Originally Posted By brotherdave Ok, here's the counterside to my other topic. Which WDW attractions would you think would have never been approved by Walt. Please be logical and 'constructive' with your answers, without bashing. My list: Stitch's Great Escape - Just not entertaining and just plain gross. In fact, I doubt that the character of Stitch would have ever been greenlit by Walt, even for the movie. Or, if it had been, I doubt there would have been many 'bodily function' references. Mickey's Toontown Fair - I just don't think this area would have ever happened, at least as it is. Perhaps if it were more like Disneyland's with some substantial attractions in it. But not as it is now. Magic Carpets of Aladdin - Not that Walt would not have put 'spinner' rides in (he did with Dumbo and Starjets), but, I don't think he would have let the theming of Adventureland suffer from the addition of this ride. I think an Aladdin dark ride with a suspended Magic Carpet ride would have met his approval, though. Buzz Lightyear's Space Ranger Spin - I don't think he would have hated the concept for this ride, but, I think he would have insisted that it would have been more immersive and '3-dimmensional'. Given that Toy Story is a 3-D CGI style movie, I'm really surprised that it was developed into a '2-D' attraction. And I think Walt would have agreed. Mission: Space - Although the allure to feel the positive G-Force of lift off, and the 'weightlessness' provided by the attraction would have appealed to him, the intensity most likely would not have. Journey Into Imagination (both redos) - I sincerely doubt that he would have allowed either of these to occur. Slightly altering or plussing the original Imagination possibly, but, I doubt that he would have approved of 'lesser' attractions replacing a more elaborate one! Rock N' Roller Coaster - As good as a coaster as this is, I doubt that it would have seen the light of day by Walt. Too 'teenage' oriented. I doubt that he would have approved the name, either. He was trying to disassociate himself with traditional amusement rides. Expedition Everest - Somehow, I doubt this coaster would have been built, at least as it is, by Walt. Intensity is too strong in parts, and theming lacks in others. If modified and themed better, it might have been approved. (The queue line, though, would have impressed him, I think!) And the area that I feel would have NEVER been built, EVER, by Walt... Chester and Hester's Dino-Rama. THIS is what he was trying to avoid his parks from ever becoming! I think whoever might have submitted this idea to him might be looking at the unemployment line! The rest of Dinoland (Dinosaur and Boneyard) might have met approval, but, this section would have never seen the light of day!!!
Originally Posted By trekkeruss I'd have to disagree with your assessment about the intensity of the bigger thrill rides and Walt not approving of them. The biggest reason why his parks didn't have the gut-wrenching thrill rides is because the technology wasn't around for them to exist. I also think WAY too much is made out of his statements that his parks were for the whole family. So I firmly believe he would enjoy attractions like M:S and EE.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom My list: Never built: Stitch, Magic Carpets, Mission Space, Chester and Hestor's. I think Disney would have circumed to the circumstances of todays day and age and built Mickey's Toontown Faire. I just think he would have done a much better job with it. The plastic is begining to fade on some of those "rides". Overall, of all the "lands" Toontown is looking the worst. I don't think that Walt would have built Mission Space. Heck half of Dinsey Company now is questioning the judgement of that decision. I absolutely do think that Walt would have built RnRC and EE. Walt built the first steel framed Roller Coaster in the world.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 I do not think he would have approved of: Stitch ( at least in todays content) Dinoland except for Dinosaur and of course - the Poo Playground. His concept to build DL was to give an experience beyond a playground that the whole family can enjoy, this crapola attraction with poor themeing and nothing to do would get an F IMHO as for Mission:Space - not so sure he wouldn;t have greelighted - think Mission to Mars and Flight to the Moon - he was fascinated with space..--but he might be the first to close the doors today after actually talking to guests himself. I think Toon Town fair might also have been built, but it would be more atraction based ( like the old resuce rangers show there and more rides like Barnstormer...I can;t believe here again he would use all that space for basically nothing
Originally Posted By kpwdwfan Pooh Playground and Stich have to be at the top of my list. Pooh Playground is just another space filler and there's nothing special or creative about a playground. I beleive that is a pretty big area and a "E" ticket attraction would be a perfect addition to that prime location. Other than all the problems with MGM, something needs to be done with Toontown and the old 20,000 Leagues site. I never thought I'd see the day where Disney would put Whack o' Mole type games in there parks just like cheap travelling carnival. Dinosaur is a good attraction even though I beleive it pales in comparision to Indy at DL. Dinolands seems to be just another ut-oh we need to fill space as cheap as possible type area. Just my humble opinion of course.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<I don't think he would have hated the concept for this ride, but, I think he would have insisted that it would have been more immersive and '3-dimmensional'. Given that Toy Story is a 3-D CGI style movie>> Toy Story is not 3-D. I really don't care for these "what would Walt have done" kind of questions. It's impossible to know or even guess, and it's far too easy to put our own bias spin on why we think he wouldn't like something, when in reality it's merely what we ourselves don't like.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss One other thing: this is 2006. People's tastes have changed in 40 years. If Walt had lived these 40 years, no doubt he would have changed somewhat as well. But to ask as if he suddenly came alive, without having lived these past decades? What would a person from 100 or 200 years ago think about what Walt did? I imagine some would be shocked and horrified. This is not to say some of his basic business values would have changed. Surely he would dissapprove of unkept parks, rude or uncaring CM's, and just overall poor show.
