Slash and Burn ...

DisneyMusician2 · Jan 6, 2009

tirian said:
epcotWSC said:

True, but that doesn't change the man's lack of interest.

It's also true that many (not all) WDW execs are fed up with Rasulo's method of watering everything down. DL folks are reportedly ticked off, too.

Click to expand...

The main problem is that it is unbelievably tough to justify firing an executive for future mistakes. Until the company sees some hard evidence, or Lasseter has him assassinated, he'll be messing things up for a long time.

jt04 · Jan 6, 2009

DisneyMusician2 said:
tirian said:

The main problem is that it is unbelievably tough to justify firing an executive for future mistakes. Until the company sees some hard evidence, or Lasseter has him assassinated, he'll be messing things up for a long time.

Click to expand...

If Lasseter wants to go around him I am sure he could, especially if what he was "selling" actually works.

But the problem may be with managers below Lasseter not presenting "sellable" projects. :shrug:

EpcotServo · Jan 6, 2009

whylightbulb said:
I never said that these attractions couldn’t be criticized and I also never said that they were all masterpieces. What I have been saying that you can’t seem to comprehend is that Everest should never be called a masterpiece. It’s a fun coaster (albeit quite tame) accompanied by a pleasant Himalayan atmosphere. That’s it. There just isn’t much more to it. The only attraction I’ve called a masterpiece on this forum is Sinbad in Tokyo. I’ll add Indy Crystal Skull, 20K, TOT and Pooh (all Tokyo versions) and Pirates from France. The reason I can classify these as masterpieces is because they offer top grade quality and acceptable quantity of every show and themeing element they feature. Everest is lacking in the quantity department mostly. Most of the in-ride show elements (four if you really stretch it) are passable but not interesting enough to make most people care.

And I never called Everest a "masterpiece" either. (Really the only American Disney attractions I would call that would be Indy, Disneyland Pirates, Haunted Mansion, Etc.)

But this is interesting, first you compared it to Splash, Big Thunder, Indy. Which I would say, even if not as good, Everest firmly belongs in that category. Now you're adding attractions from Tokyo, which I'd never argue that those aren't perfect. I KNOW that EVERYTHING in Japan is in a class of it's own, trust me.
:lol:

You have seen the same Splash Mountain that I’ve seen right? You have to use your imagination to figure out that Brer Rabbit is looking for his laughing place and likes to trick the antagonists Brer Bear and Fox? You can’t tell from the song, “I’m looking for a little bit of adventure…fun…” that he is in search of adventure and fun? You can’t tell from the dialog, sound effects and his big butt sticking out above our log that Brer Bear has been tricked into a bee hive? All the way through the ride we are fed the story through song, visuals and dialog. It’s a simple story but it has a main character, antagonists, a plot, obstacles and conflicts, an inciting incident and a conclusion.

Why is it a bad thing to use AA figures that are no longer being used in another attraction? That is a great way to save money that can be utilized for other elements in the attraction.

You think the mountain is just okay? There is double the amount of detail and art finish in this mountain than Everest and Thunder. Not that I think they need anything more with respect to detail in the other mountains but to say that Splash rock work is just “okay” without explaining how you come to that conclusion is a meaningless statement.

Here is an example of you using some of your own criteria to attempt to prove me wrong. I don’t feel that every attraction needs a complex storyline to be good. But if there is a story every tool available at our disposal should be used to convey the story if it’s worth telling.

Attraction storytelling is similar to film in that they are both mostly visual mediums. What I mean by that is that the more the story has to be delivered by exposition as opposed to a natural occurring event within the world being created the less interesting and realistic it becomes. The story points you list for Everest below can only be derived from written exposition that most guests will not bother to read. It’s true that the attraction designer has a disadvantage due to the short amount of time he or she has to tell a story. Many use the queue as a copout almost. I have no problem with that as long as the rider has the opportunity to garner each story point from the ride also. Such is not the case with Everest or Big Thunder for that matter.

I’ve said all that to say I agree with you as far as Big Thunder goes. But I never said that was part of the criteria to consider in comparing Big Thunder to Everest. I’d say they are almost equal when it comes to story but that is not saying much unfortunately. There are much better examples below of more interesting and better told stories.

