Originally Posted By cstephens Better yet - just ignore all the cardboard cutouts all together and the weirdo agent and just look at all the sets and all the nifty little things they've put in them. /cs
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By ni_teach Jim in Pasadena CA > To say that "SuperStar Limo" is hip and edgy -- well, sure -- it's a cartoony and crazy version of what California culture is all about. But it's very tongue in cheek -- and over the top < I'm sorry to say that I didn't find it to be any of the words that you described. "Hip, edgy, tongue in cheek". I found it to be boring and grating on my nerves. I say go back to the drawing board and try again.
Originally Posted By jonvn There's absolutely nothing wrong with thinking it boring and grating. I can see why some people would say that about SSL, as its tone is a bit sardonic and slightly different than other Disney dark rides. It's also lit slightly differently, as well. As far as dark rides go, though, it's really not that bad. There's a lot to look at, it's colorful, and it attempts to have some kind of story. The subject matter probably hits a little close to home for some people, so that might make it a bit less fun for them. I suppose if you lived in Neverland, the Peter Pan ride might not be all that enchanting to you, either. What this ride reminds me of mostly is the old San Francisco ride on Fisherman's Wharf. That was a pretty sad little experience, but a lot of fun as well. It's too bad that's gone. I think people take this attraction a bit more seriously than was intended. It has UFOs, dancing pigs, and Cher in it. How can anyone get worked up over anything with those kinds of ingredients?
Originally Posted By DennisTag What really bothers me is the tone of the Limo and the Steps in Time show (again, based strictly on what people have said here since I have not seen them). When I think of trendy or edgy, I think of the in-your-face, smart-alec, cynical attitude that seems to be everywhere today. This seems to be the tone of the Steps in Time show. I expect Disney to direct people's sights a little higher. Disneyland has traditionally been optimistic, and points to man's accomplishments and the promise of the future. It's a park I can be proud to be able to show my children. Yes, it's just a theme park and not a religion. There are many good things about DCA, I'm sure. I'd like to think that Limo and Steps in Time are just an aberration and not the start of a shift in the Disney style.
Originally Posted By jonvn I have seen both the limo and the steps in time show. Neither are hip or edgy. The Limo ride is a silly car ride through Los Angeles. It has dancing pigs. It's fine. The Steps in Time show is the story of two young brothers who fight, so a fairy godmother comes down to make them love each other through the use of Disney music (near as I can tell this is the story). Limo and Steps are not an aberration. What is the aberration is what people have been saying about them. You may or may not like them as entertainment vehicles, but they are totally innocuous. I think everyone would serve themselves a lot better by just going to the place, seeing for yourself that it's a nice Disney theme park with lots of things to do, while acknowledging it has room to grow and improve. The park is decent and clean fun with a lot of classy touches. Don't get caught up with the negative nellies who simply bash. It's always easy to complain and see what is bad. It's a lot harder to put down the jaded viewpoints and just feel yourself free to have a plain old good time. I think if you did that, you'd find they built quite a nice park.
Originally Posted By Doobie I disagree about Steps in Time, jonvn. I think it's definitely an attempt to be hip and a little edgy, and I think it succeeds in both ways. I don't find any of it un-Disney though I can see where some feel the Hakuna Matata number is - I just don't think so. But I still think it's all good clean fun in line with other recent Disney shows around the country. Doobie.
Originally Posted By JenniBarra >>I think everyone would serve themselves a lot better by just going to the place, seeing for yourself that it's a nice Disney theme park with lots of things to do, while acknowledging it has room to grow and improve. The park is decent and clean fun with a lot of classy touches. Don't get caught up with the negative nellies who simply bash. It's always easy to complain and see what is bad. It's a lot harder to put down the jaded viewpoints and just feel yourself free to have a plain old good time. I think if you did that, you'd find they built quite a nice park.<< Very well said, jonvn. : ) If somebody goes to the park and then dislikes it (but can then articulate why), I have so much more respect for that viewpoint than, "I think I'm gonna hate it, so why bother?" Haven't all of us, at one point or another in our lives, found out that we actually *enjoyed* something we thought we would dislike? But we would never have known until we tried. To get specifically back on the topic of Hollywood Pictures Backlot, I love the look of the area. If you take the attractions of the area as a whole, the intent, really, is just to have *fun*. I mean, there's the silly Muppets film, there's SSL, there's the fun exploration involved in Animation, the parody of soaps in Soap Opera Bistro, and even just the thematic elements like the space gorilla near Hollywood and Dine. The whole park is meant to be "fun," but there's a whole other level of well, lightheartedness, in the Hollywood area. >>I disagree about Steps in Time, jonvn. I think it's definitely an attempt to be hip and a little edgy, and I think it succeeds in both ways.<< You never did get the chance to tell me how the current version differs from the original. I have heard talk about more singers showcased in the original and that "Steps in Time" was retained from the original. What are the other differences?
Originally Posted By Doobie JenniBarra: The original Steps in Time had no story whatsoever (which was fine with me). It started with a short narration and when into a performance. The performances that are there now (except for the opening A Dream Is A Wish Your Heart Makes) were there then as well though some of the choreography was different. Go The Distance was sung by one person, I believe. There were also, I believe, 2 songs that aren't there now - Snow White (can't remember which song) and Beauty and the Beast. And like I said, no story, no kids, none of that. Just performance after performance culminating in the Steps in Time number and it was over. I liked it better back then. I still like it now because the performances were what I loved. The story now seems pointless, like it was tacked on (though I do like Vera). But it still has performances so I still like it. The old version had more performances and I liked it more. Doobie.
