DAK 'Encanto' and 'Indiana Jones'-themed experiences at Animal Kingdom

[Disney Analyst]

So, TLDR, Dinosaur was a much stronger attraction than Indy and much better than most people thought it was in my humble opinion.

The good new is you only lost me with your very last sentence, which means I read the entire thing, but I fully disagree.

A broken Indy > > > > A perfect Dinosaur.

 

[Mickeynerd17]

The good new is you only lost me with your very last sentence, which means I read the entire thing, but I fully disagree.

A broken Indy > > > > A perfect Dinosaur.

To each their own, but I appreciate it either way.

I grew up with the Florida parks. To say I'm not biased would most definitely be incorrect haha. I may be heading back to DLR this year so perhaps I can get a better experience on Indy.

 

[HMF]

You have to put it all in perspective. The reason Disney is doing this is not because they’re trying to improve the guest experience or because it’s a good fit for the park. They’re doing it because they believe it’s a popular enough IP to boost attendance to the park and the ride. Dinosaur had many issues, but the giant dinosaur animatronics were not one of them (unless you’re talking to maintenance workers). What we will likely see is a brief attendance spike around the opening window before it settles down to the exact popularity the ride has before.

Never mind the fact that Dinosaur the ride Which was originally called "Countdown to Extinction " well outlived the hype for Disney's Dinosaur movie from the year 2000.

 

[HMF]

Frankly the main character is the annoying scientist who want stop talking the ENTIRE ride.

That was unfortunately a common trait of WDI Show Writing at that time. Imagination 2 and 3 being the other obvious examples.

 

[HMF]

I think with hindsight most would, however just looking at the timeframe of when Animal Kingdom was being built i kinda get why they chose Dinoland. Budget gets slashed, you either pick an area with (relatively) minor theming and an E ticket that will be using a ride system that you already have made and you know for a fact that a film is being made that will (in theory) help promote the area and vice versa.

Compared to Beastly Kingdom which is going to need a far higher budget to theme the area, plus the main E ticket is going to be a heavily themed thrill coaster. I see why Eisner chose the former even if the latter would’ve been better

Yes, but I would have actually honored building it later versus selling it to James Cameron.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

A broken Indy > > > > A perfect Dinosaur.

I think you’d agree that it matters how broken though!

 

[veritas55]

Crappy attractions get long lines all the time. Frozen Ever After gets incredibly long lines even though the ride isn't anything to write home about.

Of course, this ignores that Frozen has maximum of about 1,000 PPH (less than half of Dinosaur) and that it's an extremely popular IP, especially for kids.

Look, the mathematics don't lie and are about as factual as one can get: Dinosaur's lines are disproportionately shorter than any other major E-ticket ride at any of the parks -- including Animal Kingdom -- even when controlling for ride capacity. Even Mission:Space outperforms it.

There really isn't any other reasonable conclusion to derive from these average wait times other than: this wasn't a very popular ride. It wasn't location. It wasn't the park. It was the ride.

Why is that such a controversial take?

 

[gorillaball]

Oh i think it helps, I just mean the IP itself doesn't seem to have as much in the way of merchandizing opportunities as just the generic dinosaur options. I mean even when the IP was in the height of its popularity, it didn't have the merchandising push that say star wars, or transformers, or other 80s/90s IP did.

As for the video game, i know it had about 4M players, and did well for a video game, but i still don't see it pushing merchandizing like dinosaurs do. I mean take games that were way more popular than that at their height, like Halo, or Fortnight, in a battle between those IP and Dinosaurs, i still then the generic dinosaur wins in sales.

100% legit question, when deciding what will or won’t be a good ride, why do we care one bit about merchandise sales? Honestly, I’m missing the point somewhere and just want to understand.

If I’m a Disney exec making decisions I care. This decision has been made. If it sells $10 billion in trinkets or not a cent doesn’t change the ride experience - which is all I care about.

Dinosaurs being sold in the gift shop didn’t help make the ride any better.

 

[veritas55]

The good new is you only lost me with your very last sentence, which means I read the entire thing, but I fully disagree.

A broken Indy > > > > A perfect Dinosaur.

And it's not even close. Dinosaur was a super-weird ride experience that felt like a bunch of jerky traffic stops to look at semi-operable dinosaurs, punctuated by mostly lurches through darkness and nothingness, with an incessantly yapping annoying narrator along.

In contrast, Indy is an interesting "story" and setting, with lots of cool little set pieces, and a couple super memorable reveals/ moments: like the big room / statute/ bridge reveal and the rolling boulder. Someone remind me of a single great, memorable scene in Dinosaur?

 

[Disney Analyst]

I think you’d agree that it matters how broken though!

Oh for sure

 

[MisterPenguin]

LOL, a franchise from 30 plus years ago, who's movies have only gone down in popularity and watches as the franchise has gotten older, including its last movie getting killed at the box office, and yet the IP isn't dated because it had a first person shooter video game that had some success?

You'd wipe out a 30-year-old franchise just because its latest attempt at theatrical revival flopped?

OK, then. Say good-bye to Snow White.

 

[KDM31091]

I just will never get why it has to be an either or, in a property with nothing but size. Why not improve Dinosaur and add these things elsewhere? Of course I loved Dinosaur as is but I see people’s points about Indy. I just get tired of tradeoffs when we should be getting true expansions. Notwithstanding that Indy has basically nothing to do with this park and that’s why they chose Dinosaur initially. But today’s Disney doesn’t care.

 

[Brer Oswald]

And it's not even close. Dinosaur was a super-weird ride experience that felt like a bunch of jerky traffic stops to look at semi-operable dinosaurs, punctuated by mostly lurches through darkness and nothingness, with an incessantly yapping annoying narrator along.

In contrast, Indy is an interesting "story" and setting, with lots of cool little set pieces, and a couple super memorable reveals/ moments: like the big room / statute/ bridge reveal and the rolling boulder. Someone remind me of a single great, memorable scene in Dinosaur?

The dinosaurs were the stars of the attraction. Every confrontation with the Carnotaurus was awesome, as was the seen with the larger Dino chowing down on the smaller Dino. The ride’s biggest problems lie with the ride portions themselves. Unlike the more reactive EMV of IJA, the Time Rover jerks and wiggles nonstop. The track layout is a much simpler version of IJA, and it lacks the impressive finale drop that the California ride has. Instead it has a slow awkward descent down an incline.

The solution to the problem was not to evict the dinosaurs. It was to retool the ride experience while maintaining the current theme. Fill out the empty areas with new sets. Make the Carnotaurus chase segment more real. Give the EMVs a new motion profile. Add in a drop at the finale.

We’re not getting the impressive sprawling temple room with this retheme. We will be lucky to get the boulder scene and the drop shoehorned into where the final Carno head was. Instead, we’re going to get lightly themed temple hallways with projection effects, and 3 or 4 animatronics of Indy and the Quetzalcoatl. It will be the most halfhearted Indiana Jones attraction you will see. Even more than the coaster in Paris.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Look, the mathematics don't lie and are about as factual as one can get: Dinosaur's lines are disproportionately shorter than any other major E-ticket ride at any of the parks -- including Animal Kingdom --

Everest average is 29 minutes vs. 22.
I believe Everest has less riders per hour too.

 

[UNCgolf]

Of course, this ignores that Frozen has maximum of about 1,000 PPH (less than half of Dinosaur) and that it's an extremely popular IP, especially for kids.

Look, the mathematics don't lie and are about as factual as one can get: Dinosaur's lines are disproportionately shorter than any other major E-ticket ride at any of the parks -- including Animal Kingdom -- even when controlling for ride capacity. Even Mission:Space outperforms it.

There really isn't any other reasonable conclusion to derive from these average wait times other than: this wasn't a very popular ride. It wasn't location. It wasn't the park. It was the ride.

Why is that such a controversial take?

From a mathematics standpoint you really can't call Dinosaur underperforming because it was a fully utilized attraction; they weren't sending out empty vehicles (which does happen on other Disney attractions, like Little Mermaid).

That has nothing to do with the ride quality -- I think Indiana Jones will be a better attraction than Dinosaur was -- but from a parks operations perspective the switch isn't going to change much for Animal Kingdom. Tropical Americas as a whole will, though.

 

[Brer Panther]

and that it's an extremely popular IP, especially for kids.

Well, obviously.

It wasn't location. It wasn't the park. It was the ride.

Why? Somehow I doubt people were skipping it just because it was about dinosaurs. And if the ride wasn't good enough, surely there was a way to improve it without removing the dinosaurs?

The solution to the problem was not to evict the dinosaurs. It was to retool the ride experience while maintaining the current theme. Fill out the empty areas with new sets. Make the Carnotaurus chase segment more real. Give the EMVs a new motion profile. Add in a drop at the finale.

