A Spirited 15 Rounds ...

MerlinTheGoat

MerlinTheGoat

Well-Known Member
I don't mind many of Frozen Ever After's animatronics, but the scenery is very sparse and bare. And I don't get why anyone finds the wall screens impressive. I found them to look very flat and low quality even compared to other screen-based attractions and scenes. I actually prefer a LOT of other dark rides, even old Fantasyland ones.

Donaldfan1934 said:
SDMT is no doubt of high value to most guests and is an admittedly impressive attraction as well. The only real problem with the ride is that it's a bit too short. If the ride was a minute or two longer with an additional show scene, there wouldn't be this ongoing debate as to whether or not it's an E-Ticket.
Click to expand...
The scenery on the exterior also needed a lot of work and detail, along with the lighting quality especially at night time.

LittleBuford said:
You seem to be contradicting yourself in the same breath with these two statements. How can you be aware of the "looser" sense if you've never encountered it personally?
Click to expand...
I'm going to spoiler this because this IS getting way off topic and belongs in the Politics subforum.

What I mean by "SJW" being used more loosely by some people is that i've seen it used to describe certain liberal behavior which (while left leaning and "progressive") is not so radical to warrant such an overtly negative slur. Some people might call all liberals SJWs (even relatively moderate ones), whereas others might only use it to describe the more radical toxic fringe. But it does remain fairly consistent that SJW is used to describe a statement or action that is left-leaning and progressive in nature.

Snowflake often overlaps in the description of certain similar behavioral traits as SJW, but can be applied to a much broader scope of people and behavior than SJW. Snowflakes describe those who think they're particularly special and get easily offended or hurt by every little thing, can't stand different thoughts than their own etc. But unlike SJW, the term is not restricted to one particular group or political party. Extremely hard right people, nazis, racists, sexists etc can all be Snowflakes too (often are). It isn't necessary political either.

You can be a part of any sort of political ideology and be a snowflake as long as you behave a certain way (generally someone who thinks they are inherently more special than other people).
 
Last edited:
LittleBuford

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
MerlinTheGoat said:
I'm going to spoiler this because this IS getting way off topic and belongs in the Politics subforum.

What I mean by "SJW" being used more loosely by some people is that i've seen it used to describe certain liberal behavior which (while left leaning and "progressive") is not radical to warrant such an overtly negative slur. Some people might call all liberals SJWs (even relatively moderate ones), whereas others might only use it to describe the more radical fringe. But it does remain fairly consistent that SJW it is used to describe a statement or action that is left-leaning and progressive in nature.

Snowflake often overlaps in the description of certain behavioral traits, but can be applied to a much broader scope of people than SJW. Snowflakes describe those who think they're particularly special and get easily offended or hurt by every little thing, can't stand different thoughts than their own etc. But unlike SJW, the term is not restricted to one particular group or political party. Extreme hard right people, nazis, racists, sexists etc can all be Snowflake (often are). It can apply to non-politic

You can be a part of any sort of political ideology and be a snowflake as long as you behave a certain way (generally someone who thinks they are inherently more special than other people).
Click to expand...

Agreed, but I can't post there yet (one needs to pass a certain threshold of messages in the other forums before the website allows it). Anyway, thanks for elaborating. I basically agree with what you said, so perhaps we got our wires crossed earlier. I appreciate your detailed response.
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
Sue_Vongello said:
Yes, you’re right. But I think credit where it’s due ... I’d certainly prefer parks like Epcot and TDS to be IP free but that’s not the reality we are living in ... so I guess what I was really saying is if we have to put IP in places then I much prefer Tokyo’s direction to the stateside parks.

Other people have said Frozen, Tangled, and Pan don’t fit in TDS ... I agree on Tangled but Frozen and Pan are both set around water/ports ... I mean it’s not my favorite but it does make sense. Or let’s put it this way it makes way more sense than Monsters Inc in Tomorrowland, Avatar in DAK, etc etc
Click to expand...
TDS was never IP free. It opened with Mermaid Lagoon and Lost River Delta (Indy) if I'm not mistaken. It also had characters integrated into shows and shops from the outset.

Building a park that's free of Intellectual Properties is a mistake today and really was a mistake in 1982 as well. What needs to happen is come up with a unifying theme that allows for both new concepts and existing properties to coexist.
 
asianway

asianway

Well-Known Member
RSoxNo1 said:
TDS was never IP free. It opened with Mermaid Lagoon and Lost River Delta (Indy) if I'm not mistaken. It also had characters integrated into shows and shops from the outset.

Building a park that's free of Intellectual Properties is a mistake today and really was a mistake in 1982 as well. What needs to happen is come up with a unifying theme that allows for both new concepts and existing properties to coexist.
Click to expand...
And Arabian Coast with the Aladdin theming on the Carousel
 
yensidtlaw1969

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
MisterPenguin said:
They just replaced a rather basic AA (trolls) with one of the most advanced AAs they make (Elsa) and you're tagging them for not having more basic mannequins in the next scene?
Click to expand...
The corridor of projections is lazy scene-making, especially when depicting a number as vibrant and dynamic as Let It Go. Elsa is nice, but then they send you down a hall of screenz and it's not especially exciting. At least in The Maelstrom there was a set of scenes that felt somewhat resolved and interesting to see in person, even if the figures were low-tech.

One animatronic does not a scene make - the Let It Go scene should have been intensely magical, but instead much of it feels like riding past TV screens with bits of the movie playing. Some nice fiber optics overhead, but it's too little - where are the actual special effects? The way it is done does feel somewhat like an afterthought.

