Originally Posted By MPierce Thanks for all the info Lee. I still can't see why they don't spend a minimal time in the parks as often as maintainence, and technical issues would allow. I guess it's easy for me to make the decisions since I'm not footing the bill. I'm assuming the research, and development phase has either already been paid or budgeted for. That would leave maintainence, and operation. Are you able to say how many people are required to operate these very sophiticatedd AA's? I know it is impossible to put a dollar figure on the maintainence. I just marvel at each of these pieces as a technical wonder. When I think about it my biggest motivation in all of this is I want to see them for myself. Anybody that has ever had an encounter with a character like push has to be delighted. However I see that this would be a limited experience for the guest. I just don't think a show are some venue that had a large audience would be nearly as enjoyable as a chance encounter with one of them. Those are projects that I"m sure a lot of people would love to be a part of.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Are you able to say how many people are required to operate these very sophiticatedd AA's?>> Actually very few. The problems is two-fold - you need a fair few guest control cast members to police the show and it is difficult to strike the right balance between allowing guests to interact with the AA and protecting it. I've probably seen 100 shows of both Lucky and MML and have yet to see guest control CMs work it properly. The problem is that every show is different and that makes CMs and their leads nervous.
Originally Posted By MPierce Yes I can see where that would be a problem especially with something the size of Lucky. I know the issues are very complex. It's just that I hate to see such marvelous inovations so under used. I know if I had been part of those projects I would certainly like to see my work be on display. As for Wall-E I guess I would have better understood the complexity of his operation if I had seen the movie. As always your expert information is always looked forward to here. Thanks Lee.
Originally Posted By ArchtMig >>>WDI R&D and the specialist AA team are still fully functioning divisions within WDI.<<< Not completely tracking with what I hear. R&D has been gutted, most of the folks there that do "hands on" repair and manufacturing are gone, and only a few managerial types are left to administer what R&D purports to transform itself into which is a purely new technology/theoretical development only division. I assume that a few folks that "invent" new technologies or applications for things like MML might still be there, but I hear that all of the nuts and bolts guys were given the pink slip.
Originally Posted By DlandDug I cannot agree that Living Characters has been some sort of money pit with nothing tangible to show for the use of resources. The through line from Lucky to Muppet Mobile Lab to Wall-E is pretty dramatic, especially considering the relatively short time frame. I am sorry that Wall-E proved so difficult. I did interact with him at the movie premiere, and he wasn't all that engaging. I assume that his much smaller size is a hindrance to his capabilities. Bruce Vaughan said that the figures in the MML could be removed and perform in other venues. If that is the direction the LCI is headed, I can understand the desire to continue pursuing it. Lucky: <a href="http://www.laughingplace.com/Lotion-View-66.asp" target="_blank">http://www.laughingplace.com/L...w-66.asp</a> Muppet Mobile Lab: <a href="http://www.laughingplace.com/Lotion-View-376.asp" target="_blank">http://www.laughingplace.com/L...-376.asp</a> Wall-E: <a href="http://www.laughingplace.com/Lotion-View-695.asp" target="_blank">http://www.laughingplace.com/L...-695.asp</a>
Originally Posted By u k fan As has been said countless times before The Muppets do lend themselves to being AA's by their very nature. I think a show on a similar scale to Stitch or Crush would work well for these characters. If we couldn't have a full show how fantastic would it be in a studio setting to have Beaker and Bunsen guide us through a special effects tour? It would be a much more controlled experience whilst still allowing for interactivity and Muppet Mayhem!!!
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 The LC's may be kewl, but they don't take the place of long immersive themed to the nth degree attractions with AAs, huge setpieces, lighting and effects ... they're entertaining, but in a much smaller way than some at WDI would have you believe. How many people would rather see Lucky versus ride Splash Mountain or Peter Pan or ToT?
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo I'd rather see Lucky than ride Peter Pan, but I know I am in the minority. But yes, PotC and HM have a greater draw due to the emersion factor.
