TCM teams up with Disney to refresh Great Movie Ride

[prberk]

Anyone know what the wires are for in these scenes? The ones running diagonally. I don't recall seeing them when I rode, only noticed them in the pictures later.

DSCF2158 by smerrick, on Flickr

DSCF2156 by smerrick, on Flickr

Don't know about the wires, but is it just me, or does Mary seem completely uncomfortable in that scene?

I was always impressed byt some of the AAs in this ride (especially the Wicked Witch in Oz), but I have to say that the Mary Poppins and Bert ones in that scene always looked bad to me. Like bad wax figures. And Mary looks completely stilted.

 

[Lord_Vader]

Don't know about the wires, but is it just me, or does Mary seem completely uncomfortable in that scene?

I was always impressed byt some of the AAs in this ride (especially the Wicked Witch in Oz), but I have to say that the Mary Poppins and Bert ones in that scene always looked bad to me. Like bad wax figures. And Mary looks completely stilted.

She does have a look as though someone stuck a giant stick up her...

 

[Pirate665]

The wires in the pics are for the scrim. If your talking about the wires for the AAs, they're where you think they are. Marys back, Nelly's foot, and Bert's... umm... backside of water.

 

[1023]

The wires in the pics are for the scrim. If your talking about the wires for the AAs, they're where you think they are. Marys back, Nelly's foot, and Bert's... umm... backside of water.

Accurate! The scrims help to make the AA's appear more real as you are very close to them. Or they do that when they are actually there anyway...

*1023*

 

[Bocabear]

I still can't believe they haven't replaced that scene over the years. Its so self-contained you could do it with minimal consequence... yet it's been such a broken window for so long. The apathy that scene's existence over all these years represents is so sad.

Why on earth with present day technology can they not just fix the damned turntable, and then through digital mapping projections, Create all the moving waterfalls as if it is actually happening... it can be done, it would not be ridiculously expensive and would probably look better than when they had the actual water running.

 

[Bocabear]

Quick question about the ending film:

Does anyone know if The Incredibles was in the original version of the finale or was that added with the new update?

Was The Incredibles released in the early 90s? Then it probably was not in the original film

 

[dstrawn9889]

Was The Incredibles released in the early 90s? Then it probably was not in the original film

wow harsh, true, but harsh

 

[yoda_5729]

Well, remember, Disney and Lucasfilm had a very good working relationship for about a quarter century before the buy, and during a good portion of that time, Spielberg wasn't doing business with Disney (there's a reason Dreamworks first live action film was called "Mouse Hunt"), so I don't count Kathleen Kennedy's current position as "proof" of mended fences. The Dreamworks distribution can be chalked up to the Hollywood "frenemies" situation that often crops up, and, as noted above, I was only just made aware that he's directing a movie.

Actually, from what I remember, the first at least released Dreamworks movie was The Peacemaker with George Clooney and Nicole Kidman. Also, as I recall the mouse wins in Mouse Hunt. (Sorry, just read that another poster posted this, and I did not see the reply, sorry for the dual responses, Mr Black.)


I think the animosity for Dreamworks with Disney came largely from Katzenberg, as he had just been fired from the company. Spielberg from what I've seen (and I can only say what I've seen) had been fairly respectful towards Disney. In a lot of ways Spielberg was hugely responsible for Universal Orlando though in it's beginning, so there is competition right there (I'm aware of the Mickey Mouse ears in the Jaws attraction). I think if Spielberg really had a large disdain for Disney, Indiana Jones wouldn't have been present in the parks, as though I know George Lucas has a say in the franchise, so would Spielberg I would think. Also, form a news report I read a few months back, I think Disney is now the distributer for many of the Dreamworks movies, including the Academy Award winning Lincoln.

 

[Magenta Panther]

Actually, from what I remember, the first at least released Dreamworks movie was The Peacemaker with George Clooney and Nicole Kidman. Also, as I recall the mouse wins in Mouse Hunt. (Sorry, just read that another poster posted this, and I did not see the reply, sorry for the dual responses, Mr Black.)


I think the animosity for Dreamworks with Disney came largely from Katzenberg, as he had just been fired from the company. Spielberg from what I've seen (and I can only say what I've seen) had been fairly respectful towards Disney. In a lot of ways Spielberg was hugely responsible for Universal Orlando though in it's beginning, so there is competition right there (I'm aware of the Mickey Mouse ears in the Jaws attraction). I think if Spielberg really had a large disdain for Disney, Indiana Jones wouldn't have been present in the parks, as though I know George Lucas has a say in the franchise, so would Spielberg I would think. Also, form a news report I read a few months back, I think Disney is now the distributer for many of the Dreamworks movies, including the Academy Award winning Lincoln.

If you want to see a more complete story about Katzenberg's issues with Eisner and Roy Disney, watch "Waking Sleeping Beauty". It's available from Amazon Instant Video and probably Netflix. Really gets into the Disney revival in the '90's and the ego clashes that arose during that time. I tell ya...we humans...even when things are going really great, we just HAVE to mess things up somehow...

 

[FoozieBear]

Was The Incredibles released in the early 90s? Then it probably was not in the original film

I was talking about the previous update.

