Opinion: Toy Story Land's grand opening will be a disaster

[eliza61nyc]

Trust me, you're better off not knowing how good it used to be.

the thing is "good" is so relative. The times were totally different and I find many other factors play into our nostalgia. lol, 40 years ago things may seem better to me simply for the fact that I didn't have osteoarthritis and the knee issues that I have now.

sure crowds were lighter, lol but if you ask why it maybe because many family just like now could not afford a disney vacation. I know flying is a heck of a lot cheaper than it was when I was a kid.

I always ask exactly what made it so much better and all I seem to hear is about this spectacular "imagineering" that was prevalent. I admit I have nothing to compare it too. I don't have a problem with IP stuff and I think the attention to detail is great at the world.

 

[durangojim]

It's not that expensive when they're that young. They fly for free, barely eat anything, and don't require park admission.

Now, if you're only going to take a kid once or twice in their lives, definitely wait for a more ideal age. But if you plan on being a regular visitor, Disney with a baby is fantastic. My three year old has been six times and she's had a blast every single time. She doesn't remember the first few trips, but there's undeniable excitement in her eyes from the colors, sounds, and smells even in those earliest photographs.

I’ve got pics of my kids standing (or being held) in front of the wilderness lodge Mickey totem pole every year from the ages of 8 weeks through now. They’re 12 and 10 respectively. I wouldn’t trade those memories and photos for anything.
It’s hard to tell but this is a mosaic of my family made up of about 10000 of those memories from 5 years ago. It’s hanging on our wall and if you get close enough you can see what each of those photos are.

 

[Goofyernmost]

the thing is "good" is so relative. The times were totally different and I find many other factors play into our nostalgia. lol, 40 years ago things may seem better to me simply for the fact that I didn't have osteoarthritis and the knee issues that I have now.

sure crowds were lighter, lol but if you ask why it maybe because many family just like now could not afford a disney vacation. I know flying is a heck of a lot cheaper than it was when I was a kid.

I always ask exactly what made it so much better and all I seem to hear is about this spectacular "imagineering" that was prevalent. I admit I have nothing to compare it too. I don't have a problem with IP stuff and I think the attention to detail is great at the world.

Most of the time, people go way back to when Disneyland was opened. I never went to it, but, it mostly consisted of off the shelf carnival rides. The carousel was just a carousel, nothing fancy. Dumbo was just a spinner with plastic Elephants. The teacups were not an original idea. The train that went around the park was a train that went around the park. The backgrounds were man made and good for the time, but, amateurish by today's standards. Case in point look at the character costumes of the time. Autotopia was a go cart track. So for original rides that pretty much left the Jungle Cruise and the side-wheeler on the rivers of America. The stores on main street were everyday retail establishments run by private owners. Heck you could buy a baby grand Piano there as well. I often wonder how many people made that trip to DL and left carrying one of those Piano's on their back. You could buy underwear and bras as well, something every theme park guest cannot wait to do. Other displays like the Monsanto home of the future were also built and made to promote Monsanto. There was no Pirates at the time, no Haunted Mansion, No thunder mtn. No space mountain. The big Frontierland ride was a horse drawn stagecoach, how original. Imagineers did design the monorails and the trams, but, there was very little technology in the park other then the Enchanted Tiki Room which was originally slated to be a restaurant. Even 20k leagues under the sea was a walk through exhibit that housed the props from the movie that was made in 1954. The Matterhorn ride didn't show up until 1957.

This distorted vision of what Walt had created is what we deal with today. Disneyland was a major success for two reasons. The main one being it was deemed to be unique and different from any other amusement park known in this country at the time and second, it had the Disney name on it. A legacy that continues through today. But, spectacular in any mystical sense, I'm afraid not. As the years progress things like AA's were added and that really didn't take full flight until the 1964 worlds fair and that is when Disneyland became absolutely unique and top level technologically. Even after Walt's death they still created things that were ahead of the time like EPCOT, which was not Walt's creation as his view of EPCOT was not even close to what we actually got. With time and success Disney in my mind got quite lazy in what they did, especially along the lines of updated and renewing, but, there was a new age that completely crept in in the early 80's and the was electronic technologies. The speed with which that developed was so rapid that it was literally impossible to stay ahead of it. New things happened every single day and almost new things died as quickly as the new stuff was developed.