Originally Posted By jonvn I think we may have different ideas as to what is edgy. The Steps in Time show is not as simplistic in its choreography as other Disney type shows, but they seem really very similar to me otherwise. I think the story kind of gets in the way, and does not make a lot of sense in relation to the singing and dancing. And as far as Hollywood is concerned, my favorite detailing in all the park is there. It was when we discovered all the little tiles that make up the mosaics in the walls in the area. One of those little extras that you see in Disney parks that most people are simply not going to see, but when you do see them, they make you appreciate the effort that went into it.
Originally Posted By Captain Red Bows HIP.....NOW..Contemporary..Trendy..Edgy ????????? I thnk Neil's watched..Austin Powers..too many times !!!!!!! I was waiting for him to say,"Yeah Baby" !!!!...to Doobie !!!!!!! He said he didn't spend that much time in Orlando !! Well they should have put the Grauman's building in DCA..Great styling..and it could have something installed in it,at a later date a cartoon dark ride showing the animated characters homes !! Forget Beverly Hills !! What's behind the HOLLYWOOD sign ???? Toon Acres !! Put Disney cartoon characters hand+footprints in the cement !! Try to fill Goofy's shoes etc. "Yeah..Baby" !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Originally Posted By Briguy1314 I agree with Doobie. I do think the show achieves a hip and edgy feel-but its a hip and edgy DISNEY feel. There are fairygodmothers -in sequins and platform boots. Disney songs and movies, with cool street, hip hop, and contemporary dancing. It is still by far Disney in its family appropriateness and should not not be offensive (except for the horrible storyline, but thats another story.) I just wish they would have left it the way it was!
Originally Posted By Doobie He didn't. But he did use say hip and edgy when referring to DCA and Hollywood and that sparked this discussion. Doobie.
Originally Posted By DennisTag I'll say again that my comments are not intended to be a critical review of the actual park. But I did want to express my concerns based on what I am reading on this and other boards. My concerns began with an article on MousePlanet that included the following samples of language from the Steps in Time show: "Who coughed in your corn flakes?" "Get used to it kid. First, you're nagged by your mother. Then you're nagged by your parents and then you're nagged by your wife." "I thought it's an older brother's job to pick on his little brother." All of these, I believe, from the character that's supposed to be the 'good guy' (or woman, in this case). Others talked about a 'near-expletive' that is cut off by another character (perhaps son-of-a...?). If I were surprised by these in a Disney show, I WOULD be very offended. At first I wrote this off as just something that slipped through the cracks. I did the same for the Limo ride's focus on second-rate 'celebrities' like Cher and the others. Then the Engel interview set off alarms. It appeared from what he said that this could signal a major shift in the Disney brand, taking it away from a positive message to a trendy, anything-goes approach. And that would be a shame. Don't take me for a prude. I enjoy entertainment geared towards adults. I enjoyed 'Pulp Fiction', 'Seven', heck I even laughed my head off at the South Park movie (is that considered 'adult' or 'juvenile'?). But when I take my kids to see Disney entertainment, I expect a wholesome, uplifting message from positive role models. There's any number of other places I can see the sarcasm and bitterness that most (immature) people seem to think is 'hip' and 'edgy'.
Originally Posted By jonvn As I said in an earlier post, the show does have an uplifting message. Despite what others have said here, the show is about as hip and edgy as an episode of The Electric Company. It is more hip and edgy than other Disney park shows, but considering how totally extreme they are in not being hip and edgy, it's not saying much. It's not exactly an episode of SNL's Sprockets. No one is yelling in German accents about how people should touch his monkey. It's not Brother Theodore. It's not even Alvin, Simon, and Theodore. If Disney had done something like that, then what you are saying would be true. But it is so far removed from anything like that it's not even funny. I think you should just go and see the show and enjoy it.
Originally Posted By Briguy1314 "At first I wrote this off as just something that slipped through the cracks. I did the same for the Limo ride's focus on second-rate 'celebrities' like Cher and the others." maybe you think they are second rate, but maybe Disney doesnt. Whats so offensive about putting Cher in the ride? She is a VERY popular icon, as well as Cindy Crawford. And besides, if some of the Celebs do fade, they are very easy to replace and freshen up.
Originally Posted By jonvn Let me make an ammendment to the above. I think it's as edgy as the Electric Company. Others may think it more so, although the Electric Company was pretty darned edgy. But to each his own. I really and truly don't think anyone would have a problem with it, though, as there is absolutely no monkey touching or anything of the sort going on. It's wholesome. The major problem with the show is that the story line is kind of weak. But if you get past that, the singing and dancing are good, the staging is ok, and the theater is pretty neat.
Originally Posted By Dlmusic Dennistag, don't let the posters tell you what's appropriate for your children. Only you know the answer to that. I can tell you if you are a cautious about Steps in Time to skip it. It's not that good of a show anyway, so maybe it's not worth the risk? I've heard from many other people who express the same views as you, so don't feel alone. I find much of DCA to be very much focused on the hip and now. Like Golden Dreams which has a fairly graphic death scene. Or the fast paced "shock value" intense action of Tough to be a Bug. Or the the "white knuckle" thrills of Paradise Pier. The breadmaking tour is very scarastic particularly at the end when Rosie refuses to share with the other guy (what's his name again?). Even Eureka has some choregraphy that's a little too risque for my tastes, and some costuming that's very hip and now. What is too much for one person may not be for another. But I do believe that this park is not quite as "safe" as Disneyland.
Originally Posted By Doobie I completely agree, Dlmusic. There are things at Disneyland that I wouldn't show to my children of a certain age. And there are even more things at DCA that I wouldn't show to my child of the same age. That said, I think DCA is very much in line with what Disney is doing these days and what America is accepting these days (for better or worse). If your child watches the Disney Channel, I think they're ready for DCA. Doobie.
