Originally Posted By RoadTrip I just think it is a lot more fun than Pooh. What's wrong with that? P.S. I've never for even one moment thought I was actually at any of those places Dznygrl described. I always knew I was just in a ride. And in the case of Snow White, I knew I was in a pretty lame one. I'll take Monsters any time.
Originally Posted By dresswhites i like monster inc, but then again i like dl winnie the pooh as well. Superstar Limo was pretty bad. the concept wasn't bad, but the way turned out was bad. the use of c list celebrities dated it from day one. i always thought they should of done a mini great movie ride. maybe instead of seeing tim allen, they could of had classic stars like you are a limo through out time hollywood. you could of had marilyn monroe, judy garland, bogart. jim i agree with you on block party bash. it is horrible!! it just too over the top,loud, and obnoxious. i tried to watch for a few minutes and i had to leave. it was one of the few disney entertainment offering i truly could not stand. i have seen pictues of eureka. that looked like a classy parade. perhaps they should bring that back.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<I think the reason that Monsters, Inc. fails as a really great ride is because it doesn't put YOU right into the action like all the other classic Disney dark rides do. In Pinocchio, YOU'RE the one trying to escape from Stromboli/Monstro/etc. to get back home. In Snow White YOU'RE the one the witch is trying to lure with the apple. In Alice, YOU'RE the one falling down the rabbit hole and getting chased by the queen.>> IMO, great is measured by its popularity. So I don't buy that explanation, especially since all those "classic Disney" dark rides rarely have much of a wait time. The only one that could be considered great is Peter Pan, which always has a long queue. I also think most guests, myself included, never make the connection that they are supposed to be Pinnochio, Snow White, or Alice. Even if they did, and putting you into the action is what makes Disney rides so good, then it doesn't explain PotC of HM, which "is just all this stuff happening AROUND you instead of TO you."
Originally Posted By Dabob2 I remember reading that the concept for the original Snow White ride ONLY was that you were Snow White. That's why she didn't even appear in the pre-'83 version. But no one "got" that, and in the new FaL version they put her in. Peter Pan appears in PP, Pinnochio in PDJ, etc. Alice sort of split the difference by having her not appear, but narrate. I still think the primary difference in feel between the classic FaL dark rides and the newer Pooh and Monsters is the scale of the sets and the fact that you're farther from them - that's what makes them feel more removed.
Originally Posted By Park Hopper Actually Alice does appear in the Alice in Wonderland dark ride. But she is easy to miss. As you approach the caterpillar, look at the other side of the track.
Originally Posted By Sweeper Monsters is a nice dark ride and light years better than SSL. The lame queue is a SSL thing. And I think FastPass has ruined queues as was already mentioned.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka Going on any Disney ride is better than sitting on my couch at home. We thought Block Party Bash was a lot more fun than the other parades. We aren't fans of the 50th parade at all.
Originally Posted By Westsider >>"The only thing left to do was to have everyone throw up on the street, or light each other on fire to top the excitement level."<< What a great line! Thanks for the laugh Jim! And I agree with you about Block Party Bash.
Originally Posted By gadzuux I like 'BPB' more than 'PoD' or 'PotS' - which isn't saying much. DLR seems to have given up on creating truly impressive parades. Parades of the past - party gras, mulan and others - were impressive affairs with lots of dazzling sights. But I haven't seen a disney parade I was truly entertained by since 'hercules'. I've also been vocal about my disappointment in 'monsters inc'. From the bus station theming of the queue to the big open rooms with very little in them, this ride leaves me cold. I don't think smaller dark rides hold up well on their own. Clustering several of them together can certainly help by creating a neighborhood of them. But when they're stranded out on their own - such as with 'monsters' and 'pooh', they lose their context and seem more pointless than they would if they had other similar rides nearby. This seems less noticable with 'roger rabbit' partly because it's a better ride and partly because it's the ONLY ride in TT. As for the land around 'monsters', as the first area to receive its "placemaking" it doesn't seem all that significant. A new fountain, a couple of new archways, and a few new palm trees - big deal. I had hoped for something more.
Originally Posted By jmuboy The placemaking in Hollywood was supposedly a "lite version" to see how the program might work. The pier, front gate area and Condor Flats all have much more significant place making plans.
Originally Posted By GMLSKIS I love the ride because I also love the movie. I think they captured the revolving door scene very well for a ride. I guess to each their own and that is why they have lots of rides. Ride the ones you like and skip the ones you don't!
Originally Posted By Liberty Belle I haven't gone on Monsters Inc but I think I'd enjoy it as a nice simple dark ride, I'm not expecting an E ticket. I think the only reason Snow White and Pinocchio are regarded as such classics is because of their age - if they were made today, I'm fairly sure a lot of people on discussion boards would be underwhelmed (just IMHO). I love Alice and Peter Pan, but there's just nothing that strikes me as being that special about Snow White or Pinocchio.