On a similar note, it's totally possible for a few low-power animatronics to have a greater impact than one amazing one. Think if Jungle Cruise and Na'vi River Journey were created with inverse methods, one stunning AA for Jungle and multiple simply animated figures of Pandoran creatures. I think guest's feelings about those attractions might similarly flip.
 
smile

smile

Well-Known Member
RSoxNo1 said:
was a mistake in 1982 as well.
Click to expand...

because the subsequent pivot worked wonders?!

the park has been a shell of itself ever since...
competing with mk in this era is unheard of, yet that's exactly what happened.

the tired old perspective that ec was tired persists unabated despite facts.
 
MisterPenguin

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
yensidtlaw1969 said:
On a similar note, it's totally possible for a few low-power animatronics to have a greater impact than one amazing one.
Click to expand...

Totally disagree there. The AAs that have repetitive limited motion just strike me as incredibly cheap. I'd rather have a projection than an AA waving its hand back and forth (cf. 'fish on a stick' at Mermaid's dark ride).

And FEA has plenty of good AAs. Dinging it for using projections to extend the Elsa scene instead of dropping in limited, cheap AAs is beyond my ability to comprehend by not looking at the attraction as a whole.
 
the.dreamfinder

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
RSoxNo1 said:
TDS was never IP free. It opened with Mermaid Lagoon and Lost River Delta (Indy) if I'm not mistaken. It also had characters integrated into shows and shops from the outset.

Building a park that's free of Intellectual Properties is a mistake today and really was a mistake in 1982 as well. What needs to happen is come up with a unifying theme that allows for both new concepts and existing properties to coexist.
Click to expand...
That’s Eisnerian revisionist history. EPCOT Center was a success. They certainly didn’t build enough hotel rooms to profit off the park, but Walt Disney Attractions kept the lights on. The studio side of the business dragged down WDP’s stock price, not EPCOT.
 
britain

britain

Well-Known Member
MisterPenguin said:
Totally disagree there. The AAs that have repetitive limited motion just strike me as incredibly cheap. I'd rather have a projection than an AA waving its hand back and forth (cf. 'fish on a stick' at Mermaid's dark ride).

And FEA has plenty of good AAs. Dinging it for using projections to extend the Elsa scene instead of dropping in limited, cheap AAs is beyond my ability to comprehend by not looking at the attraction as a whole.
Click to expand...

Depends on the context. Limited motion animals in the Jungle Cruise are better than projections.
 
FigmentJedi

FigmentJedi

Well-Known Member
Sue_Vongello said:
Yes, you’re right. But I think credit where it’s due ... I’d certainly prefer parks like Epcot and TDS to be IP free but that’s not the reality we are living in ... so I guess what I was really saying is if we have to put IP in places then I much prefer Tokyo’s direction to the stateside parks.

Other people have said Frozen, Tangled, and Pan don’t fit in TDS ... I agree on Tangled but Frozen and Pan are both set around water/ports ... I mean it’s not my favorite but it does make sense. Or let’s put it this way it makes way more sense than Monsters Inc in Tomorrowland, Avatar in DAK, etc etc
Click to expand...
While it's not featured as an external element as it would be competing too hard with Arendelle Castle, Tangled's Kingdom of Corona makes just as much sense as Frozen and Pan and I think having a boat ride that climaxes on you in the middle of the lantern festival on the lagoon with that castle lit up could be a very well-fitting addition for DisneySea. Like really put the romance in that "Built on the principles of Adventure, Romance and Discovery" thing from the park's dedication.
 
Last edited:
Sped2424

Sped2424

Well-Known Member
smile

smile

Well-Known Member
britain said:
Jungle Cruise
Click to expand...

speaking of something terribly dated...
anybody thinking anything is dated should be screaming to yank this, first and foremost

so out-of-step, it's verbal degreadtion is not only condoned, but encouraged - let the old girl rip and use the remaining acres for a new project
 
Donaldfan1934

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
MerlinTheGoat said:
I don't mind many of Frozen Ever After's animatronics, but the scenery is very sparse and bare. And I don't get why anyone finds the wall screens impressive. I found them to look very flat and low quality even compared to other screen-based attractions and scenes. I actually prefer a LOT of other dark rides, even old Fantasyland ones.
Click to expand...
As for the sets and scenery, I'd say it varies from scene to scene. The opening scene with Olaf, Sven, and the trolls is very lush while the scene with Anna, Kristoff, and Sven before entering Elsa's Ice Palace is noticeably lighter on scenery largely due to the extremely limiting space they were given. I didn't read anyone saying the wall screens were the most impressive things ever, but as I've said previously, they're not the highlight effect, so why put so much focus on them? Altough I think most of us here agree that the ride could be better under different circumstances, I feel nitpicking it to death undermines how far it exceeded most people's expectations for it. Even if it isn't one of your favorites, let's not pretend that the final product couldn't have been much worse.
MerlinTheGoat said:
The scenery on the exterior also needed a lot of work and detail, along with the lighting quality especially at night time.
Click to expand...
I agree with you here, but I do think those are issues that can reasonably be fixed in a refurbishment further down the line. Same can't be said about the ride's length.
 
britain

britain

Well-Known Member
smile said:
speaking of something terribly dated...
anybody thinking anything is dated should be screaming to yank this, first and foremost

so out-of-step, it's verbal degreadtion is not only condoned, but encouraged - let the old girl rip and use the remaining acres for a new project
Click to expand...


Eh... I can't tell if you are describing what some people think or if you actually are expressing what you think.

But if you are advocating the removal of the Jungle Cruise... Weehawken, dawn! Guns, drawn!
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom