Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<We're "purists?" Only in the sense that some people would like them to stop putting forth utter crap all based on cartoons or some other lame movie, and go back to producing quality work. >> <<They really are a talentless clod of self-indulgent money bloated hacks, and half the people online would do a better job than they would.>> Boy, for someone who has never set foot in Glendale, you have a perfect grasp of the situation. Really!
Originally Posted By mousermerf Did we mention Pooh's playful spot? And Philharmagic is primarily based on Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast and Little Mermaid which are vastly under represented in MK. If you consider that Soarin and LMAX are closed of older attractions (meaning no one had to think it up recently) then the only really original thing not based on a movie lately has been Canada.
Originally Posted By leobloom ...and, let's face it, Martin Short alone is worse than all these animated films. I couldn't resist.
Originally Posted By DAR <<Whereas it was once about things that everyone can enjoy, it's rapidly becoming stuff that only small children can enjoy. And in that process, selling them stuff.>> I disagree, when I returned after a four year hiatus I felt it was just as enjoyable the first time I went back in 78.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Boy, for someone who has never set foot in Glendale, you have a perfect grasp of the situation." I've set foot in there, but not very far. Aside from that, I've followed this stuff literally for decades now. I know people who have worked in the corporation, as well as WED and WDFA. I don't know if what I said is right on target or not, but it certainly seems like it to me. It's really very painfully obvious how bloated they are. If you, again, listen to the new Disneyland DVD, about how they built the jungle cruise, you can get a picture. Tony Baxter was going on about how they laid it all out, and designed it. He said the guy (I think it was Harper Goff) took a stick, drew a line in the sand. Then took a 12 foot piece of string on either side of that stick, and that marked off the edge of the river. He told some guy with a bulldozer to dig out all the dirt between the markers and pile it up on either side of the trench. That's how they designed the waterway for the jungle cruise. And Tony Baxter was marveling at this, because if he had to do it, it would cost millions. Mostly, I assume, because he, or WDI in general, is beyond lame, and can not function without an immense flow of needless expense. Turn down that spigot just a little? And the people at WDI howl, and you get Rocket Rods. Money is not always the best thing to have. Sometimes it gets in the way of creativity. Change is not always good, either. Change is the lifeblood of these parks, but when you pull something out, you better put something back that is better. That's been the hallmark of what they have always done for years. Baxter says this himself when discussing how they just ripped out the skyway and replaced it with nothing. Now, they just rip stuff out and replace it with junk, or nothing at all.
Originally Posted By mousermerf Jonvn, i was recently roundly criticized and called a fool for saying that with my limited experience in theater design/fabrication that i could in 24 hours produce a better ending for SSE with plywood cutouts and paint then what is currently there. Everyone screeched that i knew nothing about the process and complexities. The big problem is that Imagineering currently has the fanbase on their side. They have people convinced the months of work on a show scene for demolition and build is normal, while theaters everywhere build and strike more complex sets in a matter of days. They have people believing that the work on Pirates really is proper for the amount of time it took - they try to ignore the schedule showing the 2-man crew working on it for a few hours a day (it was posted online when a CM found it and Disney went ballistic to hide it). People really think there's this grand effort and genius behind WDI - not because of what they're doing, but because of what others have done. To be cliche, they're standing on the shoulders of giants.
Originally Posted By christiemarsh88 I was never in WDW before 1997, so I can't compare it to opening day. Sounds like this may be a good thing. I love Disney World, and that's where my family always shouts to go when we start talking vacation time. It seems like the argument has shifted focus here: the problem isn't necessarily with all character tie-ins, only ones that are unoriginal, or a gimme. I'd be all for a great, original Wall*E tie-in, if it's done properly. Let's face it: CoP is looking pretty sad these days. It either needs a major rehab (and I'm not just talking a fresh coat of paint) or something new needs to be done. Spirit never outlined exactly what the story or experience of the new attraction would be, so it could be great. Maybe it's even going to be the first permanent full-scale LCI attraction. Probably not, but maybe. Forgive me if I sound a little Pollysanna-ish over here, but that's just my 2 cents. <<<...then the only really original thing not based on a movie lately has been Canada.>>> I'd call Expedition Everest pretty new and pretty original.
Originally Posted By mousermerf Not the first coaster in a mountain, but I suppose you can call it original.
Originally Posted By mousermerf Heck, not even the first mine-scenic-ride-gone-wrong ride Disney has built.
Originally Posted By jonvn "The big problem is that Imagineering currently has the fanbase on their side." That's because the "fanbase" listens to know nothing nitwits that run certain websites. "To be cliche, they're standing on the shoulders of giants. " Yes. And they are, piece by little piece, taking apart everything they did and replacing it with things that would never have been worth before. "the problem isn't necessarily with all character tie-ins" That is a very serious problem. But they don't think so, apparently. Obviously people like me are just cranks who know nothing.
Originally Posted By mousermerf I think, if anything, the good news is that apparently the Pixar folks do know what the problem is. Look at Ratatouille, and the reference to smacking the Chef's face on frozen burritos. It's the same reason Disney tries to use the characters to prop up bad rides/shows.
Originally Posted By jonvn I don't know what the Pixar people know. Because in looking at the DCA additions which supposedly Lasseter had a view of and approval of, every single thing is a cartoon, except the new entry mall. I would hope they would be better than what we have now, but who knows. The thing is that Tony Baxter on this Disneyland DVD expresses a lot of these same basic feelings, yet the work he produces is still terrible. Is this his doing, or is his hand forced due to corporate politics? I have no idea. So it is not right for me to point my finger at him or any other individual, but instead say the entire group of them working together are producing junk.
Originally Posted By christiemarsh88 <<<Not the first coaster in a mountain, but I suppose you can call it original.>>> And "Haunted Mansion" wasn't actually the first-ever haunted house attraction. But the original format was plussed to a nearly-unrecognizable state. I do see your point, though. I still hold to my point that not all character tie-ins are bad. I've never heard a single person say that Peter Pan's Flight would be better without Peter Pan. That's because it's done really well and immerses you in a new world. I largely agree with you--I was probably about the most upset person in the world when they gave "Alien Encounter" a Stitch overlay. I'm just holding judgement on whatever may replace CoP until I actually see it. Heck, it may not even end up being a character tie-in. Not to impugn Spirit's info, but it wouldn't be the first time Disney made a last minute change.
Originally Posted By jonvn "I still hold to my point that not all character tie-ins are bad." You are right, they are not all bad. But they have their place and their location. If this is pretty much just about all they can do, then that is what makes it bad. Especially to the exclusion of other types of things.
Originally Posted By christiemarsh88 <<<Heck, it may not even end up being a character tie-in. Not to impugn Spirit's info, but it wouldn't be the first time Disney made a last minute change>>> And I think CoP's fate rests largely on how well Wall*E does. Hopefully they learned their lesson about "Dinosaur." It's sort of embarassing that an awesome ride is named after that terrible movie. If Wall*E's a bust, I would imagine that they will probably put CoP on the backburner...again.
Originally Posted By leobloom Fortunately very few guests realize Dinosaur notice it's named after a crappy movie. To most people the ride is a stand-alone attraction.
Originally Posted By leobloom ^^realize Dinosaur is named after a crappy movie. Are we ever going to get an edit feature on this board?