We’re not getting the impressive sprawling temple room with this retheme. We will be lucky to get the boulder scene and the drop shoehorned into where the final Carno head was. Instead, we’re going to get lightly themed temple hallways with projection effects, and 3 or 4 animatronics of Indy and the Quetzalcoatl. It will be the most halfhearted Indiana Jones attraction you will see. Even more than the coaster in Paris.

Yes. All of this.

 

[JD80]

Some always bring up size as why we can't just endlessly expand the parks. The parks weren't deisgned to just add more and more layers outside the original design. These parks weren't designed for that.

@tommyhawkins just had a good read on his substack about building a 5th gate and how it should be designed for expansion with the infrastructure to support it.

 

[veritas55]

The dinosaurs were the stars of the attraction. Every confrontation with the Carnotaurus was awesome, as was the seen with the larger Dino chowing down on the smaller Dino. The ride’s biggest problems lie with the ride portions themselves. Unlike the more reactive EMV of IJA, the Time Rover jerks and wiggles nonstop. The track layout is a much simpler version of IJA, and it lacks the impressive finale drop that the California ride has. Instead it has a slow awkward descent down an incline.

The solution to the problem was not to evict the dinosaurs. It was to retool the ride experience while maintaining the current theme. Fill out the empty areas with new sets. Make the Carnotaurus chase segment more real. Give the EMVs a new motion profile. Add in a drop at the finale.

We’re not getting the impressive sprawling temple room with this retheme. We will be lucky to get the boulder scene and the drop shoehorned into where the final Carno head was. Instead, we’re going to get lightly themed temple hallways with projection effects, and 3 or 4 animatronics of Indy and the Quetzalcoatl. It will be the most halfhearted Indiana Jones attraction you will see. Even more than the coaster in Paris.

do we actually know what the new Indy will look like? or is this just what you suspect will happen? (If the latter, I'm not doubting that they may go on the cheap here, given the time frame. But I'm secretly hopeful there has been lots of behind of the scenes design-work and set fabrication and the 1.5 year frame is just removal and installation of the existing showbuilding, which would allow for impressive sets and projections to be installed.)

I don't disagree there was a way to re-do Dinosaur and keep the dinosaurs theme. But I think it required substantial re-doing. For instance, they could have used the "Indy temple room / bridge scene" to have you open to an expansive diorama of a primordial lagoon/ dinosaur scene with Sauropods feeding and a night sky (setting the stage for the meteor) -- something awe-inspiring (because all the scenes in Dinosaur were mostly limited close-ups - no real expansive, broad scenes). And yes use projections and other moments rather than just a checklist of stops before dinosaurs.

 

[veritas55]

Why? Somehow I doubt people were skipping it just because it was about dinosaurs. And if the ride wasn't good enough, surely there was a way to improve it without removing the dinosaurs?

I don't think people were necessarily skipping the ride or that dinosaurs turned anybody off.
I think people rode it, and then when they got off had a general "meh" impression and didn't feel a great need to re-ride it.
It just wasn't a high-demand ride. That doesn't make it a bad ride.

But it makes it understandable why Disney eventually believed it was expendable.

 

[veritas55]

From a mathematics standpoint you really can't call Dinosaur underperforming because it was a fully utilized attraction; they weren't sending out empty vehicles (which does happen on other Disney attractions, like Little Mermaid).

That has nothing to do with the ride quality -- I think Indiana Jones will be a better attraction than Dinosaur was -- but from a parks operations perspective the switch isn't going to change much for Animal Kingdom. Tropical Americas as a whole will, though.

Well, I believe Disney looks at more than just does a ride send out empty vehicles.

They are interested, particularly nowadays, in lightning lane sales, which have a very strong correlation to demand (which is correlated to waiting times). Dinosaur's lightning lane sales were a tiny fraction of FOP, Guardians, Rise, Tower, etc.

Disney surely considers the appeal/ demand of the ride in terms of whether it has an impact on guests desire to return. Part of the ROI analysis of these rides is whether they help create an impression and a desire of "I want to go back and ride that again..." Consider the impact and effect of FOP on most guests vs. Dinosaur.

Finally, I don't think Disney wants super long lines (despite the cynical take that they do to increase LL sales), but some lines are effective because they help spread crowds out, especially in a park with few rides, like Animal Kingdom. The decreased demand of Dinosaur correlates to greater lines at FOP, Kiliminjaro, etc.