Early reviews for TLM ride?

[dweezil78]

Or if they get a lot of negative comments from riders about Ariel's ice cream hair, they could easily update that for our version. Larger changes like the rushed ending would be more difficult to modify b/c there just isn't much track left by that point in the ride.

I'm pretty sure most guests are not commenting on the hairdo of an animatronic character. Do you people even realize how silly this sounds?

 

[ToTBellHop]

I'm pretty sure most guests are not commenting on the hairdo of an animatronic character. Do you people even realize how silly this sounds?

Do you realize how many complaints Disney gets every day. If you place someone at the exit of the ride to survey riders (as they often do with new rides), you will get honest opinions--ESPECIALLY when you are involving California Annual Passholders.

 

[EPCOTCenterLover]

^^Yes- very silly.

 

[MickeyPeace]

Was that a ride through with the lights on? It was way too bright for a dark ride. Out of all the comments here, only one other person touched on that.

I don't want to see the controls behind the characters, the ceiling as plain as day, how the limbs are connected on the characters, etc.

Turn down those lights, NOW!

 

[RandySavage]

My overall impression after riding is that this attraction only barely succeeds at "making the grade" and that once again, stateside Disney has taken one too many shortcuts in development and made some poor judgements in art direction and execution.

It doesn't help that the ride is housed in a grand structure that says, "hey look at me I'm going to be one of the highlights in the park," or that the Disney marketing machine hyped it up as they did. The bottom line is that it's just okay like so many of the more recent stateside offerings where the "wow" factor is the exception rather than the rule.

The Disney apologists use the excuse that it is only supposed to be a FL type dark ride so we shouldn't expect as much as Mansion or Pirates. Why not? Tokyo Pooh was also supposed to be a FL dark ride and there is no need to apologize for its quality.

In my opinion a good example of the quailty we should expect for a ride like Mermaid is Sinbad from Tokyo. There are a multitude of "supporting cast" animatronic figures and there is not one that looked like a window store display character such as those seen in the Under The Sea sequence and the finale from Mermaid.

The descent and of course some of the AA figures were done well. My problem is that we should expect that from every new Disney offering. The animatronic technology has been available since the Wicked Witch from GMR and Muppetvision.

The Under The Sea scene was very poorly lit, meaning extremely bright, and in some cases highlighted the mechanisms controlling the window store display figures. As an alternative why didn't they perhaps use the black light puppetry method that is done so well in the DHS Mermaid show? To orchestrate an automated version of that sequence would have been magical. We would't see the frames, steel and mobiles that are so obvious now but instead would see floating fish in a simulated bio-luminescent environment where the Coral and fantasy sea life would stand out. Tritan's castle background could have been beautiful in Wildfire paint and the scene could have been one of the major highlights of the ride. At a minimum dim the intensity of the current lighting setup about 30%.

Others have commented on the hair and the anti-climatic ending so I don't need to go into that.

All in all the ride left me wanting more but not in a good way. On a scale of one to ten I'd give it a six. There are some talented Imagineers but it appears as though too many of the average talent designers are being given too much decision making power. There was some of that before I left WDI but it seems as though the problem runs rampant now. Budget is always going to be limited - it's what you do with the money that you have that indicates how good of a designer you are.

Personally, I'm fine with the attraction - a souped-up Fantasyland-style darkride combining AAs, animated figures, film, etc. in a six-minute book report of the movie. It's exactly what I expected: no more, no less.

But I appreciate this perspective from ex-WDI WhyLightBulb, unafraid to give a pretty harsh critique of his former company's work, with some perspective on talent, politics, overhead and other issues within WDI that shape the outcome of these projects.

To his point, someone on another board made a very good point: If for $65, Billy Bass
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m80jt6bm6ZA
can move his tail and mouth to lyrics, then a $100,000,000 dollar Disney attraction should have no static figures (like the fish on the wall heading into the Under the Sea room), some fx around the giant Ursula tableau, and all supporting AAs ought to more-articulated (like Sinbad). Again, I'm fine with the ride and hope it's successful (as it represents a big step up from its closest local peer, FL's Pooh), but I think the above perspective on its design with respect to some of Tokyo's A-grade work is an excellent contribution to the thread.