Originally Posted By ctdsnark When Walt passed away,his son-in-law Ron Miller took the reins of the company,constantly asking himself,"What would Walt have done?".Need I point out,that sort of thinking may have contributed to WED nearly falling victim to a hostile takeover.Good or bad---or rather,good AND bad,popular tastes,especially in this country,are in a constant state of change.
Originally Posted By brotherdave I just posted these topics as mere speculation by everyone who participates. It's not meant to be a true gauge of what Walt would or would not have done, but merely what WE think he would or would not have done. It's strictly for fun to see people's responses. No one could ever really pretend to know what he really would have thought about these attractions. But, we can TRY to guess merely from our knowledge of what he tried to instill upon his original park. We must also acknowledge that not everything he approved was themed and what we think he would have expected in his parks. "Holidayland" is a prime example. (Group picnic tents!) Remember, this is only for fun debate!!!
Originally Posted By brotherdave I guess '3-D' was a poor choice of words for Toy Story. But, it seems more 'dimensional' by the very nature of CGI animation. The 2-D flats in Buzz Lightyear Space Ranger Spin just do not reflect the imagery of the Toy Story movies as well as it should. Personally, I like the ride. I'm just not sure if Walt might have as it is. But, then again, he might have liked it, especially the interactive element.
Originally Posted By oc_dean My list: - Stitch's Poop Escape - That crummy of an abreviated version of PotC (They rushed it into production to get it done for a 1973 opening - I firmly beleive Walt would have said .. "Do it right or don't bother at all." - Not the ride, just the junky looking facade for "it's a small world" - Every meet&greet as they currently stand now as a Stand-Alone feature .. but rather accompanied by a large attraction to go with it. - And I think he would have gone through with the Aladdin spinner in Adventureland .. I think he would have had it accompanying a larger attraction to compliment it. Okay .. okay ... So none of us know "What Walt Would Do" .... one of the most famous lines for us around here ....... But what I know of Walt .. he was not one to think "Small". Having stand-alone Meet&Greets are rather empty and shallow experiences all by themselves - for starters.
Originally Posted By brotherdave >>and of course - the Poo Playground. His concept to build DL was to give an experience beyond a playground that the whole family can enjoy, this crapola attraction with poor themeing and nothing to do would get an F IMHO<< I purposely didn't list that one. I left that one for vbdad55 to add!
Originally Posted By dresswhites it is hard to say. i don't think walt would like the subtracting of attractions though. for expample at Disneyland he wanted a busy river. so i don't think he would like that right now the only attracton on the river is Tom saywer island rafts, and hoepfully some day the riverboat. Nor would he like the empty buildings in Tomorrowland. once again going back to disneyland, Tomorrowland wasn't any where near ready for opening day,but he didn't want leave things empty, so he allowed alot of coporate exhibits to go in. As to which attractions he wouldn't like, that is alot harder to say. Some peopel complain that some things look cheap. But you know even walt allowed some cheapness or least things that weren't all perfect show elements. for a couple of attractions the exteriors were wonderful, but the interiors weren't as elaborate. Disneyland Matterhorn and Small World come to mind. I have never understood why with Small World they went with the channel and didn't flood the sets. Also the matterhorn had no theme on the inside until 1978. so who knows what he would of thought of some of the modern rides we may think are lacking in detail or expereince.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Small World went with the channel approach, because it was cutting edge technology at the time. It marked the first time that a ride like that had been created, that didn't simply flow in a circle. The ride was powered by a series of pumps that pushed water up a small hill, and then it gradually ran down hill until the next pump. The flooded show building didn't come along until two years after they created iasw, when POTC was built. Also, the original iasw was created, from the time Pepsi approached Disney wanting a ride until opening, in about nine months. That is very fast for a new attraction, even if it is a clone of an existing one. It is extremely fast, considering that the technology hadn't been created yet, and they had to build it in a way that would allow it to be moved back to California after the World's Fair was over.
Originally Posted By pitapan16 Let me some it up for you............Chester and Hester's Dino-Rama. Thats like the paradise pier of WDW. And whats so weird is that Dinorama is in a park as spectacularily themed as AnimalKingdom is.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <I purposely didn't list that one. I left that one for vbdad55 to add! < merci !
