Bob Iger treated Disneyland with kid gloves — but took a sledgehammer to the ill-conceived DCA - OCR/SCNG

[el_super]

The thrill ride push is undoubtedly true.

I don't think it's fair to say that Sindbad is received poorly, at least not the current incarnation of the ride. It has short lines for the same reason Pirates often has short lines...massive capacity in a way nothing else at the park does.

I don't think it's a bad ride, but it just doesn't really have the reach of the other top rides at Tokyo Disney Sea (and that's saying something about a park that rarely advertises its rides as it is). When you have an AA heavy show that's pulling in crowds because the lines are short, you definitely have to consider that against any plans to build more of those rides. I don't think it's really out there to suggest that even at Disneyland, people are coming to see the headlining attractions (Rise of the Resistance, Indiana Jones, Space Mountain) and end up riding Pirates because it's there and the line is short.

I think it's hard to sell the expense of an attraction when you think the best you can achieve is a C+.

The problem with Mermaid is that the only place where the animatronics were ambitious were when they were depicting characters important to the story...

Yeah... I'm just not sure that spending more money on that ride would have significantly changed perceptions of it, and that starts down the path of why they don't build those AA rides anymore. It's not necessarily that they don't want to spend the money, because they have spent LAVISHLY on things like Smuggler's Run and Rise of the Resistance. It's more along the lines of, can you justify spending 200-300 million dollars on a ride format, that you can't really promote as the be-all, end-all of themed experience.

So they spend the money instead on designing proprietary ride systems and scenic effect technologies, paired up with IP that only Disney can provide to produce something that can't be copied elsewhere. Yeah, it doesn't always work, but at least it's a consistent strategy.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Yeah... I'm just not sure that spending more money on that ride would have significantly changed perceptions of it, and that starts down the path of why they don't build those AA rides anymore. It's not necessarily that they don't want to spend the money, because they have spent LAVISHLY on things like Smuggler's Run and Rise of the Resistance. It's more along the lines of, can you justify spending 200-300 million dollars on a ride format, that you can't really promote as the be-all, end-all of themed experience.

So they spend the money instead on designing proprietary ride systems and scenic effect technologies, paired up with IP that only Disney can provide to produce something that can't be copied elsewhere. Yeah, it doesn't always work, but at least it's a consistent strategy.

It’s a consistent strategy with worse and worse return on investment. At $100 million, that became $150 million, The Little Mermaid should have been amazing. It had more than enough resources.

Proprietary ride systems absolutely can be and are copied all the time, even by Disney and Universal’s manufacturing partners. Anyone can buy a flying theater from Dynamic Attractions, who built Soarin’ for Disney. Oceaneering sells their own version of the Spider-Man/Transformers ride vehicle.

 

[PiratesMansion]

I don't think it's a bad ride, but it just doesn't really have the reach of the other top rides at Tokyo Disney Sea (and that's saying something about a park that rarely advertises its rides as it is). When you have an AA heavy show that's pulling in crowds because the lines are short, you definitely have to consider that against any plans to build more of those rides. I don't think it's really out there to suggest that even at Disneyland, people are coming to see the headlining attractions (Rise of the Resistance, Indiana Jones, Space Mountain) and end up riding Pirates because it's there and the line is short.

I think it's hard to sell the expense of an attraction when you think the best you can achieve is a C+.




Yeah... I'm just not sure that spending more money on that ride would have significantly changed perceptions of it, and that starts down the path of why they don't build those AA rides anymore. It's not necessarily that they don't want to spend the money, because they have spent LAVISHLY on things like Smuggler's Run and Rise of the Resistance. It's more along the lines of, can you justify spending 200-300 million dollars on a ride format, that you can't really promote as the be-all, end-all of themed experience.

So they spend the money instead on designing proprietary ride systems and scenic effect technologies, paired up with IP that only Disney can provide to produce something that can't be copied elsewhere. Yeah, it doesn't always work, but at least it's a consistent strategy.