That doesn't mean that Disney fell behind, but, they certainly had a hard time keeping up and eventually focused their assets on expanding the brand to other countries and new audiences. However, they still are great and something that first timers see as wonderful and fun. Those of us that have been about a gazillion times have wore off a lot of the glitter in our minds by repetition, not by fact.

 

[Damon7777]

To address all of this yesterday vs today stuff----

Of course the attraction lineup from yesteryear vs today is even more of difference than night vs day. I would not go for free even if I had the parks to myself if they only had pre 1990 attractions.

But the modern day US Disney park does some things that embarrass, disgust or disappoint:


Star Wars in Animal Kingdom

Jamaican immigrant or Flint Michigan girl working a World
Showcase pavilion.

Studios Park that, well, is devoid of real studio content

A 3O year old park with just 4 rides and charging $120, as if it offers the equivalent of AK and EPCOT

'toonification' of the parks

screen avalanche

 

[DisneyDoctor]

To address all of this yesterday vs today stuff----

Of course the attraction lineup from yesteryear vs today is even more of difference than night and day. I would not go for free even if I had the parks to myself and they only had pre 1990 attractions.

But the modern day US Disney park does some things that embarrass and disgust.


Star Wars in Animal Kingdom

Jamaican immigrant or Flint Michigan girl working a World Showcase pavilion.

Studios Park that, well, is devoid of real studio content

A 3O year old park with just 4 rides and charging $120, as if it offers the equivalent of AK and EPCOT

'toonification' of the parks

screen avalanche

These are the sorts of things that "embarrass and disgust" you? I understand your qualms towards HS and the price, but changes are coming.

I get the feeling you will NEVER be satisfied or happy with WDW.

 

[Fox&Hound]

I use to think that way.

Then I had kids.

I honestly had just as much if not more fun with my kids in the parks when they were infants and toddlers than I did when they were in their early teens. There is so much more to the parks than just going from ride to ride.

I completely agree. Once we had my daughter, I couldn't imagine not taking her. Does she remember her first trip at sixteen months? No, but I will never forget it....

 

[MisterPenguin]

I would not go for free even if I had the parks to myself if they only had pre 1990 attractions.

Then why do you even bother with a WDW fan forum?

You got problems.

 

[Disone]

To address all of this yesterday vs today stuff----

Of course the attraction lineup from yesteryear vs today is even more of difference than night vs day. I would not go for free even if I had the parks to myself if they only had pre 1990 attractions.

But the modern day US Disney park does some things that embarrass, disgust or disappoint:


Star Wars in Animal Kingdom

Jamaican immigrant or Flint Michigan girl working a World
Showcase pavilion.

Studios Park that, well, is devoid of real studio content

A 3O year old park with just 4 rides and charging $120, as if it offers the equivalent of AK and EPCOT

'toonification' of the parks

screen avalanche

Star Wars in Animal Kingdom? I can't figure out what that means. Are you just referring to Pandora sarcastically as Star Wars or do you mean that there is some actual Star Wars stuff in Animal Kingdom? Sorry if I'm missing the hyperbole or the sarcasm on that one.

And also if I can challenge you on one thing. What's wrong with a Jamaican or Flint Michigan person (or two) working in the world showcase Pavilion? I could understand if the world showcase Pavilion was entirely staffed with cast that were not from that Pavilion host country But as long as the majority of the cast is from that Pavilion I don't mind a few, into the diversity of that Pavilion. I'm sure the people working there don't mind the diversity as well.

I'm sure if I go to the real Morocco I am bound to see a few non Moroccans. So having a similar experience at Epcot is not embarrassing disgusting or discouraging to me.

 

[CoasterSnoop]

I would not go for free even if I had the parks to myself if they only had pre 1990 attractions.

I mean, the only notable MK attractions post-1990 are Splash Mountain and SDMT. By then, we had original Pirates, Space Mountain, BTMR, HM, as well as fan-favorite rides we don't have anymore like Mr. Toad and 20,000 Leagues.
And if you're saying EPCOT pre-1990 was better than post-1990, you, sir, have a very unique opinion.

