mickEblu
Well-Known Member
Maybe they forgot to mention the teaching kitchen?
I’d be willing to wager that more than a few imagineers working on the project aren’t happy about the direction they ended up going.
Maybe they forgot to mention the teaching kitchen?
See, the added context makes a huge difference in a claim like this.Just spoke with someone in the know...I don't often claim this, but I actually spoke to someone with firsthand knowledge (see discussion of when TRON was going to open if you don't believe my source's track record).
Heard this from someone who has connections inside the development process and has no allegiance to Splash or anything like that.
- The missing ingredient is NOT "us" but they wouldn't tell me what it is.
- The story about Iger visiting and not understanding the story of the ride is true and management started scrambling to make changes...even after the attraction had already been have constructed, much to the chagrin of those working on the ride. Some of Iger's confusion had to do with what the secret ingredient is.
- There is no Dr. Facilier on the ride, but there could have been with the plot they have.
I don't speak to this person often and they cannot share very much.
Not understanding parts of the story is not remotely the same thing as saying it's boring...
That isn't a ridiculous thing to say at all, and yes it is wildly different than saying something is boring. For instance, I visited Disneyland Paris when I was a child, with no understanding of the French language at the time. Several of its attractions conveyed the stories almost fully in French, and I didn't fully grasp everything that was going on (though the excellent visual storytelling admittedly helped a lot). I still found them to be extremely enjoyable regardless of anything that went over my head.Really? I think it very much sounds like the same sentiment. If he thought whatever he was walking through was fun would he care that he didn’t fully understand the story? I don’t think so.
“You guys this is looking excellent. Kudos. But I’m going to need you to rework some of these scenes so I can understand it better.”
Did you hear any additional information regarding the amount of AA figures that are supposedly going into the attraction?Just spoke with someone in the know...I don't often claim this, but I actually spoke to someone with firsthand knowledge (see discussion of when TRON was going to open if you don't believe my source's track record).
Heard this from someone who has connections inside the development process and has no allegiance to Splash or anything like that.
- The missing ingredient is NOT "us" but they wouldn't tell me what it is.
- The story about Iger visiting and not understanding the story of the ride is true and management started scrambling to make changes...even after the attraction had already been have constructed, much to the chagrin of those working on the ride. Some of Iger's confusion had to do with what the secret ingredient is.
- There is no Dr. Facilier on the ride, but there could have been with the plot they have.
I don't speak to this person often and they cannot share very much.
That isn't a ridiculous thing to say at all, and yes it is wildly different than saying something is boring. For instance, I visited Disneyland Paris when I was a child, with no understanding of the French language at the time. Several of its attractions conveyed the stories almost fully in French, and I didn't fully grasp everything that was going on (though the excellent visual storytelling admittedly helped a lot). I still found them to be extremely enjoyable regardless of anything that went over my head.
In addition, and to reiterate my prior comments, I don't put any stock in what Iger thinks. Assuming it's true. Have you considered that Iger is simply an idiot? Because he is. Or in a different context, perhaps he meant that guests would be too stupid to understand and need things dumbed down and explained to them like infants. Also on brand for Iger.
Given how much negativity there is here towards Iger (including from myself in particular), I don't really know why anyone would use his supposed negative comments as evidence of the ride being poor. I am more worried that his interference comes with the significant danger of making the ride's story worse rather than better.
Not about the amount, just that they are NOT screen-faced. Those are not happening for this ride.Did you hear any additional information regarding the amount of AA figures that are supposedly going into the attraction?
What Mickey Views claimed initially was that Iger said the ride is "boring". What imagineer97 is claiming is that Iger said the plot of the ride isn't clear. Those are definitely not the same things.Aren’t you making my point with your first paragraph? You’re saying you didn’t fully understand the stories on some of those attractions but still had a lot fun.
As far as creativity goes, Iger is in fact a dolt. But even on the business side of things, he's not nearly as intelligent as a lot of his supporters try to paint him. Discussing this further will inevitably lead to this post being deleted however as it veers offtopic.I’m not a big fan of Iger but calling someone who managed to become CEO of Disney an “idiot” doesn’t make any sense.
This is a good point and it's what makes me a bit leery of this information. If it were the scenery he had a problem with, then I could buy that being a thing that came up in the discussion. What is shown in CGI ridethroughs isn't always accurately replicated in real life, so perhaps he might say "this doesn't look as good as I expected". But as the CEO, he SHOULD already know full well what the story is and how it relates to each scene without needing to step foot inside the building.The other thing that people need to consider with regards to Iger's rumored comments is that he's "ridden" the ride already multiple times in The DISH.
