Mickey and Minnie's Runaway Railway confirmed

[Surferboy567]

Which more closely means "The park isn't set in stone, we can make changes to keep it getting better and better" instead of "Quick, close things people like or they'll think we're boring!"

Walt Disney lamented the way a movie is "done" once the film is in the reel - you don't get to keep playing with it after it's been released, even if you have a new, better idea. Whereas Disneyland was "like a lump of clay" that could be resculpted as many times as was interesting. Then Walt bought massive amounts of land in Florida to offer "the blessing of size" to the projects being built for Walt Disney World that wasn't afforded to Disneyland and limited his ability to grow and improve the park.

The Great Movie Ride could have used an update - which would constitute reworking the lump of clay that is the park. But what's more - The Great Movie Ride could have THRIVED with an update. It's not like the ride was a bad idea that couldn't have its execution improved on, but in its almost 30 years they never gave it that attention. Most major attractions don't go that long without at least some plussing. That's part of how you keep things fresh, or from feeling like a "museum". But even museums know that it's better to keep exhibits people like and make sure to brush the cobwebs off them than it is to replace them simply for the sake of change. Spruce up the things that need it and then outright replace the things that no longer have potential - The Great Movie Ride still had plenty of potential.

I think you’re right - the idea of a ride through great movies had potential. I think the chief problem was the ride system and the impact it had on the pacing of the storytelling. There was a mismatch between pairing such large ride vehicles that moved at a glacial pace with static scenes depicting minuscule moments from cinema, a highly motile medium.

For an experience like UoE, where the show scenes are novel and ask the audience to deeply investigate details, the pace of the moving auditorium vehicles makes perfect sense. But for consuming a wax figure of Edward G. Robinson knocking on a door? You don’t need the 15-20 seconds that scene took to pass in order to consume and enjoy it. GMR was a glorified wax museum where the audience was given no agency; in a real wax museum you are given the choice to pay deep attention to scenes you want to explore, and walk away from those that don’t catch your fancy.

So GMR likely could have been a great ride for a modern era, but the ride system itself - some of the most expensive infrastructure investment in this case - would have had to been rethought. Faster, smaller ride vehicles would have opened so many more options for a modern audience. It would allow for an increase in pacing and frequency of story beats to hold audience attention. But GMR was also really missing a storyline... much like a tradition wax museum is too.

lol Every thing has a lot of "potential". Not sure about your museums part, museums close exhibits all the time. all the time. outside of the classics (Mona lisa, Monet etc etc) how would you get return visitors. even at museums people return because there are new exhibits to see.

I 1000% agree with the bolded but unfortunately there is not going back and correcting that. heck, the entire premise of most of the parks downfall is that they were not maintained properly.. So the question comes back around, you have this out of date, boring, stale ride (very subjective I know, but I think pretty accurate for a large portion of guest) that is going to be expensive to update, what do you do.

how could they have updated the ride? from what I heard many of the owners of the scenes where asking huge amounts of money to use their clips (wizard of oz), heck the guy who own "ricks cafe" sued Warner bros for money he feels he was due from Casablanca. So that pretty much leaves Disney with using their own stuff. lol, can you image the heck that would have broken out if the updated the ride with just Disney material??

My point being that while yes, the IDEA of GMR had potential and sure it could of been plus'ed no ride is sacred (besides your classics) hence the "Disneyland isn't a museum". So we should all just welcome MMRR with open arms into HWS.

 

[Goofyernmost]

My point being that while yes, the IDEA of GMR had potential and sure it could of been plus'ed no ride is sacred (besides your classics) hence the "Disneyland isn't a museum". So we should all just welcome MMRR with open arms into HWS.

I do! The purpose of GMR was never understood to begin with and it became nothing but pure nostalgia since the closed up the studio.

 

[marni1971]

Naw, I don't think so marni, this is one ride that I do think in order to make it anywhere near enjoyable would have been extremely costly..

Yes, it would have been. Depends on your definition of “extremely” though. We’re not talking about wholesale changes, just restoring it to the equivalent of opening day quality with today’s technology and perhaps the odd IP switch.

Although if you didn’t enjoy it the first place I could talk until the sun didn’t shine and you still probably wouldn’t like it.

from what I heard many of the owners of the scenes where asking huge amounts of money to use their clips (wizard of oz)

But let me just correct that misinformation you were told. Oz was an issue in 1989, not today. Nor were any other scenes jeopardising the attraction. It was a through and through too expensive to fix vs install something marketable as new.

 

[Disney Dad 3000]

I know the opening date of this is still in question, with the intended likelihood they'll try and get it open before if not a few weeks before at least SWGE. Have there been any rumblings behind the scenes about Fastpass for the attraction @marni1971 ? Just curious if they'd considered not opening fastpass for the attraction for a bit like they are doing for SWGE and leaving FP as it is for the rest of the park until they are ready to update the tiers after a small bit of the madness has subsided.