Have you been on Sindbad?

And are you suggesting that building rides that can soak up huge numbers of guests is a bad thing? Even if some people are only riding Pirates because its lines are shorter than, say, Splash Mountain, isn't that still a net win for the guest experience if it makes the other lines shorter?

Are you suggesting that people only ride Pirates BECAUSE the line is short? Even if that was the case, the fact that Pirates routinely gets 30 minute waits in the middle of the day despite its high capacity should suggest that it is held in higher regard than, say, Sindbad, an attraction that averages about a 15 minute wait in a park with significantly fewer attractions and less ride capacity to go around.

The difference is also NOT that Pirates was a movie franchise and Sindbad wasn't, as they have already started actively removing things that reflect the movie franchise and restoring original elements of the attraction with the lines for the attraction unchanged.

Clearly, some people still care about Pirates.

It's also important to remember that "Line short" does not equal "ride bad or unpopular." "Line long" does not equal "ride good or popular." That Space Mountain's line is twice is long as that of Pirates does NOT mean that people like Space Mountain twice as much; in fact, Space Mountain's hourly ride capacity is about half that of Pirates. Also, ANYONE can ride Pirates; Space Mountain has a height requirement and is a no go for people of "unusual body proportions" or who do not like thrill rides. Too many parks, Disney included with its recent emphasis on thrill rides, have lost sight of that.

Are people going to be drawn to the new and shiny? Absolutely, that's the way the world works. But I don't know what to tell you if you can't see that at Disneyland specifically and Disney parks generally, nostalgia is also a significant draw. Disney parks are often treated like sacred spaces, up to and including the attractions within them. Remove too many, and give too many inferior replacements, and you're left with a husk of a place that struggles to draw people (i.e. Epcot).

I kind of can't believe that I've had to defend Pirates and Mansion in this thread. Feels like a bad omen.

RE: Mermaid, their budgets are out of whack, and Mermaid is no exception to that, but spending a little more (or more efficiently spending the money they were allocated, which they used to be able to do) to make the entire attraction consistent would have done wonders for its reception. That Disney goofed and combined lavish aspects and dirt cheap aspects (or at least, things that FEEL that way) into one attraction in a way that did not cohere does not mean that the attraction was a bad investment, or that AA attractions are bad investments in a more general sense. It was the execution, not the concept, that was the problem.

 

[Little Green Men]

Exactly. It's cost cutting. Sure, it looks better on some rides than others, but it's a little uncanny valley for me when it's not implemented well.

@GrandCanyonConcourse I count 15 animatronics on Frozen and 11 on Seven Dwarfs Mine Train. plus the figures in the little end scene (and it's a roller coaster. I'm not even saying it NEEDS animatronics, just pointing that out). Is that not sparse to you compared to attractions like Pirates (119), Splash (103 at DL, 68 at WDW), or Sindbad (allegedly around 150)?

I also don't understand your need to troll with laughing emojis on posts that don't 100% match your own opinions, which detract from the legitimate contributions you do make on this board. Not saying I've never done that, but you do that quite a lot. It's baffling.

Well first off I apologize for that, I wouldn’t consider it trolling. I admit I do it too much and will try to show more restraint if it’s viewed that way.

It’s sparse maybe, but when you compare it to the maelstrom before it which only had 3 animatronic trolls and maybe 2 or 3 static figures and a few static animals it’s a nice net gain.

 

[PiratesMansion]

Well first off I apologize for that, I wouldn’t consider it trolling. I admit I do it too much and will try to show more restraint if it’s viewed that way.

It’s sparse maybe, but when you compare it to the maelstrom before it which only had 3 animatronic trolls and maybe 2 or 3 static figures and a few static animals it’s a nice net gain.

I just watched an old pov of Maelstrom to compare; it was harder to tell because Maelstrom was considerably darker, but I counted around 10. I won't pretend I went on the attraction that many times and so some of those may indeed be static figures. It's a gain, but by any metric not a particularly large one.

