I'll take a stab at that.
Its because for some, the end result isn't the only factor. If Rat was produced exactly the same, but there had never been a movie on which it was based, you are correct that the ride itself would be no better or worse than it is now. But my feeling on the ride's existence would change because the context would be different.
The general consensus is that Rat is a decent ride and a tolerable fit even among purists for the France pavilion due to the content of the movie, right? By building it as an IP tie in it represents the idea that Imagineers are still restricted in what they can dream up. They have specific merchandising and IP factors on which they can build their rides. When you are restricted, the art will more times than not be less creative. It is easy to become derivative. Just as when they make a remake of a movie. Yes the end result may be decent, but they most often reuse ideas from the original source material and therefore have a certain staleness to them. Most damage though, in either of these cases, comes in what we are not seeing more than what we are. How many great movies aren't being made and how many great attractions are not being built because of the restrictive parameters in which the artists work. Rat may be good, but what wasn't built there that could have been? Perhaps the next Imagination or the next Haunted Mansion wasn't thought up because we just reused and existing idea. Once you restrict that creativity to a small subset of ideas, it dilutes the output.
You can easily take the stance that, if the end ride is good what harm can something that doesn't exist have? And that is a fine stance for the average consumer of these things to take. The average consumer visits these attractions for entertainment, and then treats them as nothing but a fond memory. There is no vested interest in the industry or its direction. It is a purely superficial enjoyment. And there is nothing wrong with that. It is the way the vast majority of guests will experience these attractions.
But for enthusiasts who have an interest in the direction of the industry, future content, and the sustainability of high quality output, those intangible factors mean a great deal. It's easy to dismiss people with those priorities as naive "fanboys". But in reality "fanboys" are really just people whose obsession gives them a stake in the long term priorities of whatever industry over which they obsess. In the end, all of us here who criticize and complain about these things do so out of a desire for the survival of something we love. Some may call it silly or childish to care about these things so much. But as with most industries that sell something that isn't necessary to survival, without a subset of fans demanding high quality, the quality would continually drop. Every consumer product has their die hards, fanboys, or early adopters that hold their selected product to a higher standard than the average consumer. And it is always a contentious relationship between the business and those fans. But I think it is a healthy and necessary one to help a business not become stale or complacent. And that relationship in the end helps the average consumer to get a better product, even if they wouldn't have known what they were missing had it not been better.
I appreciate the time and thought you put into that.
I'm willing to accept we are just two different kinds of people.
I mean no offense by this, but based on my philosophy, I have no use for that way of thinking. When your bottom line is if the attraction were based on a movie, it's less than the same exact attraction if it were not based on a movie, this strikes me as a pointless exercise.
All that "what might have been" explanation - again, another exercise in futility IMO. It could apply to anything, anywhere. In the context of WDW, it can apply to any attraction, anywhere. What if they did something more super terrific than Snow White's Scary Adventures, and we wouldn't have wasted all those years riding it - when we could have had something amazeballs - nothing specific, just *something.* Maybe they could have thought of something better.
It could just as easily have been something worse.
The rest of this is not specifically directed towards you,
@Gomer, but more broadly to the group on this thread.
What I won't grant you is what is implied in parts of some peoples' dissertations: that if people don't think like you, they are just commoners who don't get it, or can't grasp it, or just live on some lower plane or what have you.
I am a very intelligent person. I get the sense that
@21stamps is, too. We can most certainly grasp it. We just disagree with you.
We emphasize or prioritize different things; that's all. Your thought process is no more correct than ours, even though some of you seem to think it is. And those of you who think no, really, we are more correct, have little to back that up. You have no Disney lineage. You have no Disney imagineering job. Presumably you've read some things and think that qualifies you in some way. I realize that sounds snarky, and if I had time, I'd reword it. I apologize, seriously.
But please correct me if any of you have real qualifications to appoint yourselves to positions of apparent authority on this subject and more than occasionally talk down to others.
It comes off sometimes as a self-congratulatory club.
I take your point, Gomer, that there are extra enthusiastic fans in various arenas. My biggest arena has been music. Yet my philosophy is consistent. While I can grasp the differences between Britney and The Beatles, I loathe hearing people disparage the former primarily to make themselves sound knowledgeable to others. I can derive enjoyment from either, perhaps for different reasons at different times. I have no use for snobbery in any arena, and I tend to stick up for the ones being disparaged. The record store I own is specifically designed to be unlike other record stores. The first thing you see when you enter is 12 feet of disco from floor to ceiling. Then you see soul/R&B. Then you see DJ 12" singles and pop albums. (Oh, and on the wall behind the counter is a beautifully displayed collection of Disney picture discs, among other things LOL.) In a separate room, you'll find the rock music. What we play in the store is mostly dance and pop music videos that we get from a local club.
That is my reaction to the indy music world after going to record stores my whole life, locally and around almost every state in the country, and finding music I like treated with no respect because people who don't even listen to it need to puff themselves up by putting it down.
So the people who think like I do are over the moon when they find us, and very loyal - and happy to be encouraged when they buy that stuff, rather than getting a look or a comment when they buy it at a more BeatlesAndPearlJamAreEverything kind of store. And the people who like that have their own area as well. We play to and show respect to both audiences, and that serves the business well, and leaves opportunities for minds to be opened on both sides.
I can play cello. I get more enjoyment from listening to Huey Lewis & The News.
In music as well as theme parks - it gets crazy when you start to take things too seriously or lose perspective or the forest for the trees. I hope those of you who are so into this have some balance in your lives. Relax and enjoy the stuff. Have realistic expectations.
But when you guys form a wall and anyone who dissents is a problem to be dealt with - it just deadens conversation. Have the conversation, it's OK. People like 21stamps and I enjoy discussing these topics, too. That's why we're here.
All JMHO. Off to finish prepping for my quickie trip to WDW tomorrow.