As far as the topic at hand goes, I think it's a little much to say Toy Story Land's opening will be a disaster. It's going to have a huge turn-out no matter how good the final product is. To say the final product isn't looking too good at the moment... that's different. I love the idea behind TSM, but beyond that, it's looking very undercooked compared to Pandora and the plans for SW:GE imo. I'm not just talking about attractions, either.

 

[LittleBuford]

I visited WDW in 1991, 1996, 2001, and, after a very long break, twice in 2017. My favourite year was, without doubt, 2017. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but those who claim that things have only got worse should bear in mind that some of us don't feel the same. I for one can't wait to see the new Toy Story Land, which doesn't look at all cheap to me. All the doomsaying is very puzzling to me.

And I can't think why it would bother anyone to see a Jamaican or a person from Flint at World Showcase. If the same people had a different origin stated on their name badge, you'd suddenly be OK with them?

(Oh, and hello! This is my first ever post after quite a few months of lurking.)

 

[Disone]

I visited WDW in 1991, 1996, 2001, and, after a very long break, twice in 2017. My favourite year was, without doubt, 2017. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but those who claim that things have only got worse should bear in mind that some of us don't feel the same. I for one can't wait to see the new Toy Story Land, which doesn't look at all cheap to me. All the doomsaying is very puzzling to me.

And I can't think why it would bother anyone to see a Jamaican or a person from Flint at World Showcase. If the same people had a different origin stated on their name badge, you'd suddenly be OK with them?

(Oh, and hello! This is my first ever post after quite a few months of lurking.)

Welcome and thanks for posting.

IMO only, most of the time when Disney uses some version of the "carnival" theme, AKA, Previous Toy Story lands, Bugs Land, Mickey's Towntown Fair, Paradise Pier 1.0, its just a design by sign theme of a normal off the shelf Carnival rides, which just comes across to many as a cheapen Disney Experience.

That said, I do think they got it right for MK's Storybook Circus. I actually think that turned up much better then the rest of Fantasyland Forest. Storybook Circus is rich in details, feels like the classic and romanticized circus you see in Dumbo, truly a version of circus (borrrowing from DHS dedication here) that never was and always will be.

I have yet to feel how fleshed out Toy Story Land will be. All the other Toy Story Lands around the world have featured Carnival Rides and come across as the All-Star Resorts of the theme park lands. Bright, colorful, oversized, and fun, but not overly welled themed. They are are "Value" additions to the park. And truely in almost all cases, their themes were chosen because theming carnival rides to look like a fair and fair rides to look like a carnival.... well thats as you might imagine comes quick and cheap. And the lands come across as such compared to say, Frontierland, Fantasyland, Adventureland, Future World, Sunset Blvd, Africa or Asia.

I think DHS toy story land suffers the same but to a LESSER extent. At least by looking at the model and artist rendering, it looks more fleshed out to me. It feels less carnival like. Having a real coaster helps. Having a better themed Coaster would have been even more helpful, but overall I do think it is going to be the best version of Toy Storyland Disney has done yet.

 

[LittleBuford]

Welcome and thanks for posting.

IMO only, most of the time when Disney uses some version of the "carnival" theme, AKA, Previous Toy Story lands, Bugs Land, Mickey's Towntown Fair, Paradise Pier 1.0, its just a design by sign theme of a normal off the shelf Carnival rides, which just comes across to many as a cheapen Disney Experience.

That said, I do think they got it right for MK's Storybook Circus. I actually think that turned up much better then the rest of Fantasyland Forest. Storybook Circus is rich in details, feels like the classic and romanticized circus you see in Dumbo, truly a version of circus (borrrowing from DHS dedication here) that never was and always will be.

I have yet to feel how fleshed out Toy Story Land will be. All the other Toy Story Lands around the world have featured Carnival Rides and come across as the All-Star Resorts of the theme park lands. Bright, colorful, oversized, and fun, but not overly welled themed. They are are "Value" additions to the park. And truely in almost all cases, their themes were chosen because theming carnival rides to look like a fair and fair rides to look like a carnival.... well thats as you might imagine comes quick and cheap. And the lands come across as such compared to say, Frontierland, Fantasyland, Adventureland, Future World, Sunset Blvd, Africa or Asia.

I think DHS toy story land suffers the same but to a LESSER extent. At least by looking at the model and artist rendering, it looks more fleshed out to me. It feels less carnival like. Having a real coaster helps. Having a better themed Coaster would have been even more helpful, but overall I do think it is going to be the best version of Toy Storyland Disney has done yet.

