"Clip Shows" like Fantasmic and Philharmagic, and : good thing or bad thing?

[Bairstow]

"Clip Shows" like Fantasmic and Philharmagic : good thing or bad thing?

I listened to a recent WDW Fanboys podcast with the original Dreamfinder, Ron Schneider, and he said something I thought was interesting- as a longtime Disney parks performer and adviser, he as a strong aversion for what he calls "clip shows" like Fantasmic. I suppose other attractions like the now-defunct Mickey Mouse Review and the more recent Philharmagic would fit into this category.



Go to 57:45 http://www.wdwfanboys.com/wfb-files/podcasts/2012/WDWFanBoys-Episode-111-01-22-2012.mp3

Thinking about it for a while, I'm inclined to agree with him. A "clip show" format for a themed attraction fails to give the guest a proper themed experience, instead using a contrived framing structure to shove in as many recognizable sequences and images as possible. These sorts of shows really are the antithesis of what most theme park design and writing tends to do which is meant to be immerseve.

Am I alone in this, or is Mr. Schneider onto something?

 

[the-reason14]

On to something, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of experiences in WDW that have this so I see no problem.

 

[MarkTwain]

Interesting point. I think you're definitely onto something, saying that a "clip attraction" isn't really true thematic design, in that it is 100% referential and only crops and combines the imagery of pre-existing media. In a sense, this can be detrimental to the design in that it does both the source media (the movie) and the attraction a disservice - the attraction loses the opportunity for a more original and self-contained design, and the source media loses all of the surrounding context that defines the clip and actually makes it memorable.

This kind of occurred to me about this watching DCA's Little Mermaid ride on youtube, which isn't quite the same thing but is in a similar vein. Despite years of development and the tens/hundreds of millions spent on it, the ride will only ever be a 4-minute reiteration of the movie's highlights. The greatest success the "Kiss the Girl" scene can achieve as a design, for instance, is to recall the existing scene from the movie as accurately as possible. It can't really redefine the movie scene, or replace it in the public consciousness.

Clip attractions are a bit like clip episodes pf TV shows, in that sense - highlighting the "best of" moments, and possibly even briefly recapturing the sense of emotion you felt watching it the first time, but in the end providing no real independent substance or memorable moment uniquely identifiable to the attraction.

 

[Rivers Rowe]

I think philharmagic and fantasmic are outstanding attractions that deliver. People labeling them into something is missing out on what they really are. Just a theme park attraction.

 

[MKCP 1985]

There is plenty of room at Walt Disney World for both the offerings of such attractions as PhilharMagic and Fantasmic on the one hand and such attractions as the original Journey Into Imagination with Figment on the other.

Oh wait. . .

:lol:

 

[dave&di]

I love 'clip shows'. Philharmagic is one of my favourite attractions, my love for Disney comes from watching many a Disney movie as a child, so to sit in a theatre and see clips and songs from my favourite movies, plus witnessing the interaction of smells and water to me is special.

My OH has said to me before that the 1st time he realised I was enjoying my 1st WDW vacation was when he turned to me when watching Philharmagic and saw I was swaying and singing along!

To me Philharmagic and Fantasmic are important to show what Disney was all about. Simple but effective IMO.

 

[Master Yoda]

To me clip shows are akin to a cover tune. You are typically already working with a former hit, they are familiar, and you are nearly guaranteed success. In a nut shell, they are the safe bet. All of which is fine but I prefer the greater risk and better rewards of an original show.

 

[spoodles]

Clip shows are medleys. Some people like medleys, some don't. Give me whole song anytime.

 

[Rowdy]

I think they're fine. Plus, kids love them.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I love 'clip shows'. Philharmagic is one of my favourite attractions, my love for Disney comes from watching many a Disney movie as a child, so to sit in a theatre and see clips and songs from my favourite movies, plus witnessing the interaction of smells and water to me is special.

But as the Disney experience becomes more derivative and referential, is it still worthwhile as an attraction? Why go through all of the expense of seeing bits of something that can be seen at home or on the go through an increasing number of devices?

Your comment also gets at the issue of the source of fandom. There appears to be a distinction between people who are Disney fans, and thus like the parks for their associations with other aspects of what constitutes Disney (in your case the Disney films) and those whose fandom is more based in the parks as distinct and separate entities. Those whose fandom is more generally Disney based and less park based are likely to have a greater preference for the "clip show" format, as it readily satisfies that desire and expectation for referring to and reframing established Disney experiences.

