Originally Posted By Mr X Considering that the park is a grand example of cost cutting at its finest, let's see what we can cut out and still get away with it etc..., that makes perfect sense.
Originally Posted By TDR_Fan <<The Disneyland version, in any case, is by far the cheapest one>> I certainly didn't think it was any cheaper than the other versions. Besides, I think Disneyland's has the best exterior.
Originally Posted By Mr X Definitely cheaper. I like the outside of the Disneyland one too (and Tokyo). Much better than generic Florida anyway! Hope Hong Kong manages to at least get THAT part right!
Originally Posted By SMCD Thanks for all the great tips! Will try to complete your “top 10 listâ€, WorldDisney. >> and that being the case then, you SMCD must have seen the lights of Romance display at the hub which is IMHO.. "FABulous!"<< Agreed >> I think all the versions are pretty cheezy and boring...but that's just me.<< Not a fan of it’s a small world, myself. They really should add some small drops to the HK version … and change that song.
Originally Posted By Mr X I rode IASM in Tokyo last Tuesday twice. What I realized by doing so was that once, is definitely enough.
Originally Posted By TDR_Fan <<Definitely cheaper.>> How so? I don't have a clear memory of all the different versions. The dolls all look similar in each version and all of them feature painted flats I believe.
Originally Posted By Mr X It's the way it's set up. The Disneyland one is an old throwback attraction from the worlds fair, meant to be easily put together and taken down. No special building required. The others are more "complete" with flooded showrooms and such, and built for their particular locations (more permanant = more money). But not Hong Kong. They want cheap. Using the uber-lame excuse of "wanting to stick to the original". No surprise. Someday, if/when they finally put in Splash Mountain in Hong Kong, I really hope they stick to THAT original plan too...just so we can hear the shills try and explain why it has nothing to do with being cheap!
Originally Posted By TDLFAN >>Besides, I think Disneyland's has the best exterior.<< And the longest ride as well. TDL got the shaft with WDW's version and DLP at least gave us something different to look at...
Originally Posted By TDR_Fan At least Tokyo Disneyland has a beautiful exterior like Disneyland's and not a tacky carnival one like Magic Kingdom's. I think Tokyo Disneyland's exterior is the best after Disneyland's. I'm not a big fan of Disneyland Paris' exterior for some reason, though it is still tons better than Magic Kingdom's.
Originally Posted By Mr X >>And the longest ride as well.<< I think Small World just may be the lone exception to the "longer is better" theme park attraction rule.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 "It's the way it's set up. The Disneyland one is an old throwback attraction from the worlds fair, meant to be easily put together and taken down. No special building required. The others are more "complete" with flooded showrooms and such, and built for their particular locations (more permanant = more money)." This isn't really true. When It's a Small World came to Disneyland from the Worlds Fair, everything was built specifically for the attraction. Yes, at the fair, it had to be fit into a pre-existing building, but they built the showbuilding at Disneyland specifically for the attraction. Also, it got some added scenes when brought out west that were not at the fair. Also, the facade was completely new for Disneyland. The World's Fair version had the Tower of the Four Winds (that was to expenseive to dismantle and ship to Disneyland, so it was destroyed), but the building itself was very ugly and boring. So, no, they didn't just "plop" it's a Small World into Disneyland exactly as it was at the fair. The Flume was a carryover from the fair, but since it was the first boat ride of that type Disney had done, they didn't think about flooding the show building until they built Pirates, and then all of the subsequent versions of Small World. I don't See Disneyland's being the "cheapest" version at all. The only thing it may lack is a flooded show building, but I don't think that makes it "cheap" at all.
Originally Posted By Mr X Well maybe I got bad information then (and my informant will get his ass kicked as soon as I see him next!!), but anyway, the point is dollar for dollar it's the cheapest version (I do believe that's still correct, is it not?). And the flume being what it is, it was done (like you said) because they never thought up the better way to present these types of rides (til Pirates came along). SO, why the heck would they copy that OLD idea in Hong Kong (oh, yeah...to save money!). Or am I missing something else. Anyway, I don't care so much. Small World sucks. I think it's tragic they're putting THAT into Hong Kong when so many other, COOLER attractions are still missing. (cheap...like a kiddie car motorway...oh yeah...that's the OTHER attraction they added...still missing MANSION, PIRATES, SPLASH, ALL THE DARK RIDES ('cept pooh), TIKI BIRDS, and the list goes on and on and on...)