 

[celluloid]

Where it is good it was good where it was bad it was exactly what Whylightbulb seemed to say.

The first scuttle, that is just poor story pacing. Also, the Under The Sea area needs to either get better figures that are more animated, or become much much darker. I would prefer both. But from which how much you can see in there, there is not much illusion and the entire thing feels what it looks like...like you are just looking at Starfish on spinning mechnaisms and static figures rocking back and forth in unison.

The Ursula scene I find to be fantastic. THAT is what I want from a modern Disney family dark ride. The well done Animatronic, the multimedia with the video as her orb. The set up to the scene and the way she loops just enough so you can hear her go through it. The only thing missing was a proper finale showdown with Ursuala scene. That should of been a more intense theatrical moment of the ride...but it never happens. A key element as already pointed out to the story and experience.

 

[aladdin2007]

Where it is good it was good where it was bad it was exactly what Whylightbulb seemed to say.

The first scuttle, that is just poor story pacing. Also, the Under The Sea area needs to either get better figures that are more animated, or become much much darker. I would prefer both. But from which how much you can see in there, there is not much illusion and the entire thing feels what it looks like...like you are just looking at Starfish on spinning mechnaisms and static figures rocking back and forth in unison.

The Ursula scene I find to be fantastic. THAT is what I want from a modern Disney family dark ride. The well done Animatronic, the multimedia with the video as her orb. The set up to the scene and the way she loops just enough so you can hear her go through it. The only thing missing was a proper finale showdown with Ursuala scene. That should of been a more intense theatrical moment of the ride...but it never happens. A key element as already pointed out to the story and experience.

I thought the whole ride was suppose to have a blue light effect of rippling water everywhere??? I didnt see any of that except in the descent scene. The Under the Sea room needs that yet it just seemed standard old lighting, and a tons of plastic fish and more plastic now that Ive rewatched it :shrug:

 

[fundesign]

Edit

 

[whylightbulb]

Personally, I'm fine with the attraction - a souped-up Fantasyland-style darkride combining AAs, animated figures, film, etc. in a six-minute book report of the movie. It's exactly what I expected: no more, no less.

But I appreciate this perspective from ex-WDI WhyLightBulb, unafraid to give a pretty harsh critique of his former company's work, with some perspective on talent, politics, overhead and other issues within WDI that shape the outcome of these projects.

Thank you for the kind words. Of course the only reason I'm unafraid is because of the anonimity . The irony is that some of the people I'm targeting in my critique will be and have been helpful in getting work for my company.

I'd like to address what you say in your first paragraph. One of the things that empowers mediocrity with respect to the Disney product is the acceptance of past mediocrity. I have no doubt that the general public will enjoy the ride. They do not know any better and do not know what they do not know. From your posts however you seem intelligent and in-the-know when it comes to the Disney product. You do know that Disney is just getting by and being lazy in certain respects. If the public is going to enjoy it anyway why try harder? If people like you do not speak up Management will continue to approve lackluster product. They do read these boards.

To his point, someone on another board made a very good point: If for $65, Billy Bass
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m80jt6bm6ZA
can move his tail and mouth to lyrics, then a $100,000,000 dollar Disney attraction should have no static figures (like the fish on the wall heading into the Under the Sea room), some fx around the giant Ursula tableau, and all supporting AAs ought to more-articulated (like Sinbad). Again, I'm fine with the ride and hope it's successful (as it represents a big step up from its closest local peer, FL's Pooh), but I think the above perspective on its design with respect to some of Tokyo's A-grade work is an excellent contribution to the thread.

Thanks again. I have more to say on this ride but I didn't want to go too far with one post. I did think the Scuttle scene, descent, and Ursula were good enough. Kiss The Girl and Ariel's first scene were okay but not amazing. Everything else was less than impressive in my opinion. King Triton was way off scale in comparison to the window display dolls around him. Ariel and Eric on the balcony was a missed opportunity for a nice emotional wrap up. The Ursula silhouette and the heart effect were obvously cheap cop outs and very disappointing.

I was not involved in the budget or project management of Mermaid but based on my experience I would bet that the budget didn't reach $100 Million. If it came close than it's another example of massive WDI waste and poor allocation of funds. If you gave me $100 Million to do a Mermaid ride I promise it would exceed your expectations and put this ride to shame.