Thank you for your reply and for welcoming me!

I agree that the carnival theme doesn't represent the most exciting thing that Disney has to offer, but, as Goofyernmost pointed out above, the parks have always interspersed their more ambitious attractions with more basic, off-the-shelf ones. I just don't see how the rides in Toy Story Land are any "worse" in this regard than Dumbo or the Mad Tea Party (both IP-based attractions, I might add). It's nothing more than nostalgia that leads to such uneven standards of measure. (Mr. Toad's Wild Ride also comes to mind here -- now there's a ride that looked cheap!)

I personally like the fact that the parks have different kinds and levels of attractions. It keeps things varied and means that there's something for everyone.

 

[TwilightZone]

(Mr. Toad's Wild Ride also comes to mind here -- now there's a ride that looked cheap!)

Yeah I love mr. toad (the California one, I wasn't around for the WDW version), but that ride is basically cardboard cutout-bots: the ride.

 

[Disone]

Thank you for your reply and for welcoming me!

I agree that the carnival theme doesn't represent the most exciting thing that Disney has to offer, but, as Goofyernmost pointed out above, the parks have always interspersed their more ambitious attractions with more basic, off-the-shelf ones. I just don't see how the rides in Toy Story Land are any "worse" in this regard than Dumbo or the Mad Tea Party (both IP-based attractions, I might add). It's nothing more than nostalgia that leads to such uneven standards of measure. (Mr. Toad's Wild Ride also comes to mind here -- now there's a ride that looked cheap!)

I personally like the fact that the parks have different kinds and levels of attractions. It keeps things varied and means that there's something for everyone.

All true, but of note is I was more comparing the entire land holistically then the individual parts or attractions. The rides are any worst, but the land might be. When the land is made of exclusively carnival rides.... it hurts the experience. When a carnival ride, or just a B or C ticket attraction, is apart of the greater offerings, they often help make the land better.

Again I do think DHS Toy Story Land is going to be okay. Haters are going to hate, but it will be just fine and with an actual coaster, Midway Mania, and a C ticket that is not your standard carnival ride, its rooster of attractions is far more impressive to me then the other Toy Story Lands that are more carnival like and with out the headliners to offset that.

 

[LittleBuford]

All true, but of note is I was more comparing the entire land holistically then the individual parts or attractions.

Fair enough. But even by that measure, the land looks great to me -- fun, immersive, eye-catching, and really quite lavish given the intended theme. The Slinky coaster especially seems the very opposite of cheap, at least in my eyes. I respect the fact that others may feel differently.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Now, if you want to make the case that a new land should have more rides, sure, go ahead. But you can't say that the number in TSL is an outlier. Both Disney and Universal pretty much put the same number of new and/or converted rides in new lands in the past decade. What criteria would you like to use to say that there should be more rides and break the precedent that has been set?

Aside from the point that the set precedent is a bad one, the fact that these are both lightly themed sub-D-Ticket attractions does break with the growing pattern. Most of your examples offered an E-Ticket to go with them, but even New Fantasyland, which didn't, gave us oodles of dense theming and high-level design work.

You're not wrong to suggest that the growing trend has been to open new lands with roughly 2.5 attractions, but to me that's a train we should desperately be trying to get off of.

Two appetizers does not a hearty meal make, even if you like them. Toy Story Land's new attractions feel like finger food - which I wouldn't mind if there was a main course being served with them.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Any time they put in a C Ticket ride, which experts clamor for in order to 'eat crowds', then that is a "good enough" ride. That's what pretty much calling something "C Ticket" is all about.

My take is: If it's not an E-Ticket, don't bother. If you can't plus that C Ticket until it's an E, then get rid of it and put in an E-Ticket. If all rides were at the same E-Ticket level, they would all have the same drawing power, and there would be no need for FP... except for E Tickets with low capacity, which, in that case, you keep adding extra tracks or clone them. But people call me crazy for that opinion.

Anyhoo... TSL is more akin to Storybook Circus, a very family friendly park which is really for the kids. SWL will be family friendly more so for older kids and adults. Until they're all E-Tickets, this is just fine.