Previsualization for attractions like this is more advanced than ever, and that tech has been developed specifically for the purpose of avoiding major construction issues. You get the ride experience designed, tourable, and working upfront in the digital realm so that potential complaints like "it's boring" can be fielded before you start building for real.
If Bob had big issues with this ride he would have had multiple opportunities to voice them before the jackhammers started. Almost everything he'd have encountered in the physical ridespace sometime in the past month or two would either have been installed based off of what he'd already seen or would be an unfinished space where something he okayed is preparing to go.
But as I've said before, if there somehow *were* some major recent shakeup that wasn't accounted for by the above (despite how unlikely that would be) Disney wouldn't be sitting on their hands about it. They know full well that this ride needs to impress.
I think we're somewhat in agreement. To be clear, I don't think Iger has made any point to be intimately involved with the development process on this attraction. He is typically very hands-off as things come together (as well he *generally* should be, he has much bigger fish to fry and Disney pays other people to be creative) and I'm sure that has continued here.What Mickey Views claimed initially was that Iger said the ride is "boring". What imagineer97 is claiming is that Iger said the plot of the ride isn't clear. Those are definitely not the same things.
It's possible to find something entertaining without understanding everything that is going on. Likewise, it is also possible for something to have a 100% clear plot but to also be dull as dirt. Boring and confusing are two completely different types of criticism.
As far as creativity goes, Iger is in fact a dolt. But even on the business side of things, he's not nearly as intelligent as a lot of his supporters try to paint him. Discussing this further will inevitably lead to this post being deleted however as it veers offtopic.
This is a good point and it's what makes me a bit leery of this information. If it were the scenery he had a problem with, then I could buy that being a thing that came up in the discussion. What is shown in CGI ridethroughs isn't always accurately replicated in real life, so perhaps he might say "this doesn't look as good as I expected". But as the CEO, he SHOULD already know full well what the story is and how it relates to each scene without needing to step foot inside the building.
That said, it's important to point out that it isn't a certainty that Iger has bothered to actually keep an eye on the attraction's development. He has a general lack of any interest in the parks. It's not out of the realm of possibility that he had in fact been mostly ignoring the specifics of its development before that supposed on-site tour.
That said, I was also told that Iger supposedly cares about the success of this ride on some significant level. He was a key figure in the decision to remove Splash in the first place. And I gather he even had a hand in raising the budget for the replacement after public reaction towards TBA was much more negative than expected. So while he's usually very disinterested and hands-off with projects like this, I could see this being a rare exception.
According to @Inspired Figment, he only became CEO by manipulating and forcing Roy Disney.I’m not a big fan of Iger but calling someone who managed to become CEO of Disney an “idiot” doesn’t make any sense.
Other than the contentious mural, what are you referring to?But the rest is a visual culinary abortion.
We don't know what's going on inside. But based on what we can see outside, it's a mess. And they've certainly wasted time and money on it when the results are mostly anachronistic and visually-muddled. It's a hodgepodge of whatever and it looks it. You can't just throw random ingredients in a pot and call it gumbo. There's been little to convenience me that Carter and company know what they're doing. The greens are nice. And the water tower is palatable. But the rest is a visual culinary abortion. I think they could have used their finances and talents to better results.I may be in the minority here, but does anyone else think they are wasting money redoing so much of the outside and queue when that money could be spent on things inside the attraction or even others that need some tlc?
Other than the contentious mural, what are you referring to?
Splash didn’t have a giant princess tiara out in front.
Nothing says “Frontierland” more than a giant princess tiara!
When they built Everest all those years ago they designed the line based on areas in Tibet. "It looks raggedy" I remember some saying whilst others marvelled at the authenticity of the research and design. They're never going to please everyone but it's not a new thing to travel to different places to decide how to theme a queue.My point is that the WDI team isn’t too concerned if it fits. Or at least not as concerned as the primary reason for it existing. I’m about 99% sure that it TBA was built 6 years ago that mural wouldn’t exist.
I think the art looks fine. It has its place. Its place just isn’t at Frontierland and part of an attraction that’s supposed to be set in 1920’s New Orleans. The one with Louis looks out of place but the other one with those faces (that I’m not sure I saw until recently) really looks out of place. I do believe things can be objectively ugly or beautiful.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