No, Big Thunder is richer in terms of show elements than Everest and at least most of the waterfalls work. At least there is a Mountain Goat, an Eagle and several other AA animals scattered throughout the mountain. What do we get in Everest…trees. I like trees but I can see that anywhere. The mining town alone is larger than any one show element in Everest. The mining equipment scattered throughout Is another bit you forgot to mention. Let’s add up the show elements in comparison. Earthquake effect with show action lanterns, shadows, actuated rocks. Bats, rainbow water drops, mister, silhouettes in mining town along with building sets and lighting, steam, water jets, all the animals and details mentioned before. Are you sure you could count that on one hand? While Big Thunder is not my favorite attraction at least it contains more than triple the number of show elements making it more than a nice coaster with a pleasant atmosphere.

As far as just being a roller coaster in the dark it really depends on which Space Mountain you are talking about. WDW’s SM is so far inferior to Paris or any of the other ones that it’s not worth talking about. Although I don’t like France’s coaster system the light show is pretty good and far surpasses Everest in terms of quantity and impact. Actually the same goes for the other three Space Mountains. Sorry but as far as impact and innovation, for its day Space Mountain wins. Yes I know the track switch in Everest is a nice innovation. But as far as how that impacts the show it doesn’t come close to SM’s innovations back in the 70’s.

Now you are hitting closer to home since I was at WDI for this project and IJA. Once again it’s in order of magnitude, quantity and quality that make this stand out above Everest. Also, the innovations in the ride system here support the story and help to immerse riders in the world. Everest trains go backward. There is no explanation as to how they stop at the top of the hill and why they stop at the end of the backwards run. Yes it’s fun and I love that part for the visceral thrill but there is no imagination used to make it more interesting and realistic. The fact that TOT takes place in the Twilight Zone allowed us many liberties that Everest designers didn’t have. But that’s no excuse to be lazy and settle.

Once again to repeat myself, the sheer number of show elements is enough to make this stand out. The Corridor scene contains pepper’s ghost video, RP video, fiber optics along with the raked set of the hall. The Fifth Dimension scene contains numerous reflection gags, star field door and eye effect. The drop sequence contains lighting effects, air blast and video. The unload area includes authentic props from the Twilight Zone. Sorry…TOT has more show elements than Everest.

This is also in my top three Disney attractions. I worked heavily on this ride while at WDI so I’ll try not to personalize any of your comments since you said it is your favorite.

I completely disagree with you when it comes to the queue. There is so much more to look at and enjoy than Everest and certainly more than just “stones and caves.” Each queue scene is different in terms of style, audio, gags, lighting, graphics…pretty much anything that can be employed in a queue. This was really the first queue to ever contain interactive elements of this nature. The pre-show film is interesting, humorous and authentic. Little details such as the shadow of the film reel on the wall, the items in the excavation office, the lights all being run from the generator, the radio broadcast etc. far exceed Everest’s efforts. Most of the queue gags are animated and brought to life in some way as opposed to the static, boring interpretive panels at Everest. Don’t forget, we are talking about entertainment value here. What would most guests enjoy more, reading the panels or activating booby traps?

Most effects are rather simple in construction and don’t have to be complex to be effective. In fact, it’s usually the simple ones that impress the most. Calling those UV panels cheap is inaccurate by the way. As far as UV paint finish goes they are pretty standard but still well done. We did have a very cool effect installed that only lasted a few days because Disneyland maintenance refused to keep it running. It was a very expensive ice machine and conveyor/release system. When it was turned on it made it appear as though chunks of the ceiling were falling into the pit. It’s a shame because it was truly impressive. Anyway back to the point. The effects here, too numerous to list, are well done and much more effective than Everest. Do I really need to list them one by one? The rat screen, boulder, Chamber of Destiny, crackle bars…the list goes on and on. Each one of those is more effective than anything on Everest. Who marvels at the Yeti shadow projector or even just talks about it after riding? Even the wasted AA figure, I’ve never once heard anyone say anything about that at the end of the ride. By contrast you constantly hear people exit IJA and mention the rats, the boulder that they thought they were going to get hit with, the fire etc.

