Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<I'm sure they have the talent to make a very cool Avatar land. But it would make a whole lot more sense to me to create a Star Wars land since it is a solid classic as popular today as when it first appeared -- not to mention they now own it.>> YES!! The final three Star Wars films may have been lacking in content, but they had WONDERFUL settings. Theed, Courescant and Otoh Gunga were all beautifully realized.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> (The Avatar "timeline" calls for construction starting in 2013, with completion in 2016-18. Or so.) <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar_Land" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar_Land</a> << And what in the meantime? Dwarf Coaster and...? That's the scary thing. I'd love if Disney took a page out of Universal's playbook and sprung an E-ticket on us in 12 months' time. But I'm not holding my breath.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>And what in the meantime? Dwarf Coaster and...?<< ...more interactive queues, FastPass+ and the happiest potties on earth. So kwitcherbellyakin!
Originally Posted By leemac <<I found Mermaid to be a monumental bore. Fails at being both a madcap traditional dark ride as well as telling a coherent story. It does nothing overly well, IMO.>> You are me both - a waste of $120m. I can't fathom how anyone could find it appealing. It lacks the intimacy and first person narrative of classic dark rides.
Originally Posted By dshyates The air conditioning ducts in the way to bright to be a dark ride "Under The Sea" scene make it feel like you are riding around a warehouse.
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "No-one loves? This is where I'm totally perplexed by the Disney fanbase." Weird, huh? "But it has the visuals - that world is highly immersive." The plot of the movie was by-the-numbers. But the real potential is in the world Cameron created. Done right, the land could be incredible. I don't get the knee-jerk anti-Avatarland attitude. I would've preferred a Beastly Kingdom. Oh well. Oh, and I like the Little Mermaid ride.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<It lacks the intimacy and first person narrative of classic dark rides.>> The original Mr Toad's Wild Ride in DL. The classic first person narrative dark ride. Simple but totally affective. After all of these decades, it's still the best.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>The air conditioning ducts in the way to bright to be a dark ride "Under The Sea" scene make it feel like you are riding around a warehouse.<< Next time you're on one of the traditional Fantasyland darkrides, look up. You might be surprised at how barren the ceiling and upper portions of the set are. Air conditioning ducts, lighting rigs, and conduits are all exposed overhead. However, they completely make up for this by effectively directing the guests' attention down, away from the ceiling. There's just something about the layout of that huge room in Mermaid that makes everybody look upward, making the exposed infrastructure painfully obvious.
Originally Posted By DlandDug The problem with Under the Sea is two-fold. First, it is underpopulated for its size. There should be about three times as many figures to create the impression that the film left. Second, the lighting is... strange. I haven't seen it in Florida, but in DCA it goes through a cycle, with a high point that is so bright it looks like the room is lit up with work lights. I wish they would plus this scene with more figures, and take the lighting down a bit. And I, too, like this attraction. I have seen youngsters who have been absolutely enchanted by this ride. I have seen very few adults who were plainly disappointed. There are some who look upon it as a duty (like it's a small world), sure. But it seems the vast majority of the negative comments I run across are right here on the internet. Maybe everyone is just being polite at the park, waiting to get home to vent...
Originally Posted By Manfried <<<The name Splash Mountain was bequeathed on it by the ever-tasteful Mr. Eisner, to promote the latest hit from the Disney Studios. You know. Splash. Yes, that Splash, with Darryl Hannah. (No joke. He even wanted "Madison" to make an appearance at the end of the ride.)>>> Not true. The movie came out way before Eisner was even considered for the job.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Not true. The movie came out way before Eisner was even considered for the job.<< Not not true. Splash opened in March of 1984, and Eisner was named CEO that September (after months of behind the scenes maneuvering). According to Tony Baxter and other Imagineers involved in the design of the attraction, Eisner repeatedly insisted that the film should be promoted in the attraction. The name is the only legacy of his enthusiastic participation in the creative process.