 

[Bocabear]

There was a a previous update?

 

[FoozieBear]

There was a a previous update?

Um...yes? They had scenes from movies like Narnia in it which came out in 2005, so it makes sense to have The Incredibles in it.

 

[erasure fan1]

I really don't like the new narration from the head of TCM. He just doesn't have the right sound and energy. It just feels off to me.

 

[Tuvalu]

I was talking about the previous update.

The Incredibles was not in the previous update. It is new .

 

[Goofyernmost]

Don't know about the wires, but is it just me, or does Mary seem completely uncomfortable in that scene?

You would look uncomfortable too if you knew that everyone was looking up your skirt.

 

[yoda_5729]

The thing I find odd about the montage, which granted I have only seen it on youtube and not in person is some of the head scratching selections of the movie scenes themselves. For example, when Frozen appears, forgetting the controversies of if it belongs or not, the scene appears to be just the characters standing there. Not the scene of Elsa making the ice castle?

When the ride first updated, in the montage they had Jack Sparrow as the scene from Pirates, of when he tricks his opponents into following him and looks one way with a sly smirk on his face. They got rid of that perfectly acceptable scene (a shorter one at that), and went with a scene of Barbossa turning into a skeleton with dialogue, and Elizabeth Swann. The single biggest character in the franchise is nowhere to be found?

The Incredibles scene is just basically the team posing. Recently I watched a few of Pixars movies, and the balloons appearing from behind the house in Up, or Wall-E reaching out to touch Saturn's rings are more impressive visually.

I do love the Great Movie Ride, and anything that keeps it around and fairly intact I am for. It just seems to me like this was a rough draft, like "We need to get Frozen and Pirates in there, and we'll go back later and pick the proper scene from each," later. I still can't grasp why that Tangled scene is there either. If you wanted a Disney villain there are dozens more iconic.

On this page we discussed the concepts of exploring other movies then just strictly the Disney ones, but even if you were going to only pick Disney movies, they appear to be picking fairly generic scenes to represent them. With all the true glorious artwork that has been done by Disney over the years the fact that two of the modern movies represented are just characters standing there (Frozen and Incredibles), is pretty confusing. Some scenes they got right, but others, using the exact same movie, I can think of better examples.

Mary Poppins as a movie's significance is hard to overstate, but in the movie montage, Mary Poppins isn't even featured, though Dick Van is visually, in song, and in animatronic? Really. Three shout outs to Dick Van from Mary Poppins, having more time then Julie Andrews (who played the title character and won the Academy Award)? It's just all head scratching to me.

 

[Pirate665]

Ole Burt was there to do a job, and do a job he did. Carry a scene he right says, carry a scene. And carry a scene by George he does!

**read in bad cockney accent**

 

[Bairstow]

Why on earth with present day technology can they not just fix the damned turntable, and then through digital mapping projections, Create all the moving waterfalls as if it is actually happening... it can be done, it would not be ridiculously expensive and would probably look better than when they had the actual water running.

Yeah, but who's gonna pay for all that stuff? You?

 

[BrerJon]

I'm so pleased they've got rid of the cheesy 90s jokes 'I see dead people! Oh it's George of the Jungle' etc., and the new CM script is much better, but the voiceover guy is soooo dull, really need some charisma classes!

 

[Fantasmicguy]

The thing I find odd about the montage, which granted I have only seen it on youtube and not in person is some of the head scratching selections of the movie scenes themselves. For example, when Frozen appears, forgetting the controversies of if it belongs or not, the scene appears to be just the characters standing there. Not the scene of Elsa making the ice castle?

When the ride first updated, in the montage they had Jack Sparrow as the scene from Pirates, of when he tricks his opponents into following him and looks one way with a sly smirk on his face. They got rid of that perfectly acceptable scene (a shorter one at that), and went with a scene of Barbossa turning into a skeleton with dialogue, and Elizabeth Swann. The single biggest character in the franchise is nowhere to be found?

The Incredibles scene is just basically the team posing. Recently I watched a few of Pixars movies, and the balloons appearing from behind the house in Up, or Wall-E reaching out to touch Saturn's rings are more impressive visually.

I do love the Great Movie Ride, and anything that keeps it around and fairly intact I am for. It just seems to me like this was a rough draft, like "We need to get Frozen and Pirates in there, and we'll go back later and pick the proper scene from each," later. I still can't grasp why that Tangled scene is there either. If you wanted a Disney villain there are dozens more iconic.

On this page we discussed the concepts of exploring other movies then just strictly the Disney ones, but even if you were going to only pick Disney movies, they appear to be picking fairly generic scenes to represent them. With all the true glorious artwork that has been done by Disney over the years the fact that two of the modern movies represented are just characters standing there (Frozen and Incredibles), is pretty confusing. Some scenes they got right, but others, using the exact same movie, I can think of better examples.

Mary Poppins as a movie's significance is hard to overstate, but in the movie montage, Mary Poppins isn't even featured, though **** Van **** is visually, in song, and in animatronic? Really. Three shout outs to **** Van **** from Mary Poppins, having more time then Julie Andrews (who played the title character and won the Academy Award)? It's just all head scratching to me.

Wait you really can't say that?