-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
DHS Monster Inc Land Coming to Disney's Hollywood Studios
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
HMF
Well-Known Member
Disney's definition of "Attraction" has changed over the years. So who knows what they mean by "Show".
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
Think they’ll ever do anything with the large building in the middle of the park that features embarrassing Frozen karaoke (the performers try) and a TV cartoon clip show? Talk about “underutilized space.”
Brer Panther
Well-Known Member
I'm sure somebody is going to claim that the sing-along is too popular to remove, but somehow I doubt the Mickey Shorts Theater is more popular than MuppetVision was.
Everything that attracts people is an attraction. Even walk-thru elements. So, a *show* will be called an attraction. A M&G spot like Princess Hall will be called an attraction.
For this new Monstropolis land, there are two attractions: A coaster, and a new show.
The fact is, WDW has used the phrase "new show." Trying to equivocate "attraction" is completely irrelevant. Can you point to where a M&G has been called a *show*?
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
And I'd say that's why it feels dated. The show feels groundbreaking and absurdist for its day. I love Python, but there stuff certainly feels of a certain era. Muppets are a bit more modern, but the attraction felt very late 80's/early 90's. Being a child of that age, it certainly holds a lot of nostalgia for me, but I definitely felt the age of it when I took a friend on it a few years back.
mattpeto
Well-Known Member
I’m actually with @Casper Gutman on MV3D. Didn’t feel dated to me.
easyrowrdw
Well-Known Member
On my last trip I overheard a little kid say, “I love the Muppets,” as we walked into the theater. There were lots of laughs and kids shouting and pointing (at Bean) during the show. That kind of reaction didn’t happen at every show I saw but it was definitely the majority of the time.
Charlie The Chatbox Ghost
Well-Known Member
I agree, I’ve always used “attraction” as a catch all for anything to do or see in the park (that’s intentional). Then you break it down into rides (coasters, dark rides, trains and boats), shows (AA shows, stage shows), or entertainment (street performances, parades, fireworks). I guess walk throughs are their own singular category, haha
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
I suspect we’re quibbling over terminology rather than actually disagreeing with each other. “Dated” tends to have pejorative overtones, which may explain your resistance to the term. I think @BrianLo put it well by saying that the “material is timeless” even if it is clearly the product of a different age.
CosmicDuck
Well-Known Member
I understand your POV and under almost any other circumstance I would agree, but I actually think in the case of MV3D - Disney had a responsibility to preserve the show as a piece of irreplaceable art and history. And I'd even argue had the original attraction been built in Disneyland by Henson & crew, the company would agree with me. But because the executives running Walt Disney World for some reason have almost none of the same sense of preservation and legacy that Walt's original park has, they feel emboldened to continue to chip away at the edges of what makes those parks great. Not sure if you've had the chance to visit Disneyland, but you should stop by Great Moments with Mr Lincoln some time and count how many people you see seated on a regular basis. Yet there's a reason they're adding a rotating show to that theater and not replacing it.
MV3D was a singular piece of art from one of the greatest living artists of our time, it does not exist anywhere else in the world. It does not function as a painting which can be moved, or a simple digital recording which can live on a streaming service. I don't care if that theater had ten seats or ten thousand, there should always be a way for someone to come sit down and see the final work of Jim Henson. The same way I can fly to the Louvre and look at the Mona Lisa. The LEAST the company could do is move the dozen or so animatronics and a couple of the seats to the Center for Puppetry Arts but for some inexplicable reason they can not bring themselves to do that, and people should not be letting them off the hook for it. There's not a single other thing at Walt Disney World that carries this kind of historical significance in my opinion.
Last edited:
Baloo124
Premium Member
Restrooms as well. I can't imagine a scenario where someone goes into one of those unintentionally.
JMcMahonEsq
Well-Known Member
Why would they want to do something else with the building as oppose to using it for a show in connection with its franchise which is one of the most successful in history. That sells merchandise like crazy, and is constantly filled up for every performance?
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
Because the show is an embarrassment (I felt sorry for the excellent but stranded performers) and the theatre absolutely does not fill up?
Bocabear
Well-Known Member
I agree... It was meant as a bit of temporary filler and has somehow managed to stay... Almost as if Disney can't come up with any new show ideas.... So a cartoon clip show and a singalong become headliners....at a $179.00 admission price...
or the decades-old BATB show....that also is showing it's age... At this point, just start importing old shows from Disneyland... Their Snow White show was beautiful and very well done, Mickey and the Magical Map...etc. They seem to have a better grasp of entertainment on the West coast.....
It absolutely does.
Hyperion Theater filled up every time I went (several times a trip, three trips a year since it opened).
Myself and the people there adored it.
One of the actors became sort of famous for his improv. People on these forums lauded him for it.
Nothing cringe about it.
Myself and the people there adored it.
One of the actors became sort of famous for his improv. People on these forums lauded him for it.
Nothing cringe about it.