I'll keep the theme going with my food analogy -- sometimes when you're hungry don't you just want a snack instead of a full dinner? The sliding scale of A to E-Tickets have their place, and it's useful to groups that are made up of different kinds of people to have different kinds of things to do.

I think the issue with Toy Story Land is that it's an example of this thinking getting perhaps too Macro -- It used to be that each land offered it's own variation in its attraction menu, with attractions ranging from A to E within them. The idea of Star Wars Land getting the parks new E-Tickets and Toy Story Land picking up the lower grade tickets feels off to me. If Tomorrowland had 3 E-Tickets and Adventureland had none, wouldn't it feel like the scales should be righted a little?

The parks used to be designed with balance within them, and the park itself felt that balance as a result. There's no direction off the hub in the Magic Kingdom that you can head and not find an E-Ticket that way, each land has at least one (save Main Street, which is functionally different).

I won't complain about Star Wars getting 2 ambitious E-Tickets, and Mickey's coming too, but putting some protein in the mix for Toy Story Land would have gone a ways toward making for a complete-feeling land, therefore aiding in the mission to create a more complete-feeling park. And if not, offering B and C-Ticket attractions that are not amongst the most bare-bones seen in WDW would have been a more satisfying decision.

 

[Angel Ariel]

My opinion is that parents shouldn't be taking there kids to parks that do fall under height restrictions. 6 years old is the best time.
My main concern is that it's opening before the e-ticket stuff, that will make it become very unpopular opening day, but you do have valid reasonings besides those two things.

So no child should go to Disney World until they clear all the height restrictions?

 

[TwilightZone]

So no child should go to Disney World until they clear all the height restrictions?

Or until they are old enough to remember the trip, like 6 or 7.

 

[Angel Ariel]

I agree with this, but more in the sense that I do not understand why someone would spend SO MUCH MONEY on a trip to WDW before a child turns say, 6. Chances are the kid probably won't remember this (we lose most of our memories at 7, and cannot actually form memories until we are about 3 years old) so why not just wait until your child is old enough to remember & old enough to not need babying?

DD has been to WDW 2x and DLR 3x since she was born. I will freely admit that her 2 trips to WDW (8 and 15 months respectively) were for DH and I, not so much her. One was an extended family trip with my nephews (3 and 6 at the time), and the other was a Halloween trip that DH and I had been wanting to do for years so we could do MNSSHP. The pictures of her grabbing Mickey's nose are pretty priceless, though (her nursery was Mickey themed).

Her trips to DLR have been for all of us..age 3, 4 and 5. They've each been unique trips, in terms of our focus - but they've each been fantastic. Taking her at these ages has "forced" DH and I to take it slower, change our own pace and expectations of the trip - and it's resulted in us having more appreciation for the simpler rides. Seeing the joy on her face as she rides the teacups is precious! It's a ride DH and I would both avoid like the plague on our own, but now gladly ride multiple times on a trip to see her joy and hear her laughter. The same goes for pretty much all of the Fantasyland rides. Rider Swap works wonders for us to be able to go on rides that she can't.

We've been lucky to have some photo shoot opportunities at Disneyland, and I will forever treasure the pictures taken of us walking down Main Street hand in hand. DD has delays, and didn't learn to walk independently until she was 3.5. This picture was taken about 1.5 months before that milestone

photo by Danielle Ernest

Followed by this one the next year, when she was walking on her own:

photo by Danielle Ernest

In particular, her interactions with characters at Disneyland the past 2 years has been amazing. As part of her delays, she has a neurological speech disorder and can't yet converse verbally. She uses augmentative communication - sometimes low-tech, sometimes an iPad w/a speech application. The characters adapted seamlessly and wove such detailed stories with her - she still remembers them at home! (And so do we, even 2 years later). We've collected the autographs in 3 different storybooks for her (one for each trip), so when we read them at home, we always see the autographs and talk about/remember the trips.

Whether DD remembers these trips when she's older or not, they have been magical. I will always remember them, and I am writing the memories down in digital scrapbooks for her so even if she doesn't remember herself, she'll still have the stories. I was 19 months old when I first went to Disneyland (my brother was 5..they were really taking him ). I went probably 3 or 4 times before I was 10. I don't remember all of those trips, but I felt the magic early in life, and have carried with me. I hope my daughter will do the same.