 

[marni1971]

I know the opening date of this is still in question, with the intended likelihood they'll try and get it open before if not a few weeks before at least SWGE. Have there been any rumblings behind the scenes about Fastpass for the attraction @marni1971 ? Just curious if they'd considered not opening fastpass for the attraction for a bit like they are doing for SWGE and leaving FP as it is for the rest of the park until they are ready to update the tiers after a small bit of the madness has subsided.

It will be FP enabled, that’s without doubt. Which version of FP depends on when it exactly opens.

It’s down to operations if it opens FP free or not. Common sense and ops experience says it would open without.

 

[eliza61nyc]

Yes, it would have been. Depends on your definition of “extremely” though. We’re not talking about wholesale changes, just restoring it to the equivalent of opening day quality with today’s technology and perhaps the odd IP switch.

Although if you didn’t enjoy it the first place I could talk until the sun didn’t shine and you still probably wouldn’t like it.


But let me just correct that misinformation you were told. Oz was an issue in 1989, not today. Nor were any other scenes jeopardising the attraction. It was a through and through too expensive to fix vs install something marketable as new.

Thanks, yes I was told that the studios behind Oz and Casablanca want a bunch of dough to use the films.
It's not that i didn't like it, it was very sad to me, most of the films my kids didn't know and I do admit that if they insisted on doing the live action bit they needed to invest in cms that had some semblance of acting skills.

 

[Kman101]

My bet is that the construction time table was also a factor besides cost. Overall, neglecting the parks for so long has now created problems such as high crowds for SWL:GE in a park with few attractions and tired shows. Was no one paying attention all along?

I'm sure it was too. It does seem like no one was paying attention for about 15 years. It's a shame they got to the place where they have SO much to do, but they only have themselves to blame for spending a decade of little to no investment. Especially at DHS. And I imagine a lot of the spending was "forced" on them, so to speak. They still try and cut corners and still don't quite seem able to not replace something.

I imagine it was "quicker" to gut the GMR and put it there than to build and theme another show building. But they should have. I also "get" wanting Mickey and Minnie's ride to be at the center of the park, but the rumored Disneyland plans have it going into Toontown, replacing a shop. I mean ... come on. That says it all right there. LOL. WDW execs would gasp and pass out if someone dared suggest a shop get replaced by a ride! (or at the very least, a queue).

 

[Kman101]

Thanks, yes I was told that the studios behind Oz and Casablanca want a bunch of dough to use the films.
It's not that i didn't like it, it was very sad to me, most of the films my kids didn't know and I do admit that if they insisted on doing the live action bit they needed to invest in cms that had some semblance of acting skills.

But as a kid, if I didn't know a movie, I wanted to see it and be educated about it. The ride was never 'dated' to me, but I can understand why some cringed at the state of it. I'm not saying some of those movies are "for kids" lol, but nothing's "really dated" IMO. It's always going to be 'new' to someone. And I loved the Wizard of Oz section. I loved that movie as a kid and it was so cool seeing it come to life.

I wish it had received an overhaul. Maybe if they kept up with it and changed scenes out here and there over the decades it wouldn't have "fallen out of favor". I've never understood dismissing something as "old". History's "old" too but we still learn about it ... maybe a bad example but still ... lol

 

[marni1971]

Thanks, yes I was told that the studios behind Oz and Casablanca want a bunch of dough to use the films.
It's not that i didn't like it, it was very sad to me, most of the films my kids didn't know and I do admit that if they insisted on doing the live action bit they needed to invest in cms that had some semblance of acting skills.

Originally, what became Sorcerers Apprentice was meant to be the Oz tornado scene. The projection was mean to be the house spinning in the twister, aided by the wind machines which were designed to blow a lot stronger. This scene would seague into the following, starting with the house that had now landed.

The scene was finished and installed but due to miscommunication Disney found out their license only applied to two scenes. If they wanted a third they’d have to pay extra.

And so Mickey was hastily installed in the same space.

 

[eliza61nyc]

But as a kid, if I didn't know a movie, I wanted to see it and be educated about it. The ride was never 'dated' to me, but I can understand why some cringed at the state of it. I'm not saying some of those movies are "for kids" lol, but nothing's "really dated" IMO. It's always going to be 'new' to someone. And I loved the Wizard of Oz section. I loved that movie as a kid and it was so cool seeing it come to life.

I wish it had received an overhaul. Maybe if they kept up with it and changed scenes out here and there over the decades it wouldn't have "fallen out of favor". I've never understood dismissing something as "old". History's "old" too but we still learn about it ... maybe a bad example but still ... lol

One year I rented footlight parade and the original tarazan for my 3 sons and husband to watch, didn't make it 10 minutes into the film before they asked me why I was wasting their time. Lol nope my young sons even today ate not interested in seeing Gene Kelly singing in the rain.

History is old but the "telling" of it has come a long way, when i was a kid it was boring, textbook reading, rote memorization. Now in Philly, the story of the birth of our nation is explosive, interactive, immersive, 3D, fresh.