 

[dave&di]

But as the Disney experience becomes more derivative and referential, is it still worthwhile as an attraction? Why go through all of the expense of seeing bits of something that can be seen at home or on the go through an increasing number of devices?

Your comment also gets at the issue of the source of fandom. There appears to be a distinction between people who are Disney fans, and thus like the parks for their associations with other aspects of what constitutes Disney (in your case the Disney films) and those whose fandom is more based in the parks as distinct and separate entities. Those whose fandom is more generally Disney based and less park based are likely to have a greater preference for the "clip show" format, as it readily satisfies that desire and expectation for referring to and reframing established Disney experiences.

So the parks have something for everyone, 'clip shows' for 'Disney fans' and other attractions such as Mission Space and Expedition Everest for 'thrill' seekers! It's a win win situation IMO!

 

[Thrill]

So the parks have something for everyone, 'clip shows' for 'Disney fans' and other attractions such as Mission Space and Expedition Everest for 'thrill' seekers! It's a win win situation IMO!

But isn't there a third group? The group who cares entirely for thematics, not for thrill rides or clip shows? Yes, the Haunted Mansion is here to stay, but Disney hasn't done much along those lines in recent years. Pirates of the Caribbean still exists, but it has evolved into Johnny Depp's Pirates Ride.

Few heavily themed attractions have been produced in the recent years. Maybe 5 in the last two decades, give or take a couple of attractions. In the meantime, other theme-heavy rides have declined or even been removed, like Pirates and Horizons, respectively.

While I do agree that a balance is preferable, I think that the balance has shifted too far in the thrill and clip direction, farther away from the original dark ride type attractions.

 

[Silver Figment]

I think clip shows are fine in moderation. A few is nice to show off some of what Disney has done, although i'd rather see a wider variety of movies represented in clip shows rather than the same "popular" ones. If you have too many clip shows the park can give off the feeling that they don't care and are just making easy attractions. A healthy balance is good and i think WDW is doing just fine with that.

 

[ChrisFL]

I think clip shows are fine in moderation. A few is nice to show off some of what Disney has done, although i'd rather see a wider variety of movies represented in clip shows rather than the same "popular" ones. If you have too many clip shows the park can give off the feeling that they don't care and are just making easy attractions. A healthy balance is good and i think WDW is doing just fine with that.

Agreed, the problem is that if you go to the shows in a certain order, and the parades, and attractions, you could literally see references to, say, The Lion King 4-5 times or the Little Mermaid 4-5 times. That's where Disney needs to give them more variety.

 

[ght]

I am not sure I would call Philharmagic a 'clip show.' It isn't like they just edited a bunch of clips directly from the movie together, the scenes are comically redone to fit in with Donald's story. I don't see it as being much differnt than a dark ride that takes you through scenes of a movie.

I do agree with things like Fantasmic, though I like how the DL one uses the sailing ship Columbia (plus the early show draws the crowd and makes it easy to get a seat at Blue Bayou). That is one reason I don't love World of Color like a lot of people do, it is pretty much just a very fancy clip show.

 

[flynnibus]

By this defintion... Disney's greatest live show every put on.. Fantasmic! is a clip show and some would have an aversion to it.

Considering the company was started on shorts... and built itself on repurposing other's existing stories... I don't have a problem with the format.

It's not like Philharmagic is simply flat clips edited together.

 

[unkadug]

The Great Movie Ride would be the ultimate Clip Show. Therefore I approve of clip shows.

 

[AEfx]

I would hardly call Philharmagic a "clip" show. I believe it's all original animation.

Regardless, I want to hear those songs, see those scenes. They evoke feelings in me. Newer stuff I have never heard before (like Nemo musical) doesn't do a lot for me unless it's especially catchy/good enough to be iconic, which is rare.

 

[flynnibus]

The Great Movie Ride would be the ultimate Clip Show. Therefore I approve of clip shows.

Win

 

[Tom Morrow]

Interesting topic. I have always felt this way about Fantasmic, and its one of the reasons I think the show is overrated - especially with WDW's added "padding" like the long bubbles montage. "Hey, remember THIS part from this movie? and this one? and THIS one? Aren't Disney's movies great?? Remember that while you go buy a 5 dollar pretzel since you're hungry because you had to devote two hours out of your day to see this thing."

I think philharmagic and fantasmic are outstanding attractions that deliver. People labeling them into something is missing out on what they really are. Just a theme park attraction.

Why do people on this forum feel the need to shoot down anything that isn't talking about how MaGiCaL everything is?