What struck me watching the pov was that Maelstrom was able to provide a much more convincing illusion of depth and detail, but part of that is probably simply the lighting. It's just so much brighter in there now and it really highlights the shallowness of the sets and how little space they really had to work with. Because of the lighting differences, on Maelstrom this was much better disguised.

Frankly neither are/were great attractions, at least from my perspective, and it's a shame that Disney didn't opt to expand the Maelstrom show building more than they did and really go to town with Frozen, to create something of a much grander scale. Alas...

RE: the laughing emoji, it's certainly not full-on trolling but it at least gestures in that direction. I sincerely appreciate the apology.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

Maelstrom was not a great ride, but it was better than Frozen. No reason to go on another musical ride for little girls, but a viking polar bear troll ride with oil rigs? It's one of the most masculine rides they've ever done and charming as heck from the plain beige waiting line with a gorgeous mural, to the ominous and frankly impressive yet simple scene with the light at the beginning to the cool stormy ending with splashing waves and lightning. Come to think of it, maybe it was a great ride.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

All this talk of Pixar Pier reminds me... has anyone heard from John Lassetter lately?

After he was dumped in a #MeToo scandal, has anyone heard what he's up to? Besides drinking, obviously.

He has a new gig as head of Skydance Animation and their first two movies, “Luck” and “Spellbound”, will come out in February and November of 2022.

 

[Stevek]

Just watched a ride through of 7DMT. What’s wrong with the projected faces? They seem to work pretty well on the dwarves... on the video at least. I feel that in general it works well on cartoony faces and the Dwarves heads seem to have good molds with the projections accentuating the features and animating the faces. Unlike pillow face Constance in HM where it looks like a projection on a flat surface.

Do they not look good in person?

I thought the ride was fantastic, it all worked really well in my opinion. It's just a very enjoyable coaster/dark ride hybrid.

 

[Stevek]

Maelstrom was not a great ride, but it was better than Frozen. No reason to go on another musical ride for little girls, but a viking polar bear troll ride with oil rigs? It's one of the most masculine rides they've ever done and charming as heck from the plain beige waiting line with a gorgeous mural, to the ominous and frankly impressive yet simple scene with the light at the beginning to the cool stormy ending with splashing waves and lightning. Come to think of it, maybe it was a great ride.

Maelstrom probably gets far more love than it deserves. The uniqueness of the ride system, going backwards and forwards, was really it's calling card IMO. Whenever these rides close, they generally get more praise than necessary...I mean, Adventure Thru Innerspace was unique but it wasn't as great as many folks have built up in their minds.

 

[mickEblu]

I thought the ride was fantastic, it all worked really well in my opinion. It's just a very enjoyable coaster/dark ride hybrid.

Looks pretty cool to me. I wasn’t following during construction. I think a lot of people are down on it because of what it DIDNT turn out to be and not what it is. The long wait times don’t help either.

 

[Miru]

Maelstrom was not a great ride, but it was better than Frozen. No reason to go on another musical ride for little girls, but a viking polar bear troll ride with oil rigs? It's one of the most masculine rides they've ever done and charming as heck from the plain beige waiting line with a gorgeous mural, to the ominous and frankly impressive yet simple scene with the light at the beginning to the cool stormy ending with splashing waves and lightning. Come to think of it, maybe it was a great ride.

That I can definitely give the ride. It’s one of the most macho things ever to have stood at a Disney park. It’s good that there’s at least one similar ride in Europe.

 

[MouseMelly]

Looks pretty cool to me. I wasn’t following during construction. I think a lot of people are down on it because of what it DIDNT turn out to be and not what it is. The long wait times don’t help either.

For me, the only flaw is length. I don't look to it to be a big thrill ride (or most any Disney ride for that matter), but I'm fine to say that I love it for what it is. It reminds me of the classics with some modern-ish technology. My husband hates rollercoasters (opposite me!), but enjoys this ride. It's just fun.