Originally Posted By Skylardad Before he would even make his first disapproval of an attraction, he would have disapproved of the cutting back of the subtle touches that made his parks special. In the reading I have done about Walt and his ideas of how the parks came to be, he was first and foremost about quality, story, and maintaining a standard that was head-and-shoulders above the rest. While I am sure there are attractions that exist today that would not exist in part or at all under Walt's leadership, I think he would be terribly disapointed in much of what is evident today - empty buildings, lack of daily maintenance, and an insufficient staff that cares little about forwarding the legacy of his creation. I think if more of the executives of the Disney parks truly asked themselves "what would Walt do?" and were honest in their answers, execution and implimentation of projects in the same vein as Walt, we would not have as many of the debates of what is wrong with the Disney parks. With Walt being removed from the creative process for nearly 4 decades now we will NEVER know what he would appove of and disapprove of today. But he did leave a legacy of creativity for us to reflect on and pull ideas from. If you ever want to know what Walt would have done, take a look at the library of films (animated and live action), attractions, business plans and the vaults of WED Imagineers during his days and you will find the basic principles to creating successful attractions and shows. There are many attractions currently at all of the parks that sound great when they are pitched within a meeting, but when they are executed they fall flat. Let's take an attraction as an example... One that immediately comes to mind is Test Track. It sounds like a great idea when you summarize the concept but it fails in several ways. First, the ride idea is being pitched for the wrong park - it has very little, if any, futuristic theming to it. At least WOM showed progress and had a futuristic finale. It was also extremely rich in detail and theming in each scene. Second, the technology for the ride was so experimental that, to this day, its ability to properly function on a daily basis is a rare occurance. Third, it was and still is a victim of financial support. Take a close look at the props and scenery in the attraction and it is filled with items that are suitable for the junkyard. Now granted, in the queue line we are suppose to be walking through a testing facility. But rather than feeling immersed in the backstory I ask myself, is this ride based on a testing facility because it's a good story or because these props are cheaper to buy and use? Outside of construction and rennovation, how much did it really cost to theme the queue with used GM parts? Then there is the interior show design. Much of it is empty space with black walls and ceiling, cardboard cutouts, and the smell of exhaust. Had this been a testing facility set in the distant future and we were about test drive vehicles that could fly or hover and looked like a vehicle from the future, then we would have a compelling story to base the attraction on. Theming it would require imagination and original props created by Imagineering. The ideas would be endless of how to design the interior of the building and the attraction would properly fit the concept of what FutureWorld was inteded to be. Gm and the Imagineers even had the idea half conceived at the end of WOM when you get the holographic car (ala the hitching ghost from HM) superimposed on your ride vehicle - the narration even pleas for you to help GM transform the future of transportation by visiting the TransCenter. This is just one example of how Disney could have had a great attraction if they asked themselves what would Walt have done. But here is what perpetuates Disney into creating half-realized attractions - the numbers. While Test Track's creativity is debatable it still remains one of WDWs, let alone, Epcot's most attended attractions. It's mostly because you can go 55+ mph for about 20 seconds in an open-air vehicle at the end of the ride. While the thrill of going that fast is cool, that's it. Imagine how much more compelling the ride would be if there were more to truly experience and see in the ride. To this day I still find little details in rides like BTM that I have never seen before - and I've been on that ride at least 50 times (no exaggeration). To have an attraction that Walt would likely approve you have to have, bottom line, a compelling, timeless, and entertaining story that can function on technology that can stand the wear and tear of endless hours of operation. If you can check all of those items off, then you can continue to the next phase and so on. However, if at any point in the desing of the attraction you fail to uphold any one of the afore mentioned components for any reason, you have to stop until you can figure out how to make it work. This includes the financial as well as the creative process. From Walt's point of view (in my interpretation of his standards), I think if you can't make it work as compelling as you envisioned it then you need to stop the process until it can be properly done. Walt and his team of Imagineers left some pretty big shoes to fill. They conceived things at a time when business practices and culture were very different than today. However, that doesn't mean that today's ride designers and company execs have to use the changing times as an excuse to squash creativity and diversity. With a little more support and true leadership, attractions can be designed for today's parks with the same spirit and tradition as Walt did. Not everything has to be The Haunted Mansion or POTC, but everything should follow the same standards in their creative process.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 Bravo, Skylardad, on a great, well-thought out post. I love reading intelligent stuff like that here. And while I agree 100% with everything you wrote, especially when explaining why a popular success like Test Track is still a creative misfire, the following three grafs are what resonate the most: <<While I am sure there are attractions that exist today that would not exist in part or at all under Walt's leadership, I think he would be terribly disapointed in much of what is evident today - empty buildings, lack of daily maintenance, and an insufficient staff that cares little about forwarding the legacy of his creation. I think if more of the executives of the Disney parks truly asked themselves "what would Walt do?" and were honest in their answers, execution and implimentation of projects in the same vein as Walt, we would not have as many of the debates of what is wrong with the Disney parks. With Walt being removed from the creative process for nearly 4 decades now we will NEVER know what he would appove of and disapprove of today. But he did leave a legacy of creativity for us to reflect on and pull ideas from.>> I just wish every Disney CM from the lowest levels to the execs read this ... not to mention each and every Disney apologist on this site!
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> attractions can be designed for today's parks with the same spirit and tradition as Walt did. Not everything has to be The Haunted Mansion or POTC, but everything should follow the same standards in their creative process. << Doing anything creative is a difficult thing. Disney tries the hardest that I've seen in the public arena. I prefer to observe the parts of the attractions that DO work well, and that even Walt would have liked. It's too easy to point out things that aren't to your liking, or the shortcomings. You can do that with anything, including Walt's best.
