"Adios" El Rio del Tiempo!

[nibblesandbits]

If the guest enjoys the ride and gets at least a general sense of what is being conveyed, I think they've done well. It also gives the guest an opportunity to discover more on subsequent visits.

I have been reading this thread for the entire afternoon and this post caught me the most. I'm not wanting to argue...just state this simple fact.

Now, if I think of myself as a general guest (because while I'm a Disney lover, my DH is nowhere near the Disneyphile that I am, so I have some idea of what a general guest would think).

I can say that we both found the ride rather boring and I couldn't tell you the story of that ride if it bit me in the butt. I can also say that we only go on that ride if we have done everthing else in the park that we've wanted to.

Now keep in mind...this is coming from an average guest. Those ones that Disney is trying to entertain.

 

[nibblesandbits]

Well "spirit" is subjective and not quanitative. My wife thinks my dog's spirit is adorable; I think his spirit wants him to get hit by a car.

Funniest quote of the day! :lol:

 

[planet7]

So if everyone could just throw that year in their sig, it will be alot clearer for everyone else.

While we're at it, why don't we label ourselves by race, age, occupation, marital status, country and/or state of origin, height, weight, sexual orientation, and so on--that way, anyone reading our posts can know "exactly who we are". Except, it doesn't work like that. We're all more than a single label, or the sum of the labels the world puts on us. And our feelings and arguments are more than the black-and-white taking of sides that they appear here--or at least, that some want to see them as being. My thoughts and opinions are rarely at one extreme or another on anything , yet people just can't deal with that, so they lump me into one category or another, and ascribe all the qualities of that category. Nevermind how many times I say that these thoughts, opinions, and qualities don't belong to me. They've been assigned--no, branded onto me. If that's all we're going to be, are black-and-white caricatures, there's no point in being here at all, or trying to discuss anything. I personally am here for the occasional person who can see beyond that. Welcome to reality, and humanity.

G7

 

[planet7]

I can say that we both found the ride rather boring and I couldn't tell you the story of that ride if it bit me in the butt...Now keep in mind...this is coming from an average guest. Those ones that Disney is trying to entertain.

This is rather like saying, "I'm an average movie patron, and I didn't like this movie, so it's no good". There are occasions of almost universal consensus. Gigli received such an overwhelming consensus against it, that I didn't bother. Ditto for SuperStar Limo. But thankfully, most movies and most rides are not so incredibly disastrous that nearly no one likes them. You're entitled to your opinions and feelings, but please know that you don't speak for everyone--nor does the tiny microcosm of this board or this thread. Many people love El Rio de Tiempo--including "average guests", if there is such a thing.

I'd also like to remind everyone--one more time, sing along with me--Disney doens't always know they're doing (again, I need point no farther than Journey Into Your Imagination) and that they don't necessarily do things with guest satisfaction in mind (again, JIYI is an excellent example). There was a very clear intent with that one, to eliminate a large portion of the ride to make room for a larger and inescapable gift shop. Nevermind that they were so amazingly stupid (see first point) as to not consider that the character featured in the merchandise, no long existed anywhere in a Disney property.

As someone else astutely pointed out, this could all be about selling Three Caballeros merchandise.

G7

 

[SirGoofy]

Many people love El Rio de Tiempo--including "average guests", if there is such a thing.

I wonder where the lines are then?

 

[mousermerf]

And there are stantion pole holes drilled into the ground of the steps leading into the main pyramid of the Mexico pavilion for if the queue for El Rio ever got that long.

Sadly, it never does.

You can say you like the ride all you want, but you're in a unique minority. Very few people ride the attraction and even fewer consider it a must-do and even fewer want to see it left unchanged and even fewer have problems with the 3 Cabelleros.

So..

Ride It > Care About It > Preserve It > Dislike 3 Cabs

Itty-bitty teeny-tiny bit of the guest demographic.

 

[planet7]

You can say you like the ride all you want, but you're in a unique minority.

Well, if you say so, then it must be true. And I'm sure that adding the Three Cabs is going to make it every bit the blockbuster that pimping Figment made Journey Into Your Imagination With Figment. And it's all happening because that's what the guests want and Disney knows it. And Disney can do no wrong. Did I forget anything?

G7

 

[planet7]

I wonder where the lines are then?

Forgive me for being blunt (and I know blunt will be read as rude, so everyone, go ahead and have a field day with this)--if you can't be bothered with reading my posts, please don't bother me with stupid questions. I already addressed the line issue. Go back and read.

G7

 

[SirGoofy]

Forgive me for being blunt (and I know blunt will be read as rude, so everyone, go ahead and have a field day with this)--if you can't be bothered with reading my posts, please don't bother me with stupid questions. I already addressed the line issue. Go back and read.

