UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
I had the opposite thought -- pretty sure I'd enjoy that less than the River Adventure. There are a couple of cool parts, but most of it is just watching videos play on screens around you.
-
The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More -
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Zootopia and Moana Blue Sky concepts for Disney's Animal Kingdom
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
I had the opposite thought -- pretty sure I'd enjoy that less than the River Adventure. There are a couple of cool parts, but most of it is just watching videos play on screens around you.
drnilescrane
Well-Known Member
They did come up with an attraction that is a thesis statement for the park as it exists in 2023. You just don't like that statement.
(It's "Live Your Ultimate Adventure", BTW)
Trust me, I want the Hollywood that never was version of the park back too. But if I really meant it I'd go get a job at WDI so I could affect the change I want. But it's complicated - there are so many moving parts. No one person really has control over this.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
They also could have just left GMR as is, even if it wasn't overly popular, because the park needs the capacity. MMRR as a new build would have been a much bigger help to the park.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
I find this hilariously vague. It could apply to almost anything.
drnilescrane
Well-Known Member
Which I think was the goal. DCA has basically become the same thing - "adventure" with the veneer of California.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
I agree that was probably the goal. It's just a bit silly because at that point why even bother with a thesis statement at all?
drnilescrane
Well-Known Member
No, because it was expensive to operate.
The formula is guest satisfaction (which is converted to a dollar value as a fraction of gate revenue) + ancillary revenue must be greater than operating cost.
Even if a ride is heavily trafficked, but people come off really hating it, it starts to "lose" money and also negatively impact overall park sentiment. Which brings us to the new lowest rated attraction, Dinosaur.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
What in the....no..no, they didn't. What is this myth going around that DHS somehow 'changed' themes? No, it HAD themes, and now it just doesn't. Ride the movies isn't a theme. Nor is "live your ultimate adventure." those are both premises. The park is now a bootleg Universal Studios. I actually never liked the themes of DHS much, but it did have them at least. Now it simply...doesn't?
I don't...care about having the old DHS back. Like me personally, I never much cared for the park. But that doesn't stop me from acknowledging that it was creatively superior then to what it is now. Now it's just a random collection of attractions with its own corporate slogan, lol what even is an 'ultimate adventure,' it's so vague, give me a break Bob.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
Well remember Disney loves to cut on show quality because AAs are expensive to maintain. So they let things rot and/or replace them with inferior versions using screens and projection mapping.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
I believe that's the formula, but I also think it's wrong and Disney is making an operational mistake. Capacity is important, and it's not like GMR was just sitting empty (like Imagination is most of the time).
The park experience is better with more attractions running. MMRR replacing GMR (instead of being a new build) hurt the park for guests even if they hated GMR and would never ride it.
It's the exact same mistake they're going to make with Dinosaur. They're spending millions (or hundreds of millions) and doing very little to improve the park experience, because the parks were already underbuilt.
There is admittedly a small improvement if the replacement is more popular than the previous attraction (which isn't a guarantee), but it's not the improvement you'd get with a brand new build unless the previous attraction was essentially unused.
Last edited:
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
And capacity plays a role in satisfaction. When there are fewer things with longer waits people will be less satisfied. An unliked experience has more room to stick out in the crowd.
drnilescrane
Well-Known Member
I will absolutely concede that the WDW theme parks have unusually thin attraction rosters (aside from WDS-P) and that is an issue.
But I also strongly believe that WDW has grown to a scale that's really hard to effectively curate and manage, let alone operationalize. I wish the property had 3 strong parks vs the 4 weaker ones we have.
But I also strongly believe that WDW has grown to a scale that's really hard to effectively curate and manage, let alone operationalize. I wish the property had 3 strong parks vs the 4 weaker ones we have.
Brer Panther
Well-Known Member
Did people really not like the Great Movie Ride? I don't remember seeing anyone trash talk it. Maybe say that it needed an update...
Isn't the plot of the Zootopia ride going to be that Bellwether escaped from jail and Judy and Nick need the riders' help to arrest her again?
I thought the new theme was "a salute to all movies, but mostly Star Wars".
doctornick
Well-Known Member
I can't speak for anyone else, but I would rate it really low amongst Disney attractions. Especially after (I think) they stopped having entertainment CMs as the characters in the ride and used operations instead - the relatively poor acting would make it a big drag especially since you knew the "surprise" coming. We literally would do it - especially because when my kids were young - because there was so little else to do in the park and because the wait using wasn't that bad. But I wouldn't have been willing to wait very long for it or been sad to not do it on a day in that park.
To me, it's not even comparable how much better that MMRR is than GMR. I wouldn't argue that MMRR is better themed or more appropriate or anything like that but it's a lot more fun and enjoyable and ultimately that makes a big difference.
I mean, I would have kept GMR for capacity reasons, but I don't really mourn it not being around (I just think DHS needs more overall rides).
Last edited:
DocAlan02
Active Member
When did they have entertainment folks do it? I was in attractions in '91/'92. I was about to transfer from EPCOT (Seas/Wonders) to GMR when I switched out of attractions completely. There was an audition involved, yes, but I was in attractions, not entertainment. I would have been playing those roles.
Suspirian
Well-Known Member
Its a hame Strange World was such a flop. Not that the movie had any Dinosaurs, but the whole family of adventurers thing could be applied to literally anything in DAK that they felt was underperforming.
Disgruntled Walt
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
I think it depended on the particular CMs who were performing. We had some that really knocked it out of the park, and others who treated it like was their 10th time doing it in a day (which it might have been for all I know).
Do you have a timeframe for when they switched over?
Advisable Joseph
Well-Known Member
It's a spoiler, but
It turns out the animals were being drugged. The drug made them violent, like bath salts. Yes, that would be a bad thing. It also worked the same and both predators and prey.
The reason it seemed plausible that there was a reversion to their wild state was because they were not human, but rather different species which did retain characteristics of their ancestors.
Advisable Joseph
Well-Known Member
Well, maybe if you had a co-host explaining why polar bears like to live in cold environments, etc.