Of course it's not always money that makes a better ride. A great example is Sinbad from TDS. The original version was okay but nowhere near the impact of the current revamped version. The funny thing (maybe even a bit ironic since Alan Menken was involved in both Mermaid and Sinbad) is the same basic layout, infrastructure, sets and AAs were used. The main thing that was changed was the addition of Alan Menken's amazing score. That one "minor" tweak that cost Disney about $250,000 for the score and under a million to record and implement it transformed the ride from okay to spectacular. Most guests don't even know why they leave the current version emotionally satisfied but used to exit the original without giving the experience a second thought. Mermaid leaves me empty and thinking how much more it could have been. Very sad indeed.

 

[RandySavage]

One of the things that empowers mediocrity with respect to the Disney product is the acceptance of past mediocrity. I have no doubt that the general public will enjoy the ride. They do not know any better and do not know what they do not know. From your posts however you seem intelligent and in-the-know when it comes to the Disney product. You do know that Disney is just getting by and being lazy in certain respects. If the public is going to enjoy it anyway why try harder? If people like you do not speak up Management will continue to approve lackluster product. They do read these boards.

I agree in both principal and reality. I suppose the Pressler/Rasulo era successfully lowered my expectations: Since a good chunk of Disney Parks & Resorts saw a reduction in quality (in my eyes) over the late 1990s and 2000s, at this point I'm just happy/relieved when TWDC builds something that is both (a) in-theme and (b) not of a lower quality than what was there prior. You've got to stem the bleeding before you begin reparative surgery. FLE's Mermaid will satisfy both of these requirements (enhances the land's theme; better than the dirt field), so by that meager standard, I have to call it a success.

Of course, this is all subjective, and, interestingly, I have the exact opposite opinion regarding Sinbad's Seventh Voyage vs. Sinbad's Storybook musical ride. I found the former to be a masterpiece of Imagineering, with great score, plenty of dark elements, danger, etc.,. I personally find the Menken-ized, cutsi-fied version to be a major downgrade, with the song repeated ad nauseum at high volume and most of the dark elements changed out (friendly giant, music playing giant?!). From what I've read, the attraction still does not draw crowds, post makeover, but you probably have better information on that.

I was not involved in the budget or project management of Mermaid but based on my experience I would bet that the budget didn't reach $100 Million. If it came close than it's another example of massive WDI waste and poor allocation of funds. If you gave me $100 Million to do a Mermaid ride I promise it would exceed your expectations and put this ride to shame.

It's been stated here by some members that WDI has a few extra layers of management/approval to go through and that's part of the problem of it being such an expensive operation (I remember being surprised at how relatively inexpensive the Wizarding World was compared to similarly-scaled Disney projects).

Regardless, I have plenty of major criticims of WDP&Rs and WDW, and while I feel there are things that could have been done better with Mermaid, I think the ride (particularly coupled with its fantasy exterior and the surrounding environment) is still a welcome addition to the MK. I appreciate your candor and inside perspective as a professional in the business and an ex-WDI.

 

[wedenterprises]

My overall impression after riding is that this attraction only barely succeeds at "making the grade" and that once again, stateside Disney has taken one too many shortcuts in development and made some poor judgements in art direction and execution.

It doesn't help that the ride is housed in a grand structure that says, "hey look at me I'm going to be one of the highlights in the park," or that the Disney marketing machine hyped it up as they did. The bottom line is that it's just okay like so many of the more recent stateside offerings where the "wow" factor is the exception rather than the rule.

The Disney apologists use the excuse that it is only supposed to be a FL type dark ride so we shouldn't expect as much as Mansion or Pirates. Why not? Tokyo Pooh was also supposed to be a FL dark ride and there is no need to apologize for its quality.

In my opinion a good example of the quailty we should expect for a ride like Mermaid is Sinbad from Tokyo. There are a multitude of "supporting cast" animatronic figures and there is not one that looked like a window store display character such as those seen in the Under The Sea sequence and the finale from Mermaid.

The descent and of course some of the AA figures were done well. My problem is that we should expect that from every new Disney offering. The animatronic technology has been available since the Wicked Witch from GMR and Muppetvision.

The Under The Sea scene was very poorly lit, meaning extremely bright, and in some cases highlighted the mechanisms controlling the window store display figures. As an alternative why didn't they perhaps use the black light puppetry method that is done so well in the DHS Mermaid show? To orchestrate an automated version of that sequence would have been magical. We would't see the frames, steel and mobiles that are so obvious now but instead would see floating fish in a simulated bio-luminescent environment where the Coral and fantasy sea life would stand out. Tritan's castle background could have been beautiful in Wildfire paint and the scene could have been one of the major highlights of the ride. At a minimum dim the intensity of the current lighting setup about 30%.

Others have commented on the hair and the anti-climatic ending so I don't need to go into that.

All in all the ride left me wanting more but not in a good way. On a scale of one to ten I'd give it a six. There are some talented Imagineers but it appears as though too many of the average talent designers are being given too much decision making power. There was some of that before I left WDI but it seems as though the problem runs rampant now. Budget is always going to be limited - it's what you do with the money that you have that indicates how good of a designer you are.

Actually, the scene isn't overly bright, it just seems that way because the room is full of light. The solution is not to decrease the intensity of the light. The problem is the amount of light, not the intensity. Too many objects are being lit. They needed to find a way to light just the characters and have the rockwork/environment come to life in a differnet manner (UV paint like you say, or lit from the inside perhaps like a see-through plastic).

A principal of lighting design is not to just throw light at something but to NOT light something. In other words, it's the idea of negative space. If you light just one thing in an empty room, it won't be a question of light intensity, but focus. Because nothing else is lit, that one light seems brighter than it really is.

The problem with the scene is that too much light is being thrown at too many objects, so the room fills with light. It's kind of like stadium lighting, everything is a wash. There are many well focused lights, but they need to remove some washes.

I think the solution is UV paint and then use regular lights for main characters.

Worse than all of that, however, is the fact that many parts of the scene force you to look up, directly into light.

 

[The Duck]

I was going to make this same point, but in the other direction. I think this ride looks cool and overall meets my expectations. But I think my real problem with it stems from what you are praising it for. A six-minute ride shouldn't try to tell the whole story of a feature-length film. The original Snow White was great--a few scenes from the film from Snow White's perspective. Mr. Toad was awesome. I mean, you had two different rides that showed the scenes in different order, so there was no semblance of a plot. In both cases the films were used merely as jumping-off points for attractions. If the LM ride was just a collection of scenes related to the film, we wouldn't have the let-down from not seeing a resolution to the Ursula plotline.

I think that we're on the same page more than you think. My point was that I didn't think that it was absolutely necessary for a ride to tell the entire story. My reference to SWSA and Toad was showing how those two classic dark rides could still be entertaining while straying far from the source material. My comments were mostly referring to all of the negative comments about the Ursula death scene etc. and how I don't let things like that bother me. Now, about Ariel's hair. Does anyone else think that she looks like she came from the "Beauty School Dropout" scene from "Grease"? Her hair doesn't ruin the experience for me but it does look a little silly.

 

[celluloid]

Does anyone else think that she looks like she came from the "Beauty School Dropout" scene from "Grease"? Her hair doesn't ruin the experience for me but it does look a little silly.

More akin to Jimmy Neutron in my opinion.

 

[RSoxNo1]

As far as the Ursala death scene goes I think all they would really need to do is add some thunder and lighting and Ursala screaming NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! along with Ariel singing and it would be 10 times better. I think with just her singing it makes it seem more anticlimatic than it would be if they added those sounds and maybe a strobe light. Those are such small changes that hopefully they'll add them to the Disney World version and fix it.

Having only seen the video of the ride it looked like a nice addition. I don't really question the pacing issues or the "abrupt" ending to the ride. I actually think many Fantasyland rides have similar issues (Snow White in Disneyland is a perfect example).

With this having a larger scope than those attractions in theory it should have told a more complete story, but in essence you are boiling down an 80 minute movie into a 6 minute ride. The only real thing that I was expecting in the video was some sort of effect with Triton's trident at the end.