Now I know you're smart, don't pretend you don't know what I was getting at. I love each and every one of the attractions, and I'd defend their awesomeness to the death.

For me what makes a GREAT WDW attraction dosen't come from each and every "element" you can list, stack, and organize. That's nitpicking.

RNR.
Soarin'.
Splash.
Big Thunder.
Mission Space.
Test Track.
Tower.

I can find many a fault in these attractions, but I don't. Because it's not about the "elements" that's there or of lack thereof, but when you step back and look at the TOTAL PICTURE, you know Everest fits right alongside the attractions on the list. Not as a competition, you can pick favorites all you want, but I'll continue to fight against a few people's denial that Everest goes on that list of "the best", even if they never agree. Because it's about making a point. Sending a message that It's there, and whatever it is or isn't it did it well enough to make lazy --- people like me stand up and defend it, and not run away from the arguement.

I don’t’ think I did. You are just making it more complicated than it is. I pointed out very logical and simple reasons why Everest doesn’t measure up to the original Disney standards.

And I pointed out very logical and simple reasons why it DOES, so can't we just agree that this isn't a matter of "fact" or "truth", and that it's entirely the clash of opinions and that we're at an impass?
:shrug:

The finer points of the story is elusive to most guests. The theme is carried through as far as atmosphere but with respect to suspension of disbelief in the Yeti department…not so much.

Again, I think this statement is gross slander towards guests. I think guest's are dumb as all get it when it comes to the parks, but when it comes to the stories and attractions, sure a few have no idea, but IT IS the elusive finer points of these stories and attractions that come through. It's an inportant part of what makes attractions LIKE Indy and Tower so popular.

And I don't have to argue about the Yeti, because when he's working the emotions of the train are very clear. They aren't screaming because the train's taking a turn at a mild bank, it's because of the Yeti.

I like WDW 1974 and his main points. I agree with him on most things and leave that area of concern in his capable hands. As for me I preach about what I know personally and deal with on a daily basis. This is my business and I do know what I’m talking about. You can believe what you want to but I was there during the end of WDI’s glory days. I’ve worked with Universal Creative and seen how they operate. I’ve worked for Landmark, Creative Presentations Falcons Treehouse and others. Now I own my own company and have been the producer of several attractions, two of which included the design, fabrication and installation of full attractions with so much less available to us than Disney. Others have been for Disney or Universal. I’ve seen many sides of this business and can speak with enough authority whether you want to listen or not. I hope you do listen however, even if you disagree.

Then you should know better than anyone that at the end of your day the whole point of the job is to entertain people, and that sometimes it isn't about how much ingredidents you put in the Cake, it's about weather the Cake tastes good.
:shrug:

agent86 said:
The storyline that EpcotServo described about Everest is one that I feel very confident the vast majority of guests aren't even aware of. But yet he and others refer to that as a means of proving that it's a great ride.

I like how after my Last few posts towards you, you stopped talking to me and just started referring to me as "EPCOTSERVO and others".

:lol:

Anyhoo, all you've done is thrown out conjuncture about how they don't get it, yet offered no (Anecdotal or Otherwise) evidence that normal guests somehow "aren't aware" of the basic story, even though the basic story isn't about any of the "details" that guests walk by, those are all just supporting the basic story I told.

:hammer:

albino_pygmy · Jan 6, 2009

EpcotServo said:
Then you should know better than anyone that at the end of your day the whole point of the job is to entertain people, and that sometimes it isn't about how much ingredidents you put in the Cake, it's about weather the Cake tastes good.
:shrug:

Well, with that analogy, Universal makes sure they have a great tasting cake, no matter what the appearance is. Disney goes for the great looking cake to lure people to try a slice, and since this cake looks so good, people are often satisfied with it even if this cake has been made from leftover scraps from other cakes that have been sitting around and going stale. Speaking of cakes, remember that big giant pink one in MK a decade ago? :hammer:

coasterphil · Jan 6, 2009

I know we've kinda gotten away from the Everest discussions, but I want to throw my two cents in. I was never more disappointed after riding an attraction than I was getting off of Expedition Everest the first time. It felt like they had basically spent $100 million on a modern version of BTMRR that didn't have nearly as much to look at and wasn't as much fun as BTMRR. IMO, Everest fails both as a "thrill ride" and as an awesomely themed "attraction."