 

[PiratesMansion]

All of my issues with it have been spelled out:
1. Wait times
2. Short ride duration
3. Something that I don't believe has been mentioned yet, the cars are some of the most uncomfortable I have ever sat in, and unlike previous Disney coasters, are not particularly accommodating for guests of size.

If there was another scene or a longer coaster ride, I would have fewer issues with it. It's not bad, but it's a bit underdone. No matter; if people want to spend their time waiting for it of FPing it, then they're not in line or taking FPs for things I care about. I'd rather ride Big Thunder again for the millionth time-better ride, longer duration, shorter wait, more comfortable cars. Win, win, win, win!

 

[flynnibus]

Looks pretty cool to me. I wasn’t following during construction. I think a lot of people are down on it because of what it DIDNT turn out to be and not what it is. The long wait times don’t help either.

Its short... thats its main flaw. And when greater length was part of the earlier designs... fandom won’t forget that.

Its a good disney ride and adds to the setting of the land

 

[mickEblu]

Its short... thats its main flaw. And when greater length was part of the earlier designs... fandom won’t forget that.

Its a good disney ride and adds to the setting of the land

It’s 3 minutes right? If so, I think that’s a decent length for this ride. Of course I’d prefer another minute or two.

 

[Miru]

It’s 3 minutes right? If so, I think that’s a decent length for this ride. Of course I’d prefer another minute or two.

I think the line experience, while nowhere near as good as Haunted Mansion, Pooh, PPF, or even Mission Breakout, helps a bit in this regard. And uncomfortable? I felt far more cramped on Gadget’s Go Coaster and Matterhorn than on this.

 

[PiratesMansion]

I think the line experience, while nowhere near as good as Haunted Mansion, Pooh, PPF, or even Mission Breakout, helps a bit in this regard. And uncomfortable? I felt far more cramped on Gadget’s Go Coaster and Matterhorn than on this.

Must be a difference in body shape. Gadget's doesn't bother me. Matterhorn, likewise, is fine if I'm in the front of a car. 7DMT, however, is just not nearly as easy to squeeze into and is actively uncomfortable, especially considering that the ride ultimately doesn't do very much.

It's also lacking the detail and polish that makes BTMR so interesting.

It’s 3 minutes right? If so, I think that’s a decent length for this ride. Of course I’d prefer another minute or two.

It's 2000 ft long, which is actually closer to Matterhorn length than I was expecting, but a solid 1000 feet shorter than Space.

I just don't feel like it does anything that exciting, nor is it particularly detailed outside of the show scene. The queue is nice, but I'll take a better ride over a better queue each and every time.

I'd even probably take Shanghai's over Orlando's, even though it's missing the little "bonus" scene at the end and you can get some ugly backstage views because 1) fewer thrill rides in that park, so it stands out more, and 2) it has a single rider line. Not having to waste a FP on it dramatically increases my willingness to ride it.

 

[mickEblu]

Must be a difference in body shape. Gadget's doesn't bother me. Matterhorn, likewise, is fine if I'm in the front of a car. 7DMT, however, is just nearly as easy to squeeze into and is actively uncomfortable, especially considering that the ride ultimately doesn't do very much.

It's also lacking the detail and polish that makes BTMR so interesting.



It's 2000 ft long, which is actually closer to Matterhorn length than I was expecting, but a solid 1000 feet shorter than Space.

I just don't feel like it does anything that exciting, nor is it particularly detailed outside of the show scene. The queue is nice, but I'll take a better ride over a better queue each and every time.

I'd even probably take Shanghai's over Orlando's, even though it's missing the little "bonus" scene at the end and you can get some ugly backstage views because 1) fewer thrill rides in that park, so it stands out more, and 2) it has a single rider line. Not having to waste a FP on it dramatically increases my willingness to ride it.

I haven’t been on it but it looks pretty good for a D ticket coaster. I think people would view it differently if they weren’t waiting 90 minutes for it or planning their day around it.

