Cinderella Castle Ice Lights = Bad Show?

[hardcard]

While I appreciate that this is a temporary thing, and they are in their first year.. I feel that the execution of the castle lights have a bit of "bad show" similar to that of everest..

Reference the picture below:

So.. Viewing the castle for any side besides dead-on reveals that the lights do no completely cover the entire turret structure.. and even on the top "window" area, the lights are simply only on the main-street facing side of that turret, the rest is completely bare of lighting..

I know this is picky, I just wanted to get you guys thoughts on it.. My thoughts are simple.. Complete the show, complete the illusion.

 

[Buried20KLeague]

My thought is that there could be a good reason why they did it the way they did.

It could easily be possible that if they did all the turrets, and sides, etc, that from the front it might have looked cluttered. Maybe even hard to tell depth and so on. If that theory would hold true, then it would make sense to me to pick an angle, and tailor the whole project so that it looked best from that angle that was chosen.

Basically, the whole "sometimes less is more" theory.

That being said... I'm sure at some point the topic of less cost came up as well... Whether it was the reasoning behind the decision or just a "extra added bonus", who knows.

 

[WIX]

Even though it stops on the sides, it is awfully pretty. What an amazing shot you got with the reflection and all. Great job!

 

[DisneyRoxMySox]

I do agree with you. But as the second poster stated, if it was a problem with perspective and what not. I suppose it had to be done.

Quick question.. What's wrong with E:E?

 

[ISTCrew20]

I think too many lights would make it look bad. Plus to view on Main Street is so amazing that it's acceptable to look past the fact the the entire castle isn't covered with lights.

And don't forget, a lucky family has to be able to sleep in the top room. I'm sure it's bright enough already for them with the lights they have on it right now.

 

[hardcard]

My thought is that there could be a good reason why they did it the way they did.

It could easily be possible that if they did all the turrets, and sides, etc, that from the front it might have looked cluttered. Maybe even hard to tell depth and so on. If that theory would hold true, then it would make sense to me to pick an angle, and tailor the whole project so that it looked best from that angle that was chosen.

Basically, the whole "sometimes less is more" theory.

That being said... I'm sure at some point the topic of less cost came up as well... Whether it was the reasoning behind the decision or just a "extra added bonus", who knows.

You know what.. you're exactly right.. I never thought about it that way.. It would definately look more cluttered if the 'rear' and 'in-between' turrets were done too... making it a jumbled mess from a distance...

 

[hardcard]

I do agree with you. But as the second poster stated, if it was a problem with perspective and what not. I suppose it had to be done.

Quick question.. What's wrong with E:E?

e:e has the rear of the mountain totally unthemed within plain view... VERY bad show on E:E

 

[Master Yoda]

I think this thread is proof that no matter what Disney does someone will find fault in it.

 

[Austin1]

Castle Lights?

I agree with the majority of you guys. I think it looks wonderful as it is, even if it isn't Disneyland Paris standards. It's still better than what we have had before...nothing. I do have to agree with "hardcard" on the problem with E:E. I worked at Disney all sumer and if anything drove me insane it was that. Every time I went to AK I just had to keep my mind off of it. It looks like a giant warehouse from the parking lot and every one sees it. I asked a CM about it, they told me that the funding that was supposed to go to the back of the mountain went to hurricane Katrina relief instead and they have never had the money since to fix it.

 

[danesporty]

No matter what happens someone will find something about it they dont like. Im glad they did this with the castle, and I think it looks great. If Disney did give the money for the back of the mountain to Katrina that is a great thing and hopefully in the future they will get back and finish it!

 

[Teenchy]

And don't forget, a lucky family has to be able to sleep in the top room. I'm sure it's bright enough already for them with the lights they have on it right now.

Had not thought about that......hope they have some THICK drapes....or it might be like living in the house next to Clark Griswald. :ROFLOL:

 

[haveyoumetmark]

Everyone has their own opinions. For instance, I think that covering everything would have been a waste of money, energy, and time. I can assure you, the lights were put up with efficiency in mind.

 

[Yoop33]

Well they are ICE lights right? When was the last time you saw ice on an entire house or building? Typically ice is only found on the top of the buildings or hanging from the tops of things like gutters, etc. So looking at this pic I would say it looks very correct on how they did it with the exception of the back.
Now I have not seen the castle lit like this from up close but we did see it Monday night standing at the TTC and it looked amazing even from there

 

[jedimaster1227]

I think this thread is proof that no matter what Disney does someone will find fault in it.

Sad but true...


To the OP, there are at least three reasons why the wouldn't cover the castle completely:

1. The show is meant to be looked at from the front (this I can confirm)
2. Lights like those aren't cheap, and to install them in areas not to be commonly viewed, it wasn't fiscally responsible.
3. Fireworks can be dangerous when around a large amount of electrical equipment such as this. If my mapping of the castle lights was right, at least one castle-mounted launcher is near the side of the castle where you feel they need to add lights.

 

[Rob562]

As for EE's "warehouse" sections on the back of the mountain, didn't they paint those walls as cliff villages/buildings, similar to the "village" the lifthill goes through?

-Rob

 

[haveyoumetmark]

As for EE's "warehouse" sections on the back of the mountain, didn't they paint those walls as cliff villages/buildings, similar to the "village" the lifthill goes through?

-Rob

They are painted a solid brown color, but it blends well IMO. I wouldn't sweat the small stuff, not saying you are, but to the people who pick on EE. :shrug:

 

[Captain Hank]

This isn't the first time that the castle has only been decorated on the front. The 25th anniversary pink nightmare was very much focused on the front of the castle. The rear turrets didn't have the inflatable candy, and thus it looked really weird with the bright pink walls and dark blue turrets. The Happiest Celebration overlay was similarly weighted towards the front of the castle, with minimal decoration on the back.

 

[leobloom]

I asked a CM about it, they told me that the funding that was supposed to go to the back of the mountain went to hurricane Katrina relief instead and they have never had the money since to fix it.

Wow, never heard that one before. Bad show becomes a noble sacrifice made by Disney.

 

[JustPlainBill]

I think it looks wonderful, and I can be quite negative when I see something I don't like.
Just a little addition that doesn't take away from the original look.
Much like adding a little salt or some other spice to some dish that doesn't smother the taste but enhances it just a bit.
I love the look and color, It's too bad for me that the castle won't look this way for our trip in August, I would love to see it in person. Most important to me is it doesn't change the look of the castle, like that birthday cake thing they did before.

 

[PlutoInOrlando]

And don't forget about how it would look from Cinderella's Royal Table.

It would probably be so bright that you wouldn't be able to enjoy Fantasyland - let alone the fireworks as they "work with pixi dust" during the nightly show.