Originally Posted By DlandDug But don't take my word for it. >>Further development moved swiftly and soon a model of the attraction and more detailed storyboards were complete. Now it was time to pitch the concept to newly installed CEO Michael Eisner and President Frank Wells. Overall, it was an easy sell, but Eisner didn’t like the name Zip-A-Dee River Run. He suggested that the Imagineers add a mermaid to the attraction so they could tie it into the recent Disney hit “Splash” that had starred Daryl Hannah and Tom Hanks. The Imagineers convinced Eisner that this wasn’t a good idea, but he was still insistent that the attraction’s name be changed. He just didn’t think Zip-A-Dee River Run would appeal to the teenage audience, the target group for this ride. When someone suggested they add the word “Mountain” after “Splash” everyone knew they had hit upon the perfect name as this would add a new peak to the Disney chain that already included the Matterhorn, Space Mountain, and Thunder Mountain.<< <a href="http://land.allears.net/blogs/jackspence/2010/06/splash_mountain_part_one_1.html" target="_blank">http://land.allears.net/blogs/...e_1.html</a> >>Baxter and his team developed the concept of Zip-a-Dee River Run, which would incorporate scenes from Song of the South. The name was later changed to Splash Mountain after then-CEO Michael Eisner's mostly-ignored suggestion that the attraction be used to help market the film Splash.[3] << <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splash_Mountain" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...Mountain</a> >>Although CEO Michael Eisner kept pushing for the ride to be based on the film Splash, imagineers had long planned to base the ride on the live action/animation film Song of the South and they refused to be moved on that point. In honor of Eisner’s ignored contributions, they did decide to change the name of the ride from the Zip-a-Dee River Run to Splash Mountain.<< <a href="http://www.neatorama.com/2011/08/24/neatorama-facts-splash-mountain/" target="_blank">http://www.neatorama.com/2011/...ountain/</a>
Originally Posted By leemac <<Not not true. Splash opened in March of 1984, and Eisner was named CEO that September (after months of behind the scenes maneuvering). According to Tony Baxter and other Imagineers involved in the design of the attraction, Eisner repeatedly insisted that the film should be promoted in the attraction. The name is the only legacy of his enthusiastic participation in the creative process.>> I was going to ask you Doug if you have ever heard Baxter tell that tale himself. I've never heard anyone from the original project tell it as it has been documented elsewhere. I just don't understand why he would want to name the attraction after a film that came out over five years before the attraction finally opened in (July?) '89. Even by MDE's standards that is bizarre.
Originally Posted By leemac <<But it seems the vast majority of the negative comments I run across are right here on the internet.>> I didn't know there were a lot of negative comments running around about TLM. I absolutely hate it with a passion I've not had for any attraction for a very long time - maybe due to failing to live up to any potential. I strongly disliked Monsters, Inc. Laugh Floor Comedy Club for its conceit, execution and location but at least it is just a direct replacement for another show (albeit in Visionarium/Time Keeper one I preferred). I just can't pick out anything that is particularly well done from the lumbering ugly architecture to its shoehorned conceit to fit SF to its butchered storyline to its failure to create a true under-the-sea feel to its sparsely dressed sets. It really makes me angry. The first-time Disney show producer Lisa Girolami used to walk around telling people that she was "reinventing" the classic Disney dark ride.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<I just can't pick out anything that is particularly well done>> THIS. This is exactly how I felt when I got off the ride. Nothing wow'ed me. Nothing impressed me. Nothing made me say "I need to go do that again!" It's not a terrible attraction, it's just not a good one either. It's a sterile trip through a few of the movie's scenes. <<The first-time Disney show producer Lisa Girolami used to walk around telling people that she was "reinventing" the classic Disney dark ride.>> Sounds like someone from current WDI, alright.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<Is TLM like the Nemo ride in EPCOT?>> Well...hard to say haha. It fashions itself as a much grander experience, and it's got more physical effects than screens. But it doesn't elevate itself much about that ride. They're more similar than they are different, unfortunately.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "here's just something about the layout of that huge room in Mermaid that makes everybody look upward, making the exposed infrastructure painfully obvious." It's a Small World is the same way. I've always hated the how cheap and visible the drop ceiling is in that ride.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "It's not a terrible attraction, it's just not a good one either. It's a sterile trip through a few of the movie's scenes." I'm trying to figure out how this description is any differs from any other popular Disney dark ride, particularly the much beloved Mr. Toad, which is nothing more a bunch of nicely done glow in the dark cardboard cutouts and sound effcts. Do people adore it for nostalgic reasons, or is really that great? Personally I think Mermaid is superior.
