Director Randy Moore knew he wanted to film his first movie inside Disney parks.

And he knew that he could never get permission from the fiercely protective Walt Disney Co., or even seek it, if he wanted to make the movie the way he envisioned.

His tale of a middle-aged man who loses his mind during a family vacation depicts It’s a Small World dolls with demonic eyes, princess courtesans being groped by Asian businessmen, and an explosive demolition of the Spaceship Earth sphere in Epcot, just to start.

“For me, the location was key,” Moore said. “I couldn’t do it anywhere else.”

His first goal was to secretly shoot the necessary scenes at Disneyland in Anaheim and Walt Disney World in Florida. Then, it was to finish production without Disney finding out. And finally, it was to land a festival, like Sundance Film Festival.

Moore did all of those.

Still, most industry officials assumed that Disney would stop the subversive movie from finding an audience.

But on Friday, “Escape from Tomorrow” will be released in 32 theaters throughout the United States, as well as video on demand.

DISNEY-CENTERED PLOT

Moore began “Escape from Tomorrow” as a writing exercise on a yellow legal pad to explore his own childhood. He often visited the Florida Disney parks, loving them as a kid but later coming to view them as fake, manufactured fantasy worlds.

In the script, Moore explores the theme with a witchlike character who is a disgruntled former Disney princess, two underage French girls seductively eating bananas by Autopia, and a mind-control scientist inside Spaceship Earth. Moore even pokes fun at Disney tourists – one villain is a portly man with a neck brace riding an electric conveyance vehicle, or ECV.

“For me, it was the Disney brand that was important,” Moore said. “That was really the genesis of the story.”

Using a small budget from a grandparents’ inheritance, as well as money from family and friends, Moore didn’t bother consulting lawyers, choosing to do so if he finished.

Moore also sidestepped Disney’s strict policies about park use.

While the plot is centered on Walt Disney World, Moore and his cinematographer, Lucas Lee Graham, decided to use parks on both coasts for the filming, mostly in 2010. The decision was largely based on aesthetics. The movie was recorded in black and white.

During two weeks in Anaheim, the family characters go through a creepy ride on It’s a Small World, a mother and daughter shriek on Dumbo the Flying Elephant and Mad Tea Party, and a father and son wait in line for Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters, among other scenes.

ACTING LIKE TOURISTS

Moore’s crew members acted like any other tourists.

The cameramen and actors all bought Disney annual passes. They went through security. The filmmakers used Canon 5D Mark II Digital SLR cameras, which online run about $2,000 to $3,000 each and sometimes are used by tourists.

“We would have looked out of place if we didn’t have cameras,” Graham said. “We didn’t even have the best equipment.”

Moore and the cinematographer would walk each scene at least nine times before shooting. They charted the sun so they had the right lighting in each part of the park. The actors wore recorders that they left on and they all communicated by phone.

They waited in line with everyone else for multiple scenes. A segment on Dumbo, for example, shows views from behind, in front of, and inside the ride vehicle. Moore tried to limit each scene to three or four takes. But actor Roy Abramsohn and actress Elena Schuber said they sometimes got funny looks from people wondering things like why they were having the same argument over and over again?

Throughout the process Moore was stressed out.

“I had the pervasive feeling that it could end any day,” Moore said. “I was expecting the worst all the time.”

FISHY BEHAVIOR

Toward the end of filming in Anaheim, they almost got caught.

On one of the last days, Moore’s crew had plans to film the fictitious family walking through the turnstiles. Two cameramen shot them from inside the park.

Security officials stopped the actors, asking why they’d entered twice in seven minutes. The cameramen took off and ducked onto Matterhorn Bobsleds, Graham said.

The security officer asked if they were celebrities because paparazzi were following them, explaining that the park has a protocol for stars. “Honey, they think we’re celebrities!” Schuber said in character. But the pair was panicking.

The officer led the “family” to an area near the front of Disneyland’s City Hall.

Abramsohn said he had to take his child to the bathroom, where he hid his recorder in his sock. The officer sternly told him to come right back. Schuber said that her child also had to go to the bathroom. A parade came by at that point, and the distraction allowed them all to leave. A plainclothes officer followed them to their production van and wrote down the license plate.

“They probably thought we were so weird,” Schuber said. “It was a little fishy.”

Moore told them to check out of the hotel. Turned out, he had enough footage with the actors. Still, the crew had to go back repeatedly for background shots in 2011, after holiday decorations were down.

“I wasn’t even sure if it could even be done,” Moore said. “I kept making backups in case the Disney police raided my house.”

DISNEY’S NON-REACTION

In January, “Escape from Tomorrow” was the talk of Sundance. Reviewers, bloggers and other media, including The New York Times, wrote stories about how the movie was made and whether Disney would try to prevent its distribution.

Media experts weighed in on whether Disney would have a case on copyright or trademark violations.

But Disney is staying silent. Disney declined to comment for this story, as well as others.

Two legal experts interviewed for this story said Disney could have a strong case against the filmmaker, although there are exceptions for “fair use” and the ability to make a parody.

One theory is that Disney is avoiding action to prevent publicizing the film.

Kathy Heller, executive director of the entertainment law program at Chapman University in Orange, said she believes Disney officials are balancing their options.

Jay Dougherty, a professor at Loyola Law School, says Disney’s nonresponse is savvy.

“The more that they protest this film, the more they promote it. I think it’s probably a very rational decision on their part. For now.”

Moore feels strongly that he has the moral right to show this film as a critique of Disney. The movie has errors and omissions insurance and his distributor is standing behind the movie. A disclaimer has been added, at his lawyers’ request.

Now, the filmmakers are excited that anyone can see it, including in theaters in Santa Ana and Long Beach.

“I didn’t think in my wildest dreams it would be what it has become,” Graham said.

Contact the writer: 714-704-3793 or stully@ocregister.com