 

[the-reason14]

It all looks great to me. No complaints that I can think of right off the bat. The ending is a bit 'abrupt' I guess you could say, but it kinda fits in with the other FL dark ride endings. My only issue is that it seems like it'll be a little out of place in FL. A little too high tech in comparison to Pan, and Pooh. I think it'll still fit, but I kinda wish they could somehow update those rides as well. Can't wait to see it at the MK, and hopefully at DCA one day as well.

Also, maybe they should retheme the nemo clams to something else. I know they 'can' but 'won't' but nemo is already cheap as is with it's sideways scrolling watch screens ridethrough, but I guess it'll just stay the same.

 

[Contrast]

Not very impressed by that video. It's doesn't seem like a bad ride but I do agree with everyone who's said that it could have been better. Ariel's icecream cone hair looks very silly but I doubt the average tourist will be bothered by that. Disappointing to not see Ursula get her comeuppance. Abrupt ending as others have said is also disappointing.

 

[BrightImagine]

I watched the video in spite of myself due to all the complaints. I must say I'm baffled by the complaining... It looks magical. Like passing through the movie itself! I cannot wait to see this.

I am unconcerned and in fact relieved by the lack of an Ursula-defeated scene. Most FL dark rides are "too scary" for my sensitive six year old. This she might actually ride through without hiding her eyes. And who better to please than Ariel's biggest fans?

Regarding Ariel swirly hair, I will withhold judgment until I see it in person.

 

[misterID]

I watched the video in spite of myself due to all the complaints. I must say I'm baffled by the complaining... It looks magical. Like passing through the movie itself! I cannot wait to see this.

I am unconcerned and in fact relieved by the lack of an Ursula-defeated scene. Most FL dark rides are "too scary" for my sensitive six year old. This she might actually ride through without hiding her eyes. And who better to please than Ariel's biggest fans?

Regarding Ariel swirly hair, I will withhold judgment until I see it in person.

Well, I guess that is a good way to look at it.

I still haven't watched the video, but at least now I know what to expect. I don't think I'll be disappointed.

 

[aladdin2007]

I wonder if they would make slight changes to ours based on opinions from DCA's, probably not if it meant costing money I guess,,,,,But I wonder if the same team of Imagineers will be sent here to install the ride or no, wasnt sure if thats how it worked.

 

[Atomicmickey]

My overall impression after riding is that this attraction only barely succeeds at "making the grade" and that once again, stateside Disney has taken one too many shortcuts in development and made some poor judgements in art direction and execution.

Just wanted to say thanks for the insightful comments. Based on the video, the ride is pretty much what I expected, though. We've been seeing the concept art for a long time, now, and, well--it looks as they said it would. The AA's are pretty impressive. The ice cream hair, well, that's a "sure, that works" or "no, that doesn't work" subjective thing. I'm on the fence.

I think that lighting would go a LONG way, here. Based upon advance publicity, there was a lot of talk about the descent, and how you'd feel like you were going underwater. Well, the lighting deparment has dropped the ball on that one (wonder if it'll change after soft open?). I also thought there would be some video projection, or even scrims a la Haunted Mansion to give the illusion of water depth and color, but it seems right now to be a room of robots. OK, fine--but where's the "plus" factor, the illusion that you can't wait to see, time and again.

From the video, it just seems like a couple of things need tweaking--like something isn't quite working with the Ursula projection at the end or something.

What I appreciate about your perspective, Whylightbulb, is the fact that you worked on Harry Potter. Between that, and what I've been hearing about the Transformers ride, it seems like Universal is spending the money and really going for the WOW factor with it's new projects. Now, this Mermaid ride can be a small dark ride for Fantasyland, something mild, I get that--but as you've pointed out, it's not swinging for the fences even based upon what it is. I'm not asking that the clamshells go upside down or anything, just that there be a few wow moments in there.

Honesly, the attraction looks OK. Pretty much what I was thinking it would be, and I look forward to riding it. I do see some missed opportunities here, even in the budget, and wonder about that as you have.

For me, the big thing about Mermaid in WDW is going to be the exterior, I think that's a big win for the attraction, there. That will add to the overall ambiance and impact.

Fix that lighting in the main scene, and, well, not bad. Still waiting for WDW to announce something on the scale and impact of HP or Transformers, though. Come on, WDI, take the challenge!