Originally Posted By TDLFAN >>(and my informant will get his ass kicked as soon as I see him next!!)<< That's what you get for hanging out with World Disney.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Well maybe I got bad information then (and my informant will get his ass kicked as soon as I see him next!!), >>> I don't think anything gurgitoy2 said in #53 contradicts what he quoted you as saying. The fact remains that many of the design decisions made for the original World's Fair incarnation of IASW (not to mention physical elements) were carried over to DL when the attraction was moved. The fact that a permanent building was developed for the ride at DL doesn't undo the issue with the ride system having been designed for a temporary venue. Having been on the original just yesterday and TDL's last week, I can say that overall, DL's doesn't come off as cheap. In fact, I can't really tell the difference in the show scenes (other than the lack of a flooded building), but I'm not really an IASW expert. What gets me about the upcoming HKDL version is the notion that the trough design, as opposed to using a flooded show building, is being used to be true to form with the original Mary Blair version of the ride, as opposed to being done to save money. Obviously, WDI thought that a flooded show building produced a better show, otherwise they wouldn't have changed to that version for the ones built after the original. I understand if the financial realities dictate that they don't have the extra money to do a flooded building, or if it's felt that the money is better spent elsewhere. But what gets me is when they come out and say that they're doing it for artistic reasons. There's a perfect word for that (which Community Standards prevents me from using here), and it's a real turn-off when it happens. If the money isn't there, just build it with the trough and don't mention that decision one way or the other, but please don't try to pass it off as an improvement when it's obviously not.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Well, and I doubt Mary Blairs designs were taken into consideration even in the original design when going with the flume. I don't mind the flume, personally, but I do like the flooded showbuilding. I'm not really sure I buy that it's cheaper to make the flume, as opposed to flooding the whole thing though. Especially since everything in HKDL has to be built stronger due to weather concerns. I highly doubt they will have a fragile fiberglass flume like DL. So, yeah, I agree that it seems like a cop-out for HKDL to use the flume because it keeps with the "creative vision" of the original designers...when they are adding Disney characters to the ride that were never there to begin with. Still, it's a needed addition to the park, despite not being on everyone's "must see" list. I love the attraction, so I have no complaints.
Originally Posted By leemac <<What gets me about the upcoming HKDL version is the notion that the trough design, as opposed to using a flooded show building, is being used to be true to form with the original Mary Blair version of the ride, as opposed to being done to save money. >> Let me be quite clear about this: the design team have gone back to the Blair designs for inspiration but WDI have opted for a new color palette throughout. The trough design has been used as it brings the sets closer to the attraction vehicles. This version shares the same show producer as the Paris version and he feels that the flooded show building pushes the sets away and doesn't have the same charm as the floor-anchored pieces. Cost is always an issue in any attraction execution but it is all about how best to use the budget at hand. If the trough is cheaper that meant they could add more AAs and toys (which they have).
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 I just hope that they decide to disguise what's on the floor better than they do at Disneyland. There you can see lighting fixtures, speakers, wires...basically some behind the scenes stuff that should be hidden. So, I hope HKDL decides to cover that stuff up...that is really my only issue with the flume design.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney Man, sometimes I guess I'm not as nerdy as I think. What are you people constantly yammering about, flooded building vs. non flooded buildings? I think I heard this phrase about 3 years on this site now and never bothered to ask until now lol. For the record, like Superdry, I also can't tell the difference between the DL version and the Tokyo version. I rode the Tokyo version once about 3 days AFTER I rode the DL version and all the little annoying 2 directional singing puppets seem the same to me . I never even bothered to ride the ride in either Paris or WDW...that's how much I care .
