Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt I think the primary motivation for focusing the Snow White story on the Dwarfs and making it a mild thrill ride was to appeal to dads amd boys. If you recall that plot of real estate was originally planned to be a Cinderella meet & greet.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer I don't know a lot about the Tangled coaster, but honestly, I would have loved to have had that, and kept SWSA...
Originally Posted By ChiMike No magic, I have no idea. I just used it as an example of how they could have avoided a lot of grief with the current makeup of this new ride
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA While I appreciate the artistry and magic of all the Disney dark rides, I don't think losing 'Snow White's Scary Adventure' is much of a loss. There I said it.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I agree. It was always my least favorite Disney dark ride. I rode it for one reason and one reason only... ALWAYS a short wait. That says everything you need to know about it's popularity. Toad was a loss. Snow White? Meh...
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "While I appreciate the artistry and magic of all the Disney dark rides, I don't think losing 'Snow White's Scary Adventure' is much of a loss." Reported.
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance "We were shown how it's pendulum motion (powered only by centrifugal force) causes the thrill level of the ride." I thought I saw that, that looks like so much fun! So you'll not only be going fast in a straight forward motion but swinging side to side. Neat!
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance ""While I appreciate the artistry and magic of all the Disney dark rides, I don't think losing 'Snow White's Scary Adventure' is much of a loss." Reported." lol While I would have a pang in my heart to lose the DL version of Snow White's Scary Adventures, my brain tells me it would be well worth it to make way for something bigger and better.
Originally Posted By TDLFAN I don't mind loosing the Mk version of Snow White because technically, it was the worst, cheapest version of them all (DLP having the best), cardboard sets and mannequin characters that hardly moved, with minimal lighting effects, and the re-designed queue was so poorly done that it created major backups of ride vehicles inside the ride. So yes, Good riddance. However, instead of making this another kiddy coaster, they should have gone inside the ride and totally refurbish it to 21st century standards. I think the original Disney Princess deserves that treatment and more.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer If anything, the original, cubist, creepy version was MUCH better than what we have now.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Am I repeating myself again? sorry Hans" No way... I was making a crack about your sacrilegious comment about Snow White's Adventures not being much of a loss. I actually agree with you completely.
Originally Posted By piratebrittany I tried to read this whole thread but it was just too much...LOL. We were at the D23 Expo this past weekend and we spoke with some of the imagineers and representatives about the entire Fantasyland expansion. I have to say that they sold me on the new concepts. It was mentioned that they will have 3 smaller scaled show scenes and the focus was more on the "thrill ride that families can enjoy together" than the show itself, which I don't mind. From the models to the artist renderings it all looked like fun. With the speed of the coaster I really don't think lack of elaborate scenery will be a horribly noticable thing. They also had a full scale model of the new attraction cars that demonstrated the added small thrill to ride itself. I am going into this attraction with a positive outlook and I think if guests have fun on it then it's done it's job. Let's not knock it until we've tried it!
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <With the speed of the coaster I really don't think lack of elaborate scenery will be a horribly noticeable thing.> Not to poke a stick into a hornets nest -- but, what about 'Big Thunder Mountain'? The trains are moving fast, and yet, look at all the scenery that has been added.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Oh 'Reported' -- I get it now. Like, you're reporting my comment to the moderators. duh. I read it as the equivalent of 'Noted' -- like another poster does.
Originally Posted By piratebrittany <<Not to poke a stick into a hornets nest -- but, what about 'Big Thunder Mountain'? The trains are moving fast, and yet, look at all the scenery that has been added.>> This is true. Perhaps scenery was the wrong term to use. To me BTMRR has alot of decor. From small animals to gears placed here and there...it's all themed nicely. But the only time there's a showy scene is when you have a climb. Given that the reps we spoke with classified the new Dwarf coaster as "somewhere between Gadget's and BTMRR, but closer to BTMRR..." I can't imagine there would be too much space for multiple climbs or scenes. Does that make sense or am I confusing? haha.
Originally Posted By piratebrittany I guess what my point is that if the overall theming and experience is fun and pleasing, why do we need more than one or two show stopping scenes?
Originally Posted By piratebrittany I hope it does turn out well though. It looks like a fun concept. It does seem odd to think about a Snow White themed rollercoaster though, doesn't it?
Originally Posted By leobloom I'd asked a quesiton about FP on the ride and ChiMike said the mine train will have it. So if that's true, Peter Pan, Pooh, Little Mermaid, Philharmagic, and 7 Dwarves will all have FP? Even if they drop the FP on Philharmagic, that's four rides within a relatively small area with FP. I wonder how that will alter the flow of traffic in the area. This ride, while it looks fun, will certainly be less attractive if it's pulling in 45-60 minute waits. For that kind of wait time, I expect -- and I hesitate to say it -- an E-ticket experience.