Originally Posted By leemac <<The LC's may be kewl, but they don't take the place of long immersive themed to the nth degree attractions with AAs, huge setpieces, lighting and effects ... they're entertaining, but in a much smaller way than some at WDI would have you believe.>> Nobody is suggesting that they take the place or are installed at the detriment to other attractions. There is a place for LCP in the parks in the same way as attractions, shows, parades and movies. It is all about the right menu mix.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 I wish we didn't have to choose either / or on this. I really enjoyed Lucky when I saw him at WDW -- it was really cool and I wish he was there every year. He was very repeatable for me -- no not HM or potc repeatable-- but I'd like both please
Originally Posted By MPierce >> How many people would rather see Lucky versus ride Splash Mountain or Peter Pan or ToT? << That's not the point. I would consider it a part of the complete entertainment of the Park. To me what is suppose to set Disney apart from other similar venues is the attention to detail, and enhancement of a completely immersive experience in the Parks. Not any one particular attraction, but as a whole. In my opinion entertainment like Lucky or MML should be used to reinforce the experience of the Park not compete with any of the rides.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> Nobody is suggesting that they take the place or are installed at the detriment to other attractions. There is a place for LCP in the parks in the same way as attractions, shows, parades and movies. It is all about the right menu mix. << I agree, I could have saved myself some typing had I read further.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> I wish we didn't have to choose either / or on this. I really enjoyed Lucky when I saw him at WDW -- it was really cool and I wish he was there every year. He was very repeatable for me -- no not HM or potc repeatable-- but I'd like both please << At least you got to see him once vbdad. I certainly wish he had become a part of AK, even if he could only be used in a very limited way.
Originally Posted By CarolinaDisneyDad things like this are important to those who have been to the parks multiple times and want to diversify their experience. Once we had ridden all the rides then on subsequent visits we began to search out smaller more subtle experiences. These kinds of attractions really appeal to us, just like hidden mickeys, and other small details built into the parks.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<The LC's may be kewl, but they don't take the place of long immersive themed to the nth degree attractions with AAs, huge setpieces, lighting and effects ... they're entertaining, but in a much smaller way than some at WDI would have you believe.>> <<Nobody is suggesting that they take the place or are installed at the detriment to other attractions. There is a place for LCP in the parks in the same way as attractions, shows, parades and movies. It is all about the right menu mix. >> The problem with the right menu mix is that Disney has struggled mightily with that in recent years. WDI doesn't appear able to figure out what should be installed where and the park execs are largely out of touch with anything other than balance sheets and their own financial status. I was very impressed when I saw Lucky in DCA. Even more so when I saw Bunsen and Beaker at HKDL (and that was not understanding one word being spoken). So I'm not denying they aren't cool. I am a fan. But I am a bigger fan of attractions like Mansion and ToT and PoC and HoP (yeah, even that one) because they use technology but as a method for telling a story. Storytelling is what Disney does best ... or did ... when I see some of the stuff thrown in WDW over the past decade, I have my doubts. I don't see much coming down the pike at WDW to change my mind right now.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 >> How many people would rather see Lucky versus ride Splash Mountain or Peter Pan or ToT? << <<That's not the point.>> That was the point I chose to make, so yeah it was! <<I would consider it a part of the complete entertainment of the Park. To me what is suppose to set Disney apart from other similar venues is the attention to detail, and enhancement of a completely immersive experience in the Parks. Not any one particular attraction, but as a whole. In my opinion entertainment like Lucky or MML should be used to reinforce the experience of the Park not compete with any of the rides.>> That I agree with 100%. The problem tends to be that WDI gets 'hooked' on a new techonology and that becomes like a narcotic. It should never be an either/or.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< I was very impressed when I saw ... Bunsen and Beaker at HKDL >>> Interesting you should say that. Just today, I ran across a promotional offer for HKDL that specifically mentions the Mobile Muppet Lab: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/6q4kr8" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/6q4kr8</a> I don't think I've ever seen any of the LCP products being advertised before.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> WDI doesn't appear able to figure out what should be installed where and the park execs are largely out of touch with anything other than balance sheets and their own financial status. << >> That was the point I chose to make, so yeah it was! << Touche!
