• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Fantasmic! 2.0 Rumors, Speculation, Announcments

I even heard it got booed during yesterdays performance, but haven't seen any videos to confirm that.
Yeah that seems REALLY unlikely to me. I was there for the first two shows (Saturday at 9 and 10:30) and there was definitely no booing than... actually quite a few cheers and excited reactions. And that was predominately a crowd of D23 attendees likely to have strong opinions and attachments to the show!
 

D.Silentu

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
I actually haven't watched any videos! Trying not to spoil anything for myself, though others have already don't just that. LOL. I want to see it in person.
You and me both!
 

SuddenStorm

Well-Known Member
Yeah that seems REALLY unlikely to me. I was there for the first two shows (Saturday at 9 and 10:30) and there was definitely no booing than... actually quite a few cheers and excited reactions. And that was predominately a crowd of D23 attendees likely to have strong opinions and attachments to the show!
No ones been booing.
I was referring to this radio segment from this morning

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1s3e8_6BBiAWTdGUERrYUhpZnM/view?usp=sharing

But immediately after they mention the new segment, they switch over to talking about the ride and the PC changes happening there. I don't intend to pass along #fakenews, and I wasn't there so obviously I can't vouch for the accuracy of what they said, just thought it was interesting.
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
I gotta get used to Bret's Mickey voice in the update though.
Agreed. As I mentioned in my review posted earlier in the thread, I am not a fan of the rerecorded dialogue at all. Don't get me wrong, Bret Iwan is a perfectly fine replacement and is certainly miles ahead of Chris Diamantopoulos in the Disney Channel shorts, but having him rerecord dialogue Wayne Allwine nailed flawlessly the first time only highlights the imperfections of his performance. I understand they wanted new dialogue for the show, but there is certainly enough archive audio of Allwine to fill in those gaps. But aside from the new Genie scene which I think is easily the best of the changes, I don't think the show needed any additional dialogue at all so the change is even more pointless in my eyes.
I think the new Villian transition might also be based on the Tokyo version.
Figures. Even though I'm just judging from YouTube videos as I am Fantasmic! 2.0 at DL, I can easily say that the TDS version changed so much that it's barely even Fantasmic! anymore. Granted, I know that is partially due to the limitations in the area of the park it resides in, but it's still easily the worst version of the show in my opinion. While I would still consider Fantasmic! 2.0 to still be Fantasmic! enough to be called Fantasmic! despite being much more jumbled mixed bag of a show, it was instantly clear to me that the overall un-Fantasmic! nature of the TDS version rubbed off on it a bit too much for my tastes. Sadly, as much as I am impressed by Fantasmic! 2.0's state of the art effects, I can safely say that the DHS version is now easily the most Fantasmic! version of Fantasmic! currently operating at any Disney theme park in the world. And as unusual of a statement as that may seem, I feel that might become a shared sentiment amongst fans unless Disney reverts the show to Fantasmic! 1.0 with Fantasmic 2.0's quality of effects.
 
Last edited:

oo_nrb

Active Member
Sadly, as much as I am impressed by Fantasmic! 2.0's state of the art effects, I can safely say that the DHS version is now easily the most Fantasmic! version of Fantasmic! currently operating at any Disney theme park in the world. And as unusual of a statement as that may seem, I feel that might become a shared sentiment amongst fans unless Disney reverts the show to Fantasmic! 1.0 with Fantasmic 2.0's quality of effects.
I have to disagree. Fan!2017 at Disneyland tells a much better and more cohesive story than Fan!1992 ever did. Fan!DHS meanders in narrative even more than Fan!1992 did, doubles down on the lack of story as a sacrifice for IP-drops, and is easily the weakest of the 4 versions.

Having loved Fan!1992 as much as I did, I don't want it to come back (maybe save a Peter Pan/Pirates swapout). The new show blows it out of the water in forms of story, character, design, technology, and overall impressiveness.
 

Jones14

Well-Known Member
I have to disagree. Fan!2017 at Disneyland tells a much better and more cohesive story than Fan!1992 ever did. Fan!DHS meanders in narrative even more than Fan!1992 did, doubles down on the lack of story as a sacrifice for IP-drops, and is easily the weakest of the 4 versions.

Having loved Fan!1992 as much as I did, I don't want it to come back (maybe save a Peter Pan/Pirates swapout). The new show blows it out of the water in forms of story, character, design, technology, and overall impressiveness.
I agree with you except on one point, as I think losing the Snow White-Evil Queen-Magic Mirror is a BIG loss for Disneyland's version. It really made the transition from dream to nightmare very smooth. I feel like Tangled to Magic Mirror just doesn't work as well from a story/flow perspective, and it gives away the aforementioned ace of seeing Mickey on top of the tavern.