Wilt Dasney · Jan 6, 2009

whylightbulb said:
Some on this board question why myself or others in similar situations "waste our time" on a discussion board like this. This is one reason. If visitors and fans alike respond to surveys in that matter than clearly there needs to be some attempt to wake these people up.

This point stuck out to me earlier, and maybe best illustrates the different approaches in play here.

While I don't want to discourage anyone from taking a course of action they see as important, I think any attempt to "rally the troops," when you're talking about theme park tourists, is going to fail.

The average person answering those surveys isn't here posting. They're going about their everyday lives, waiting for the time every year or two or three when they go back to Disney for a week or more, after which they'll forget all about it again.

The only way they're going to be convinced that Disney isn't worth the money is when they personally feel it, based on their own experience. Tourists by their very nature aren't going to latch on to any kind of "movement" or be swayed by someone else's opinion...mainly because they're not listening in the first place.

albino_pygmy · Jan 6, 2009

Wilt Dasney said:
This point stuck out to me earlier, and maybe best illustrates the different approaches in play here.

While I don't want to discourage anyone from taking a course of action they see as important, I think any attempt to "rally the troops," when you're talking about theme park tourists, is going to fail.

The average person answering those surveys isn't here posting. They're going about their everyday lives, waiting for the time every year or two or three when they go back to Disney for a week or more, after which they'll forget all about it again.

The only way they're going to be convinced that Disney isn't worth the money is when they personally feel it, based on their own experience. Tourists by their very nature aren't going to latch on to any kind of "movement" or be swayed by someone else's opinion...mainly because they're not listening in the first place.

True, but the fanboys who would see this and realize "hey, this guy's got a good point" and would then tell their friends, and so on. So in a way, the average tourist who lives their daily lives would hear from a friend or friend of a friend that Disney's not as magical as they are lead to believe, so we'll go visit somewhere else that actually wants our business, let's go to Universal! I know that word of mouth is wishful thinking, but it does happen. How many times have you heard others talk about their Disney or Universal trip, and what they did, and then what went wrong? I'll bet that more than half of the conversation would be focused on what they felt was wrong or just didn't like at the parks.

tirian · Jan 6, 2009

jt04 said:
The problem may not be Jay, tirian.

Until all execs get "ticked off" it will probably be more of the same. And I don't think the current CEO wants a bunch of "go along to get along" executives.

Well, he's got one.

*yawn* Tired of this thread. :snore: The significant points have been made.

shmmrname · Jan 6, 2009

Eesh... I hate the opening times the most, if it's true...

CBOMB · Jan 6, 2009

I wonder if my local Krogers is still selling eggnog this week?
Sorry for the thread drift!

jt04 · Jan 6, 2009

WDW1974 said:
Those should be the nicknames of Jay Rasulo and Tom Staggs ... because I've recently heard some very disheartening news.

I am trying to piece it all together and see what it exactly means, but the big picture apparently is this: after Idol opens next month EVERY/ALL WDI projects at WDI are on indefinite hold or off the table entirely.

EVERYTHING.

I'm trying to see how this affects things like HoP, Space Mountain and Star Tours 2.0 but if I am understanding it correctly those projects may all be on hold for now as well.

But nothing new is getting done at WDW at all. Nothing. Nada. Zero. Zilch.

Sorry, but this is reality.

OK, I went back to the original post and this is what I have found. So I'd consider the source and move along. Truly nothing to see here. :brick:

tirian · Jan 6, 2009

jt04 said:
OK, I went back to the original post and this is what I have found. So I'd consider the source and move along. Truly nothing to see here. :brick:

When he posted this a month ago, things were indeed looking dim for the refurb's scope.

