Originally Posted By dshyates "I wonder what he'd be like if we were all sitting around a table together..." Throw in a bottle of tequila and you got yourself the makings of a drunken brawl.
Originally Posted By Manfried Bringing back the old would be like bringing back Captain EO. Ew, yuck and STUPID.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<Bringing back the old would be like bringing back Captain EO. Ew, yuck and STUPID.>> Why?
Originally Posted By Manfried Because no one would go on the ride and it would be a waste of money. Now if WDI could come up with a new Imagination ride through attraction, even with Figment, that would entice a huge line, then go for it. But just bringing back Figment will not do it. That would be like bring back the old Monsanto ride at Disneyland. Sure some have fond memories, but that ride would stink for today's audience. Today's audience would not get Figment, they hardly do now.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper ^^Hardly the same to compare Figment now to the old Figment two completely different rides. One was Haunted Mansion/Pirates-esque, the one now is like Superstar Limo. And people wouldn't "get" Figment? That makes no sense.
Originally Posted By dshyates I would LOVE to see them redo Imagination unleashing the arsenal of fx WDI has. The Imagination ride should be a showcase of what the Imagineers can do. Duh! As it stands now the "Imagination" attractions should be an embarrassment to the "Imagineers". Survey: Who here thinks THE attraction focusing on imagination should be a powerhouse E-Ticket++ showcasing what the "IMAGINEERS" can unleash? Instead we get Disney riding Universal and their "whizzbang" Potter thingy. Note to the Disney Execs. I am embarassed that my internet moniker is Disneyhead.
Originally Posted By mousermerf <<<But just bringing back Figment will not do it.>>> That's exactly what WDI proved with the 3rd version. It's a ghost town. But if they went back to the original concept and of course updated things, akin to the new Nemo subs, it could be very popular. The concept of the original was very sound - it just needed new effects and upgrades. The story behind it was entirely workable. It had good structural elements, solid foundations. The new version is a joke - it's very weak and no amount of special effects can fix how lame of a conceit it is. That's what version 2 and 3 showed.
Originally Posted By Manfried The problem with Figment as a character is that it was done by people who had done most of the Disney character designs in the seventies, and was a "What would Walt think?" group think creation. It really was a boring character. And a bunch of special effects do not make a great attraction either. Yes, a good brainstorm by a bunch of talented people in a room could work, but if you hamstring them with that character then you have set them up for failure. Let them create a new attraction without any preconceived notions or throwbacks to an older generation. Instead, bring in some talented newer creative types and let them dream free about what imagination means and just go wild with whatever figments of imagination they have. Something that isn't so darn literal, trite and bland.
Originally Posted By mousermerf I don't agree - Figment and Dreamfinder are solid characters. That you think that they are boring shows you and your ilk are out of touch with the average guest - guests who love Figment and buy his merchandise. Are stories about Mythology unworkable? What about something like Dracula? Is he overdone too? Impossible to work with? What about wizards and magic and brooms? Uncreative people are the ones who can't work with a novel character archetype which has a very minimal background. I suppose the ones who made Little Mermaid based off the fairytale were burdened by it too, right? Forced to be uncreative. No, it's just people who are inherently uncreative making excuses.
Originally Posted By dshyates No, Merf is wrong. Figment as a character is done. Totally unworkable. Nothing more can be imagined out of a character based on imagination. It is simply too limiting. You have to give the "Imagineers" something they can work with. Figment, a character based on "imagination' is far to restrictive for the "Imagineers" to work with. If only Figment was more like "Stitch®" or "Buzz Lightyear®"
Originally Posted By FerretAfros "It was what you got when engineers and accountants make an attraction." Well, as an engineer-to-be, it totally worked for me. Watching a refresher video on YouTube today, I think that it is still better than the V3.0 that we have today. While Figment totally worked for me in the original, in the current version, he's just kind of annoying; he still has all the mischeif of a child without any of the wonder or amazement of one. The story was cohesive and built well upon itself. While it may not be a storyline that appeals to you personally, I think that it did a pretty good job of creating a complete storyline within the confines of a 5-6 minute attraction with no outside information. No, it's not as good as the original in many ways, but for what it was I really enjoyed it. I don't think I can say the same thing about the current version, which has several places that are just plain disappointing in comparison. "It was clinical and cold and the exact opposite of art or imagination." Well, yah, it was the Imaginaiton Institute. They study it to make a science of something that's very non-scientific. While that backstory may not have worked for you, it did for me. It lacked some of the pizazz and flashy effects of the original, but in the end, I thought it did a very good job at doing what it was supposed to. Add in the connection with HISTA (whether or not you like that either), and it made for a very cohesive pavillion that has been fairly divided in the other incarnations. "It seems blatant that all you do is offer up excuses and explanations for all the mediocrity and for some reason get taken seriously." I try to be realistic. I'm aware of the various confines of budget, timelines, and physical capabilities that many of these projects are created under. While it would be great if every attraction could be 10-15 minutes long, have state-of-the-art special effects, fully integrate ADA compliance, and be the best thing since sliced bread, I'm also aware that it's just not always possible. I clearly stated in my other post that I still enjoyed the original attraction (at least what I remember from it, since it's obviously been a long time) as much or more than the second version, but I just don't think that the current incarnation is very good at all. The second one may not have been perfect, but I think it's a lot better than the reputation it gets from so many sources. I would much rather ride Imagination 2.0 than many 'classic' attractions, like it's a small world or Space Mountain, but I still understand that it's not their best effort. However, I think it's a much more cohesive effort than what they did for version 3.0. "Yeah right, you know nothing about art if you can refer to the second version that was universally loathed that way." Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Many pieces of art are univerally criticized when they come out, only to be appreciated years later. I don't think that will ever happen with Imagination 2.0, but I just like to include my opinion, that I know was shared by some others, so that there's a fair representation of guest opinions.
Originally Posted By dshyates Nice try ferret, but you don't really expect Merf to read all those words do ya? Can you draw him a picture?
Originally Posted By dshyates Sorry merf, just joking. We all know you are a well informed and knowledgeable (yet opinionated) poster. For the record I agree with most of your posts. Like the SSE descent being finished thingy.
Originally Posted By danyoung FerretAfros, you responded with much more restraint than I would have (or than I have in the past). Merf has very strong opinions, which is fine, but for some reason he seems to feel that he's the only one who gets to have strong opinions, and if you disagree with him, you're an idiot. Very lame attitude from a small minded person, IMO.
Originally Posted By MousDad I was just thinking about something, I bet Figment is the only character you will ever find in any Disney park that is loved equally by children and fanbois.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>Count me as one who doesn't mind the current version, but would MUCH prefer the original. The new version is "OK" to me, but certainly not as wondrous and well done as the original was. At least the horrible 2nd version is just history now. Add me to the legion of Figment fans, too! Wonderful character created just for EPCOT Center! And he STILL can only be found at Epcot. He hasn't been shipped to any of the other parks, especially the overseas parks. Although, I believe he would have found a home at the proposed WESTCOT for the Disneyland resort as I believe they were going to add a JII ride there, too, from what I remember reading. Still, it's good to see that he's back and still loved. Too bad his current ride isn't as impressive as his first... << Exactly....Thanks for verbalizing it so well.
