Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer Yep, this isn't a expansion, in the slightest. Won't fix numbers, won't fix the roster, is only new land. Yay.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom < Won't fix numbers, won't fix the roster> I thought that is what the Bay Lake Tower and the other DVC properties were for?
Originally Posted By Longhorn12 >Disney is just moving SWSA< It's a completely new ride... Also I thought it was almost impossible (without major infrastructure redo) to bring back the subs.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <Also I thought it was almost impossible (without major infrastructure redo) to bring back the subs.> You are correct, and they will never be rebuilt. But, that doesn't mean they aren't missed. And Walt certainly wanted them since he put them in his theme park.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>Except SWSA sucks and the Mine Train won't...so yea.<<< So refurb SWSA and build SOMETHING NEW. Sheesh, even our "new" attractions are based off of old ones. Creatively pathetic...
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>>I thought that is what the Bay Lake Tower and the other DVC properties were for?<<<< No, that's just a quick buck. LOL
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: Snow White's Scary Adventures doesn't 'suck'. Sometimes I think ducklings see what they want to see instead of what is really there.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom For the record I'm not sure how I feel about this "redo" of Fantasyland. I would feel a lot more comfortable about all this if Disney just said they were going to improve the lighting in this area so it won't be so dark walking through that area in the evening during the Extra Magic Hours and "Mickey Parties". I think that if Disney truely wanted to add to the Magic Kingdom then they would be utilizing the space outside the Walt Disney World Railroad tracks. Who knows maybe they Disney is saving that area for a future DVCs!
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt I'm not overly impressed with the content of the New Fantasyland, but I have to say that I think it will *look* beautiful. If the new Beast's castle is any indication of the level of detail to come I think that most fans will be satisfied. Whatever the outcome there's no question that this is a huge improvement over what's there now.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> ORWEN: Snow White's Scary Adventures doesn't 'suck'. Sometimes I think ducklings see what they want to see instead of what is really there. << And what do you see there? What is a fair way to describe SWSA? An ambitious, creative dark ride? That sounds like a stretch. A paint-by-numbers Fantasyland dark ride that tries not to scare the lil' ones? That sounds like the nicest description I can come up with. If that's the case, I can see why someone would say SWSA sucks.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom leobloom, SWSA is for kids. It's got to be better than a Princess meet and greet, which can is done in every park on property and select locations off property. Disney doesn't need to give up prime real estate for a Princess meet and greet.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: We've ridden Snow White's Scary Adventures many times, including recently, and tried to look for all the supposed 'flaws' it's supposed to have. ORDDU: And we're not the types to give Disney a free pass for mediocre attractions. We used to complain about how awful the sound system was for the Haunted Mansion, how tacky it was to replace Time Keeper with the Monster Inc monstrosity. ORWEN: But the Snow White dark ride is actually more satisfying than the one in California--since it tells more of Snow White's story than it's earlier version--and was updated some years ago, which made it better than it used to be. ORDDU: We think it's actually in better shape than Peter Pan's Flight to Neverland. We wish Neverland's dark ride could receive a much needed over-haul. Even so, we appreciate all 3 of the Magic Kingdom dark rides and wish there were more. We'd welcome a Pinocchio's Daring Journey, Roger Rabbit or Alice in Wonderland. ORWEN: But we're at least hoping the Seven Dwarf coaster manages to do justice to the Snow White story.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> leobloom, SWSA is for kids. It's got to be better than a Princess meet and greet, which can is done in every park on property and select locations off property. Disney doesn't need to give up prime real estate for a Princess meet and greet. << Yeah, I understand that. But as far as rides go, SWSA is kinda unimpressive. So I can see how someone would think it's not a big deal to lose it.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> ORDDU: We think it's actually in better shape than Peter Pan's Flight to Neverland. We wish Neverland's dark ride could receive a much needed over-haul. Even so, we appreciate all 3 of the Magic Kingdom dark rides and wish there were more. We'd welcome a Pinocchio's Daring Journey, Roger Rabbit or Alice in Wonderland. << You and me both. Roger Rabbit is a lot of fun, and Alice is really neat, too. Oh, and WDW's Pan needs a refurb worse than any ride at MK.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<leobloom, SWSA is for kids. It's got to be better than a Princess meet and greet, which can is done in every park on property and select locations off property.>> Epcot and MK are the only ones with Princess meet and greets. But even then, MK's is much, much busier than the ones in Epcot. Don't know why, but it is. MK needs a permanent location for the princesses in Fantasyland. That's a fact. <<Disney doesn't need to give up prime real estate for a Princess meet and greet.>> I'd rather have them get a new building in unused space, but I'd also rather have the current plan than the original where the majority of additions were meet and greets. Now, we get a better, longer, more interesting Snow White ride and a small meet and greet, rather than 2 multi-million dollar meet and greets that would have taken up more prime real estate than the current plans and the same old crappy SWSA.
Originally Posted By Mickeymouseclub I agree with the Witches. WDW Snow White attraction has a very dramatic beginning and ending. I will miss it and can not stand the thought of another line for a meetngreet. What is up with WDW tourists spending all that money to stand in a line. If you compared DL m&g's to WDW m&g's perhaps you would understand our lament.They are a really big overrwhelming presence at WDW.Let's just call WDW= MeetnGreet Land.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper ^^^As much as I don't enjoy Meet and Greets, I think you're exaggerating. There will be two Meet and Greet "attractions" in the Magic Kingdom, Mickey and the Princesses. Two properties that would be understandable for permanent M&Gs. And even then, the number of guests that stand in line for these meet and greets is miniscule compared to attraction ridership.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt What they need to do is have a meet and greet for The Witches of Morva.