G7

Sorry, but I can't ind where you talk about lines. But I'm kinda swamped with exams this week, so my mind really isn't fully here right now. But if you point out where you talked about them, I'd gladly apologize.

 

[planet7]

But if you point out where you talked about them, I'd gladly apologize.

It's really not important. None of this is.

G7

 

[pheneix]

So the general consensus is that El Rio is not popular anymore. Considering that its counts are so low, it is pretty much true. From what I have heard of the changes thus far I don't think the ride will be altered that much. A few new animations and a dramatically refurbished finale. The guy that is doing the animations is doing good work. Maybe the ride won't be an incoherent mess.

The reason I stand behind my argument that there are much better ways to move Epcot forward is that I don't think adding the Three Cabs will really make that much of a difference to the ride. The movie is so old now that it is practically irrelevant. Maybe the character meet and greet is popular, but even so they would not be the first characters that guests jumped in line for without having any idea who they are. I've seen Darkwing Duck draw a huge line at DAK, but aside from me and the two nerds present with me NO ONE had any idea what the character was from.

So now we have the Three Cabs coming to El Rio. Its popularity will spike when all the APs show up to ride it, but I just don't see it making a huge difference in adding to the ride's counts in the long run. I do fear that it will erode what minimal information it has to offer about Mexico, however. Hell, one of the three characters came from Brazil. Most of the feature film also took place in Brazil. And these guys are supposed to narrate a boat ride about Mexico? The fundamentals of this idea just don't mesh. I stand by what I said before in that Disney needs to bring back storytellers who truly care about inspiring and informing others, and they need to bring them back NOW.

 

[lnsemsf]

The ride IS dated, cheesey, and pretty bad. However, that is why my friends and I absolutely love it! We usualy ride it 2-4 times in a row, sit in the front row with our feet up, and drink whatever we happen to have bought at the bar outside. Do I wan't to see the ride changed, absolutely not. Should it change, probably. As long as they don't change the boats so I can still put my feet up, and don't make it obnoxious and "kiddy" like Journey in to Imagination,then I'll still be riding it, relaxing with a drink, and will be so numb to the changes that it's not going to matter to me at all. So I say Disney, bring on your changes, just be gentle.

 

[planet7]

my friends and I absolutely love it!

I'm sorry, but you simply must be mistaken. MouseMerf said so.

G7

 

[wannab@dis]

Explosive thread... but yet full of the same old arguments and complaints by a few. The old was better, the new is bad, the characters don't belong, blah, blah, blah.

Looking past the alleged racial issues (whether a valid basis or not), it looks like there are about 3 or 4 core people totally against the rumored changes and it's interesting to keep reading their excuses as to why progress and change is an issue. Of course, they will always argue they are for change but only *good* change. Yet, they rarely find any *good* change to praise.

In any event, this following quote, especially the bold section, is extremely telling and basically debunks their stance based on their own claims.

I am fully willing to understand that people like the application of characters and that certain people will like that. Therefore, I ask that those people are also willing to see that EPCOT Center was very successfully executed. But, it did not necessarily reach the size of an audience Disney wanted or appeal to the broad base. If you like the changes, I am happy for you. But, as I have said before, at least have the respect to see that these are very troubling to people because they do, in fact, symbolize the death of the exact things people loved about Disney World. Remember, "People" means everyone.

Interestingly, a claim was made that something was successful, but "did not necessarily reach the size of audience ... or appeal to the broad base." Seems like some extremely screwed up logic for a corporate entity. Somehow they want us to believe it was successful when it didn't appeal to the broad base, but something that will likely appeal to the larger base is a bad move. :veryconfu

Let's try to remember a simple fact... Epcot is a theme park built for one purpose. Sorry, that purpose is not some higher philosophical motive that some want to dream about, but rather, to make money. Any attempt by the consumer to instill some higher motive to the park simply means WDI succeeded in pulling some Disney showmanship to affect the transfer of $$$ from our pockets to theirs. The illusion of Epcot serving some higher purpose, as purported by a vocal few, just shows they "sold" their product very well. :lol:

 

[SirGoofy]

So now we have the Three Cabs coming to El Rio. Its popularity will spike when all the APs show up to ride it, but I just don't see it making a huge difference in adding to the ride's counts in the long run. I do fear that it will erode what minimal information it has to offer about Mexico, however. Hell, one of the three characters came from Brazil. Most of the feature film also took place in Brazil. And these guys are supposed to narrate a boat ride about Mexico? The fundamentals of this idea just don't mesh. I stand by what I said before in that Disney needs to bring back storytellers who truly care about inspiring and informing others, and they need to bring them back NOW.

