bday with no intention of ever removing it.

I personally don't think the hat is ugly or really mind it too much, though I'd rather it removed or moved if I had a choice. Walking into MGM was never as impressive as EPCOT or MK because of the scale of everything, but in some ways that initial entrance into MGM transported me better than either MK or EPCOT ever did perhaps for that very reason; it didn't feel like I was walking into a theme park so much as walking into another time and place. That's what I miss, though I can still get that walking down Sunset towards the HTH....

[ashleykay5389]

I miss the pretty view of the theater. The hat makes it hard for people to even realize there is a ride back there! I've talked to some people who have been in shock that the GMR exists! The hat is so out of place in the themeing, it needs to be destroyed or moved to a more appropriate location, (I like fantasmic or animation courtyard!!)

[MadEye]

I miss the pretty view of the theater. The hat makes it hard for people to even realize there is a ride back there! I've talked to some people who have been in shock that the GMR exists! The hat is so out of place in the themeing, it needs to be destroyed or moved to a more appropriate location, (I like fantasmic or animation courtyard!!)

Or even outside the park where they put the christmas tree for the holidays.

[mindflipper]

They have a similar hat at DLP's Studios, but it's part of one of the attractions dealing with animation. I think it would be located at DHS as part of the entrance in the animation area.

[Twirly41]

Get rid of it - it ruins the view of the theater. I say move it to a less conspicuous location.

[jmenjes]

Get rid of it - it ruins the view of the theater. I say move it to a less conspicuous location.

Agreed. I choose to move the hat to the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean.

Never was a fan of that hat to begin with.

[SimonTemplar]

...or move the hat somewhere else. To me, it fits more in the theme of the Animation Courtyard area than in front of the theatre.

Amen!! That's what I've always wanted them to do. The hat itself is not what's bad, it's where it is located.