Originally Posted By imagineer1985 "I said this somewhere in another post, but I think the reason that Monsters, Inc. fails as a really great ride is because it doesn't put YOU right into the action like all the other classic Disney dark rides do. In Pinocchio, YOU'RE the one trying to escape from Stromboli/Monstro/etc. to get back home. In Snow White YOU'RE the one the witch is trying to lure with the apple. In Alice, YOU'RE the one falling down the rabbit hole and getting chased by the queen. Mr. Toad...does there even need to be an explanation? You get my point. Monsters Inc. is just all this stuff happening AROUND you instead of TO you. Makes for a pretty static, boring ride." In Disney Defense Due to Safety/Dosh Regulations new rides can not have object in reach of guest. This is a big reason Why Fantasyland rides which are all grandfathered in have a more emotional connection to you. Monsters has numerous sight gags and some fun special effects. Its intended for families who want to enjoy the movie live with their kid, not for the small Fraction of people who hate almost all additions or changes. Monsters is better then an un used building and my nephews and nieces love the ride.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 "I said this somewhere in another post, but I think the reason that Monsters, Inc. fails as a really great ride is because it doesn't put YOU right into the action like all the other classic Disney dark rides do. In Pinocchio, YOU'RE the one trying to escape from Stromboli/Monstro/etc. to get back home. In Snow White YOU'RE the one the witch is trying to lure with the apple. In Alice, YOU'RE the one falling down the rabbit hole and getting chased by the queen. Mr. Toad...does there even need to be an explanation? You get my point. Monsters Inc. is just all this stuff happening AROUND you instead of TO you. Makes for a pretty static, boring ride." I don't think that's the case anymore. Yes, in the original versions of those Fantasyland darkrides, you WERE supposed to be the hero/heroine. The thing is, guests were confused as to why they didn't see the main characters like Snow White, Alice, and the rest in their namesake attractions. So, in the 1983 makeover, they added the characters, so now you see Snow White, Alice, Mr Toad, etc. I think at this point you are not supposed to BE the characters anymore, but you're along for the ride with them in their adventures. I thought Monster's Inc. did an ok job with putting you in the environment and asking the riders to spot Boo. I found it much more cohesive than Superstar Limo, and the characters won't be dated in 5 years, unlike C and D list celebritites.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<In Disney Defense Due to Safety/Dosh Regulations new rides can not have object in reach of guest.>> Hasn't Disney been doing that for years? I've read how they used to test to for "reachability;" it's not something new.
Originally Posted By ni_teach Jim in Merced CA said: "Me too Hans. I guess my point is that 'Superstar Limo' wasn't as bad as all that." Jim, I'm just going to have to disagree with you on that one. Superstar Limo was 1,000 times more awful than Monsters. Personally I would say that Monsters is better than the Pooh ride. While it's not as good as Peter Pan it's light years ahead of what it replaced.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan As one of the Three Defenders of Superstar Limo, it wasn't as bad as the hype. That said, it also would have been woefully dated by this point in time. Jackie Chan? Cindy Crawford? Regis? Tim Allen? Antonio & Melanie? Good grief -- it was on oddball assortment in 2001, now it would be like looking at a crumpled Us Magazine at an orthodindist's waiting room by this point. I love Monster's Inc as a neat little C ticket ride. Once again, because it is the ONLY nice little C ticket ride, like SSL before it, it has to be too much to too many. It can't be this park's Pirates or Mansion. It needs several companion attractions to take the heat off it. Seeing the amazing -- just amazing! -- AA of Johnny Depp in Pirates, however, makes me wish they had added much more life to the figures in Monster's Inc. It's a good ride in the tradition of other Disney Fantasyland-level dark rides. It just needs half a dozen more of them in DCA and they'll be moving in the right direction.
Originally Posted By cheesybaby "I said this somewhere in another post, but I think the reason that Monsters, Inc. fails as a really great ride is because it doesn't put YOU right into the action like all the other classic Disney dark rides do. In Pinocchio, YOU'RE the one trying to escape from Stromboli/Monstro/etc. to get back home. In Snow White YOU'RE the one the witch is trying to lure with the apple. In Alice, YOU'RE the one falling down the rabbit hole and getting chased by the queen. Mr. Toad...does there even need to be an explanation? You get my point. Monsters Inc. is just all this stuff happening AROUND you instead of TO you. Makes for a pretty static, boring ride." Not sure I buy this. After all, the "star" of SSL was specifically, explictly, YOU. YOU were the one on the limo, having YOUR picture taken, going to YOUR premiere. Using the logic above, SSL was by definition a truly great ride.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <Its intended for families who want to enjoy the movie live with their kid,> No kidding. And here I thought 'Monsters, Inc - The Ride' was designed as an in-depth look at race relations in the inner cities of America. <not for the small Fraction of people who hate almost all additions or changes.> That's right. If you don't just love and gush about everything at Disneyland, you're obviously a Disneyland 'hater.' Don't think too much! Just lay there and let it entertain you. <Monsters is better then an un used building and my nephews and nieces love the ride.> Well, when 'Superstar Limo' was there, people obviously thought an unused building was better, so go figure on that? As for your neices and nephews... glad they enjoyed it. Can you get them to give me some holiday movie suggestions too?
Originally Posted By tangaroa >Well, when 'Superstar Limo' was there, >people obviously thought an unused >building was better, so go figure on that? Is there a petition to bring back the unused building yet? I'd sign that.