I think it might add to the attendance just because when people see Donald, they'll flip and go on the ride. I can see where you're coming from when talking about Jose being from Brazil being a problem though. I'm sure it'll be done in a tasteful manor in which the culture of Mexico is taught in a much better way than it is now. After thinking about it for a while, I almost wish they would just use Panchito to narrate, being that he is the Mexican character.

 

[Hakunamatata]

Now keep in mind...this is coming from an average guest. Those ones that Disney is trying to entertain.

Have you ridden it trying to find all the hidden Mickeys? There are quite a few. That makes it interesting to me.

 

[Legacy]

Explosive thread... but yet full of the same old arguments and complaints by a few. The old was better, the new is bad, the characters don't belong, blah, blah, blah.

Looking past the alleged racial issues (whether a valid basis or not), it looks like there are about 3 or 4 core people totally against the rumored changes and it's interesting to keep reading their excuses as to why progress and change is an issue. Of course, they will always argue they are for change but only *good* change. Yet, they rarely find any *good* change to praise.

In any event, this following quote, especially the bold section, is extremely telling and basically debunks their stance based on their own claims.



Interestingly, a claim was made that something was successful, but "did not necessarily reach the size of audience ... or appeal to the broad base." Seems like some extremely screwed up logic for a corporate entity. Somehow they want us to believe it was successful when it didn't appeal to the broad base, but something that will likely appeal to the larger base is a bad move. :veryconfu

Let's try to remember a simple fact... Epcot is a theme park built for one purpose. Sorry, that purpose is not some higher philosophical motive that some want to dream about, but rather, to make money. Any attempt by the consumer to instill some higher motive to the park simply means WDI succeeded in pulling some Disney showmanship to affect the transfer of $$$ from our pockets to theirs. The illusion of Epcot serving some higher purpose, as purported by a vocal few, just shows they "sold" their product very well. :lol:

Best post in the entire thread.

 

[planet7]

Best post in the entire thread.

Okay, I'll bite. Why? Was it the "celeberate the money" thing? 'cause I really, really don't get that. Why people want to justify, even celerate, flushing their money down the toilet so a chosen few can get even wealthier, is absolutely beyond me. But then again, I've learned not to always expect reason on this board.

G7

 

[Legacy]

Okay, I'll bite. Why? Was it the "celeberate the money" thing? 'cause I really, really don't get that. Why people want to justify, even celerate, flushing their money down the toilet so a chosen few can get even wealthier, is absolutely beyond me. But then again, I've learned not to always expect reason on this board.

G7

It's the only argument that looks at logic rather than opinion. And (OMG) it's a neutral stance as well. You seem really quick to dismiss any stance that is different as "stupid" or "less enlightened" (and I don't mean to say that you ARE... just that you SEEM to be). No one here is spouting off "Hooray for capitalism and the commercialization of Disney!" No, hakunamatata's argument wasn't for or against either side. It was just true.

Disney parks were founded on synergy and cross-commercialization. Epcot has been labeled with a stigma since it's opening. All Disney is doing is trying to erase that stigma. Is that bad? Is it really that terrible that Disney is trying to bring more money into the parks, which will in turn allow for more money to be invested in said parks? I definitely see where your side of the argument is coming from, but I have to ask you, "Why?" All it is is an opinion. You keep going on about how your arguments keep getting dismissed when you are doing the same thing.

hakunamatata had the only TRUE post in this thread. There is nothing to disprove that Disney was in Epcot for the money.

 

[planet7]

No one here is spouting off "Hooray for capitalism and the commercialization of Disney!" No, hakunamatata's argument wasn't for or against either side.

So Disney is in it to make money. That's not news to anyone here, and there's nothing at all profound about recognizing the fact. The underlying message though, is that "it's all about the money, so it doesn't matter what you think".

Disney parks were founded on synergy and cross-commercialization.

Disney wouldn't know synergy if it bit 'em in the posterior. They can trumpet their so-called "synergy" 'til the cows come home, but when their idea of "synergy" is promoting tired (and vapid when they were new) properties like the "Honey I Shrunk" franchise, or when every family on every ABC sitcom had to make an obligatory visit to Disney World, it's painfully obvious how uninspired they are regarding synergy.

And again, this all comes back to the money, anyway. Unless you have stock in the company, why would you care? Why is there this feeling that the company making money--not making guests happy, not offering value for their dollar--but just making the company money is the most important thing in the world? Have they got you that snowed?

allow for more money to be invested in said parks?

Because it won't be. Plain and simple. For years the parks have been cash cows to support Disney's failing ventures. By and large, money from the parks has not been re-invested into the parks.


G7