I would've much preferred Tangled to go where a Whole New World sits now and leave the Princess Medley into Evil Queen section untouched. That's one area where I think DHS has a leg up now, at least narratively.
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
I have to disagree. Fan!2017 at Disneyland tells a much better and more cohesive story than Fan!1992 ever did. Fan!DHS meanders in narrative even more than Fan!1992 did, doubles down on the lack of story as a sacrifice for IP-drops, and is easily the weakest of the 4 versions.

Having loved Fan!1992 as much as I did, I don't want it to come back (maybe save a Peter Pan/Pirates swapout). The new show blows it out of the water in forms of story, character, design, technology, and overall impressiveness.
I find it rather odd that you think the storyline actually improved. If anything, I think the show has less flow between segments than either of the previous versions. And even though I can agree Florida's version was definitely weakened in the long term by Eisner's push to represent then newer movies, I actually feel the use of IP insertion here was more blatant and more careless. Even you admit that at least the Pirates section didn't work as well as it did when it was Pan. I respect your opinion, but can you please elaborate how the storyline was improved so I can get a better sense of where you're coming from?
 

SuddenStorm

Well-Known Member
This Tony Baxter quote, from episode 341 of the Season Pass Podcast, sums up why I don't think this version is clicking as well with fans as the previous iteration of Fantasmic did:

They were talking about the Transformers ride, and all the story that went into it, where it almost became difficult to understand (much like the movies)

"It brings up the point though, of having to hold back and not give it all that you can. I think a lot of people make the mistake of throwing the kitchen sink and everything else at something, rather than realizing that a sequence from something like that could be even more powerful if it was focused. You have to go "Here's the hierarchy. This is the most important thing that everyone has got to grab out of this scene. Then these things will be rendered in such a way that it supports it, and anything else has to be so subtle that on your 15 ride, you say the next time you do it, look in the corner and you won't believe there's something over there. But it in no way intrudes you seeing the gold that's in the middle, and I think that there's a lot of things we can point to where there's so much overload, and that isn't a successful solution. That's covering your you-know-what."

This new Fantasmic has so much going on, at all times, that some of the subtleness of the original has been lost. The best example I can think of off the top of my head, is the intro to the Mark Twain Finale. Originally, the island would go dark, and would be ignited by Tinker Bell. There were some minor lights that were synced to the music, but other than that, everything was black except for the pinwheels on the Twain- creating a very neat scene.

In 2.0, every light that island has is going the entire time, so the scene loses some of the subtleness, and your attention isn't immediately drawn to the unassuming twain that only has a couple sparks flying off the side. Yes, the new effects are AMAZING, but in this case, they detract from the main focus of that segment.

Here's 1.0, filmed in 2016:


And here's 2.0:

 
Last edited:

oo_nrb

Active Member
I agree with you except on one point, as I think losing the Snow White-Evil Queen-Magic Mirror is a BIG loss for Disneyland's version. It really made the transition from dream to nightmare very smooth. I feel like Tangled to Magic Mirror just doesn't work as well from a story/flow perspective, and it gives away the aforementioned ace of seeing Mickey on top of the tavern.

I would've much preferred Tangled to go where a Whole New World sits now and leave the Princess Medley into Evil Queen section untouched. That's one area where I think DHS has a leg up now, at least narratively.
I find it rather odd that you think the storyline actually improved. If anything, I think the show has less flow between segments than either of the previous versions. And even though I can agree Florida's version was definitely weakened in the long term by Eisner's push to represent then newer movies, I actually feel the use of IP insertion here was more blatant and more careless. Even you admit that at least the Pirates section didn't work as well as it did when it was Pan. I respect your opinion, but can you please elaborate how the storyline was improved so I can get a better sense of where you're coming from?
I'm currently working on a write-up to answer these questions, but it's very long :p the tl;dr is that the new show does a better job at showcasing things like Mickey's discovery of his imagination, which the audience can relate to as an accessible point easier than the original show where Mickey already has a solid grasp on things. There's a moral fable of hedonism involved, which may be reading too far into it for a Disney Park show, but I'm 100% buying it. And the Magic Mirror offering Mickey a literal deal with the Devil does more to showcase the journey Mickey experiences in his discovery better than the sudden, unexplained appearance of villains.