I anticipate me probably wanting it to go a little faster but then again I also feel that way on RSR.

Never really thought about it before but Shanghai has 1 thrill ride? 2 if you count the river rapids ride. Wonder if they re planning on getting another coaster in there. No IASW. No Jungle Cruise. No Mountains. No Mansion. Can we even call it a castle park? I do like the concept for the Gardens of Imagination and putting the spinners there... even though I remember reading execution wasn’t the best. Something like this would work well for a Mary Poppins themed area.

Back to 7DMT, people were expecting this new crown jewel for Fantasyland and it just didn’t live up to expectations. However I think they’d be over it by now if it was easier to get on.

 

[PiratesMansion]

I haven’t been on it but it looks pretty good for a D ticket coaster. I think people would view it differently if they weren’t waiting 90 minutes for it or planning their day around it.

I anticipate me probably wanting it to go a little faster but then again I also feel that way on RSR.

Never really thought about it before but Shanghai has 1 thrill ride? 2 if you count the river rapids ride. Wonder if they re planning on getting another coaster in there. No IASW. No Jungle Cruise. No Mountains. No Mansion. Can we even call it a castle park? I do like the concept for the Gardens of Imagination and putting the spinners there... even though I remember reading execution wasn’t the best. Something like this would work well for a Mary Poppins themed area.

Back to 7DMT, people were expecting this new crown jewel for Fantasyland and it just didn’t live up to expectations. However I think they’d be over it by now if it was easier to get on.

There are three thrill rides in Shanghai (I guess you could count the rapids if you wanted, but it's literally a dressed up Grizzly River Rapids): Mine Train, Tron, and Rex's Racer. And while it's not a thrill ride, that ropes course where you only have a few skimpy rocks to get across a giant cave while the waterfall next to you is pouring water down right next to you isn't something to sneeze at.

It definitely feels very different from the other castle parks, but it's less problematic in person vs. from the internet, IMO.

It needs more stuff, and it needed more stuff yesterday. Going in early June, I remember getting into the park for Early Entry and trying to immediately get a FP for Soarin'. Already right at the start of EE the return times were at 2:30, and ours actually ended up being later as we "waited too long" to claim our FPs. Waits for the big attractions generally started in the triple digits (even Pirates, their one ride that can move a lot of people, was 80 min and up most of the day. And these were weekdays! It's a shame they aren't interested in just building IASW, even if it's a cloned version. They NEED it from a capacity perspective, and it'd be a very easy project for Disney to do!

There's no way Zootopia is gonna even begin to fix their ride capacity issues.

That said, because the walkways are so wide, it doesn't FEEL that crowded when you're walking around, and it's never been easier to watch the parade because the route is so long.

It's funny that you mention the lack of a HM, because that actually came up recently when I was talking with my friend that's teaching in China. We went to SDL together for his first Disney park visit ever and he loved it, so he went again with his wife, who had been to Disney World, for her birthday. She, too, loved the park but absoulutely could not believe they didn't have a Haunted Mansion! She asked my friend, the employees, me-and she couldn't believe it until each and every person told her they didn't have one. But then, no one in China really knows about HM or any of the classics that are missing (and my friend who has no experience with the American parks doesn't either), and so it doesn't register for them at all that anything's amiss. HK is also missing a bunch of stuff, but interestingly they actually have excess capacity for the crowds they're getting most of the time; a few things didn't make the cut to Paris either.

I agree that if 7DMT had ever gone down from 120 wait minimum or FP it would be better received. Or if they do it like Shanghai and give it a single rider line after the pandemic ends.

 

[Brer Panther]

Apparently, the reason why there aren't Haunted Mansions in Hong Kong and Shanghai is because cultural views of ghosts in China are very different than they are in the West. Apparently, having ghosts in a humorous manner is considered offensive.

They could always do what Mystic Manor did and add a Haunted Mansion-esque dark ride without any ghosts or spirits to Shanghai Disneyland.