One of the reasons the play "Hamilton" is such a mega hit, they took history and made the telling of it interesting. If you like that sort of thing.

 

[aliceismad]

My bet is that the construction time table was also a factor besides cost. Overall, neglecting the parks for so long has now created problems such as high crowds for SWL:GE in a park with few attractions and tired shows. Was no one paying attention all along?

How is guest satisfaction for the shows? I'm curious as to whether the average guest sees them as tired and old. Mostly wondering about Indy, BatB, and Mermaid, since Frozen and Lightning are new(er).

 

[Missing20K]

It was a through and through too expensive to fix vs install something marketable as new.

Serious question. More expensive than GotG? Or TRON?

 

[aladdin2007]

I'm sure it was too. It does seem like no one was paying attention for about 15 years. It's a shame they got to the place where they have SO much to do, but they only have themselves to blame for spending a decade of little to no investment. Especially at DHS. And I imagine a lot of the spending was "forced" on them, so to speak. They still try and cut corners and still don't quite seem able to not replace something.

I imagine it was "quicker" to gut the GMR and put it there than to build and theme another show building. But they should have. I also "get" wanting Mickey and Minnie's ride to be at the center of the park, but the rumored Disneyland plans have it going into Toontown, replacing a shop. I mean ... come on. That says it all right there. LOL. WDW execs would gasp and pass out if someone dared suggest a shop get replaced by a ride! (or at the very least, a queue).

agree, and yet they have no problem ripping out ride designed spaces for a meetngreet, (snowwhite)

 

[Missing20K]

One year I rented footlight parade and the original tarazan for my 3 sons and husband to watch, didn't make it 10 minutes into the film before they asked me why I was wasting their time. Lol nope my young sons even today ate not interested in seeing Gene Kelly singing in the rain.

History is old but the "telling" of it has come a long way, when i was a kid it was boring, textbook reading, rote memorization. Now in Philly, the story of the birth of our nation is explosive, interactive, immersive, 3D, fresh.

One of the reasons the play "Hamilton" is such a mega hit, they took history and made the telling of it interesting. If you like that sort of thing.

Watching the entirety of a film usually gives a better indication of it's quality. The first 10 minutes of 2001 probably "wasted" someone's time too. Same with the Godfather. Also Apocalypse Now. And It's a Wonderful Life. Plus To Kill a Mockingbird. Oh and Citizen Kane.

Reading is boring? Be back, have to go wrestle the books away from my daughter.

 

[Missing20K]

agree, and yet they have no problem ripping out ride designed spaces for a meetngreet, (snowwhite)

20K

 

[Epcot_Imagineer]

Originally, what became Sorcerers Apprentice was meant to be the Oz tornado scene...
The scene was finished and installed but due to miscommunication Disney found out their license only applied to two scenes. ...Mickey was hastily installed in the same space.

Miscommunication at this level astounds me. It's stories like this that allow me to give more credence than I should to any rumor I hear involving licensing.

 

[Kman101]

How is guest satisfaction for the shows? I'm curious as to whether the average guest sees them as tired and old. Mostly wondering about Indy, BatB, and Mermaid, since Frozen and Lightning are new(er).

I'd love to know this too. Seems like satisfaction is still high. We've heard rumors of plans to replace them for how many years now? And still nothing. I'm really surprised at least Mermaid hasn't been replaced. I do think they're still really popular. They're not bad shows, just past their time.

I also think they act with the mentality of "can we avoid spending this money". Seems silly to "overhaul" the park and keep 30 year old shows, no matter how popular they are or how much they fill up (and is it because they're still loved or is it because that's just what there is to do at the park?)

 

[Timothy_Q]

Yes, it would have been. Depends on your definition of “extremely” though. We’re not talking about wholesale changes, just restoring it to the equivalent of opening day quality with today’s technology and perhaps the odd IP switch.

Where exactly would have the bulk of the GMR refurb budget gone to? What made it so expensive?

Vehicles? AA's? Everything?

 

[marni1971]

Serious question. More expensive than GotG? Or TRON?

TRONs cheaper than guardians. GMR should have been less than both (to be honest neither of the new builds should cost what they are. IMHO)

Where exactly would have the bulk of the GMR refurb budget gone to? What made it so expensive?

Vehicles? AA's? Everything?

Pretty much everything aside from the building. Like Energy, the ride vehicles were shot. Some AAs had some compliance adaptions but not all nor not completely. Lighting. Audio. RCS. Old sets. Etc etc

 

[Timothy_Q]

TRONs cheaper than guardians. GMR should have been less than both (to be honest neither of the new builds should cost what they are. IMHO)

Pretty much everything aside from the building. Like Energy, the ride vehicles were shot. Some AAs had some compliance adaptions but not all nor not completely. Lighting. Audio. RCS. Old sets. Etc etc

I'm just glad SSE is getting the attention and budget it deserves.

Shame GMR couldn't get the same