Darn! I promised myself I'd stay out of this thread.

*runs out room*

Animaniac93-98 · Jan 6, 2009

jt04 said:
OK, I went back to the original post and this is what I have found. So I'd consider the source and move along. Truly nothing to see here. :brick:

You know that Star Tours 2 is coming for sure?

We also got news form Al today that PoD isn't coming either. Think two refurbs (one of which were not certain of how extensive it will be) justify the closing and or ignoring of this thread?

agent86 · Jan 6, 2009

albino_pygmy said:
Well, with that analogy, Universal makes sure they have a great tasting cake, no matter what the appearance is. Disney goes for the great looking cake to lure people to try a slice, and since this cake looks so good, people are often satisfied with it even if this cake has been made from leftover scraps from other cakes that have been sitting around and going stale. Speaking of cakes, remember that big giant pink one in MK a decade ago? :hammer:

:ROFLOL:Excellent (and hilarious) use of that analogy!!

Taking the analogy a step further, if the cake were Everest, then whenever someone took a bite out of it and said, "Eh, it's okay I guess, but nothing special", there would likely be someone here telling them the "backstory" about the expensive ingredients that went into it in the hopes of convincing them it's really a good cake after all. :hammer: Of course, that wouldn't change the flavor or taste of the cake at all, but they'd give it their best shot.

agent86 · Jan 6, 2009

coasterphil said:
I know we've kinda gotten away from the Everest discussions, but I want to throw my two cents in. I was never more disappointed after riding an attraction than I was getting off of Expedition Everest the first time. It felt like they had basically spent $100 million on a modern version of BTMRR that didn't have nearly as much to look at and wasn't as much fun as BTMRR. IMO, Everest fails both as a "thrill ride" and as an awesomely themed "attraction."

Precisely! It has no redeeming characteristics really. Unlike attractions like, say, The Incredible Hulk, which has pretty much little to no theming but is an incredible coaster, or Big Thunder, which is by no means a super thrilling coaster on it's own but has tons of theming....Everest can't really claim either. If it were an awesome coaster, it might possibly get by on what little theming it has. But the coaster part is pretty much a yawnfest. On the other hand, if it were an attraction that immersed guests in the theme and had all kinds of visuals and effects, then most people probably wouldn't care if the coaster part was all that exciting or not. If they weren't going to go all the way with this attraction, then they should have at least gone for one of those two things. My vote, of course, would have been for more and better theming. But since it misses the mark pathetically on that count, it would have been nice if the coaster had been really impressive. Instead? :snore:

Monty · Jan 6, 2009

agent86 said:
Precisely! It has no redeeming characteristics really. Unlike attractions like, say, The Incredible Hulk, which has pretty much little to no theming but is an incredible coaster, or Big Thunder, which is by no means a super thrilling coaster on it's own but has tons of theming....Everest can't really claim either. If it were an awesome coaster, it might possibly get by on what little theming it has. But the coaster part is pretty much a yawnfest. On the other hand, if it were an attraction that immersed guests in the theme and had all kinds of visuals and effects, then most people probably wouldn't care if the coaster part was all that exciting or not. If they weren't going to go all the way with this attraction, then they should have at least gone for one of those two things. My vote, of course, would have been for more and better theming. But since it misses the mark pathetically on that count, it would have been nice if the coaster had been really impressive. Instead? :snore:

A wonderful opinion... Glad it's not mine! :lol:

Hrudey3032 · Jan 6, 2009

Agent86 why can't you just agree that to some people Everest is a incredible coaster? I mean everything is just a personal preference like are you a Coke or Pepsi person? Rep. or Dem? SSE 94 or SSE TC Era?I have never ridden Everest as I haven't been to DHS since '02 so I can't give a review for it but even I know that not everyone is going to like the same thing.

BTW you say Everest has no redeeming charachteristics? Isn't that just your opinion? To Epcotservo he would say the opposite.