The full write-up will be a lot lengthier and include a lot of specific examples, and no one will read it, but that's the gist of it :p
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
This Tony Baxter quote, from episode 341 of the Season Pass Podcast, sums up why I don't think this version is clicking as well with fans as the previous iteration of Fantasmic did:

They were talking about the Transformers ride, and all the story that went into it, where it almost became difficult to understand (much like the movies)

"It brings up the point though, of having to hold back and not give it all that you can. I think a lot of people make the mistake of throwing the kitchen sink and everything else at something, rather than realizing that a sequence from something like that could be even more powerful if it was focused. You have to go "Here's the hierarchy. This is the most important thing that everyone has got to grab out of this scene. Then these things will be rendered in such a way that it supports it, and anything else has to be so subtle that on your 15 ride, you say the next time you do it, look in the corner and you won't believe there's something over there. But it in no way intrudes you seeing the gold that's in the middle, and I think that there's a lot of things we can point to where there's so much overload, and that isn't a successful solution. That's covering your you-know-what."

This new Fantasmic has so much going on, at all times, that some of the subtleness of the original has been lost. The best example I can think of off the top of my head, is the intro to the Mark Twain Finale. Originally, the island would go dark, and would be ignited by Tinker Bell. There were some minor lights that were synced to the music, but other than that, everything was black except for the pinwheels on the Twain- creating a very neat scene.

In 2.0, every light that island has is going the entire time, so the scene loses some of the subtleness, and your attention isn't immediately drawn to the unassuming twain that only has a couple sparks flying off the side. Yes, the new effects are AMAZING, but in this case, they detract from the main focus of that segment.

Here's 1.0, filmed in 2016:


And here's 2.0:

Perfectly said. Just goes to show that no one knows how themed entertainment is supposed to work better than Tony Baxter.
 

SuddenStorm

Well-Known Member
I'm currently working on a write-up to answer these questions, but it's very long :p the tl;dr is that the new show does a better job at showcasing things like Mickey's discovery of his imagination, which the audience can relate to as an accessible point easier than the original show where Mickey already has a solid grasp on things. There's a moral fable of hedonism involved, which may be reading too far into it for a Disney Park show, but I'm 100% buying it. And the Magic Mirror offering Mickey a literal deal with the Devil does more to showcase the journey Mickey experiences in his discovery better than the sudden, unexplained appearance of villains.

The full write-up will be a lot lengthier and include a lot of specific examples, and no one will read it, but that's the gist of it :p
I'm interested to read this write up, if it means anything. I'm seeing the show live in exactly 13 days- and while my initial reaction is that this new show is a step back from the original, anything that's well written that helps me appreciate what the new show has to offer better than the old one, beyond technical upgrades, is welcome.
 
Last edited:

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
I'm currently working on a write-up to answer these questions, but it's very long :p the tl;dr is that the new show does a better job at showcasing things like Mickey's discovery of his imagination, which the audience can relate to as an accessible point easier than the original show where Mickey already has a solid grasp on things. There's a moral fable of hedonism involved, which may be reading too far into it for a Disney Park show, but I'm 100% buying it. And the Magic Mirror offering Mickey a literal deal with the Devil does more to showcase the journey Mickey experiences in his discovery better than the sudden, unexplained appearance of villains.

The full write-up will be a lot lengthier and include a lot of specific examples, and no one will read it, but that's the gist of it :p
Thanks for explaining yourself a bit, but I have to strongly disagree with this. I firmly believe that the original show's structure is vastly superior for multiple reasons. For one, a more experienced Mickey works better not because it's more relatable, but because it's reassuring. This doesn't mean that Mickey is completely invincible in this version because as the second half of the show proved, he wasn't. However, emphasizing Mickey's proffesional showmanship gives off a sense that his dream is an carefully crafted and under control experience. But most importantly, it gives the villain scenes a much greater impact. Unlike the new version where Mickey makes a deal with the devil and basically asks for what's coming to him, the villains are their own autonomous force seemingly invading the dream from the outside. By doing this, Mickey is put into a more sympathetic position since the villains are unexecpectedly invading the privacy of his dream against his will. I could go on in even more detail, but I think this gets the jist across. I'm not trying to change your opinion because I think a lot of what you said is largely deependent on personal preference, but hopefully, this provides some more perspective on the other side of things.
 

flynnibus

Well-Known Member
I think this should be called F! 3.0

I always thought of the version done where they added Murphy as 2.0
 

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
I think this should be called F! 3.0

I always thought of the version done where they added Murphy as 2.0
The reason why this version is considered to be 2.0 as opposed to the 2009 version is because the respective refurbs were on different scales. 2009 was simply an effects upgrade to the existing show whereas 2017 completely retooled much of the show's actual content while also being an effects upgrade.
 

vancee

Well-Known Member
Apparently (according to those on uhh... micegossip), there has been small tweaks to the show since the big update. Does anyone have any information on this?
 
Top Bottom