Precisely! It has no redeeming characteristics really. Unlike attractions like, say, The Incredible Hulk, which has pretty much little to no theming but is an incredible coaster, or Big Thunder, which is by no means a super thrilling coaster on it's own but has tons of theming....Everest can't really claim either. If it were an awesome coaster, it might possibly get by on what little theming it has. But the coaster part is pretty much a yawnfest. On the other hand, if it were an attraction that immersed guests in the theme and had all kinds of visuals and effects, then most people probably wouldn't care if the coaster part was all that exciting or not. If they weren't going to go all the way with this attraction, then they should have at least gone for one of those two things. My vote, of course, would have been for more and better theming. But since it misses the mark pathetically on that count, it would have been nice if the coaster had been really impressive. Instead?

agent86 · Jan 6, 2009

Hrudey3032 said:
Agent86 why can't you just agree that to some people Everest is a incredible coaster? I mean everything is just a personal preference like are you a Coke or Pepsi person? Rep. or Dem? SSE 94 or SSE TC Era?I have never ridden Everest as I haven't been to DHS since '02 so I can't give a review for it but even I know that not everyone is going to like the same thing.

BTW you say Everest has no redeeming charachteristics? Isn't that just your opinion? To Epcotservo he would say the opposite.

You are absolutely right that it is merely my opinion, as is the vast majority of what I post. The last time I checked, a "discussion" board is generally for the purpose of people expressing their opinions. For me to identify every one of my posts as "This is just my opinion..." seems absurd. That should be a given.

Having said that, if other members are so put off by my expressing an opinion that differs for their own, then I would be inclined to ask them how truly confident they actually are in their opinions. My experience has generally been that when people get so upset at the expression of an opinion that differs from their own opinion or belief, it usually means that opinion or belief is on shaky ground to begin with.

WDW1974 · Jan 6, 2009

whylightbulb said:
I like WDW 1974 and his main points. I agree with him on most things and leave that area of concern in his capable hands. As for me I preach about what I know personally and deal with on a daily basis. This is my business and I do know what I’m talking about. You can believe what you want to but I was there during the end of WDI’s glory days. I’ve worked with Universal Creative and seen how they operate. I’ve worked for Landmark, Creative Presentations Falcons Treehouse and others. Now I own my own company and have been the producer of several attractions, two of which included the design, fabrication and installation of full attractions with so much less available to us than Disney. Others have been for Disney or Universal. I’ve seen many sides of this business and can speak with enough authority whether you want to listen or not. I hope you do listen however, even if you disagree.

I don't have much time this week to be reading or posting ... and Servo's salvo in the never-ending war of how great or crappy (and it's really no where near either) took me almost five minutes to read!

I'm personally done talking about EE unless there's something newsworthy to discuss.

I'm just glad you're here lightbulb as it's very clear you know what you're talking about. I, frankly, wouldn't even put out as much personal info as you are doing because there are some folks here who I find to be a bit ... 'off' ... would be the best word. Certainly not all, but I wouldn't put it above them to try and find out exactly who you are in hopes of winning some imaginary pi$$ing contest by puking out things online that have no place here. You need to be cautious. ... Anyhow, I do enjoy your POV greatly.

I've tried to get a few friends from WDI to post here and they are too smart for that!

Hrudey3032 · Jan 6, 2009

agent86 said:
You are absolutely right that it is merely my opinion, as is the vast majority of what I post. The last time I checked, a "discussion" board is generally for the purpose of people expressing their opinions. For me to identify every one of my posts as "This is just my opinion..." seems absurd. That should be a given.

Having said that, if other members are so put off by my expressing an opinion that differs for their own, then I would be inclined to ask them how truly confident they actually are in their opinions. My experience has generally been that when people get so upset at the expression of an opinion that differs from their own opinion or belief, it usually means that opinion or belief is on shaky ground to begin with.

No you keep stating that you are basically right and Servo is wrong. Look if he feels there is a story there in his mind then so what? He likes it for whatever reason he wants. You don't basically got to keep calling the guy out and trying to rake him over the coals in your posts. He clearly stated why he believes the ride is fantastic in his mind.Do I agree with him? I don't know as I haven't ridden it.Nor do I disagree with you when you say the ride isn't great.

Slash and Burn ...

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Brilliant...and Canadian

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member