Favorite New Attraction of Fantasyland Expansion

[The Empress Lilly]

The cantankerous bit:

M&G's are not attractions. The shows the princesses will put up, from the sounds of it, will be of little interest besides to the very smallest guests. ('Colouring cards')


Disney tried to sell of the HK expansions by counting anything visual that moves as 'an attraction'. Which, according to management, brought the number of attractions in the grossly underbuild park to well over a hundred.

While I'm aware of the difference between ride and attraction, I think Disney is playing a dangerous game of testing customer loyalty. The theme parks and attractions that have been build around the world the past decade are astonishing. WDW isn't second to WWOHP, WDW is second to about 231 others. Everybody builds more exciting attractions than Disney nowadays.

Then again, it doesn't really affect Disney. A trip to WDW is almost a rite de passage for American families with toddlers. Once but a small guest demographic, they are now dominant, certainly in the MK. The park itself not at all being geared towards this group, something had to be done. Enter toddlerland, aka FLE.
This group will remain visiting WDW, and will buy the DVD's and bedsheets and princess merchandise. 'Disney' is where you take your young kids, or grandkids. (Grand)parents look forward to it from the day they are born.
It is a good business model.

With building an exciting park it has go nothing to do, nor is there any incentive for that for WDW. We'll all keep visiting Disney instead of other parks.

 

[Mr. Morrow]

Most of my high school is either going or desperately wanting to go lol

Adults of all ages I know have been going and I haven't heard one negative thing about the land (even from someone who went and didn't even get to ride).


And the average weight of adults is 174 according to a 2007 study. What kind of things are you reading say that over half the population is over 265 pounds?! We're fat, but not that fat. 24% are over 200 pounds and I don't even think remotely 95% of those people are pushing 3 bills. And how many people do you know over 6''6'? rofl!! 60%, seriously? SERIOUSLY?


I agree about capacity, but they need something to combat Potter or the lost capacity due to IoA will mean no need for added capacity in MK.

That isn't the issue the 265 is.

I am also glad to see some more people that aren't buying that Disney is selling M&G's as attractions!

 

[inluvwithbeast]

Honestly, what I'm most excited about isn't an attraction (or M&G or whatever you want to call an attraction).

I'm most excited for the BatB restaurant. Can anyone give me any details on it other than what wdwmagic has posted on FL's page:

New table service and counter service restaurants. The largest being the 552 seat Be Our Guest restaurant located in Beast's Castle, which will be a counter service restaurant by day, and a full table service restaurant by night. The Be Our Guest restaurant will feature 3 dining rooms - Beast Ballroom, West Wing and the Castle gallery. The Beauty and the Beast area will also include the quicks service restaurant Gastons Tavern.

 

[_Scar]

That isn't the issue the 265 is.

I am also glad to see some more people that aren't buying that Disney is selling M&G's as attractions!

Didn't I address that issue? Look again? :shrug:

And, if it's as cool as the concept art, Cinderella's M&G is an attraction to me. It's much more than a typical meet and greet.

And an 'attraction' is such a vague word and its only real purpose is to categorize on the park map. Why can't an attraction be anything you can physically do at the park?

 

[misterID]

A playground could be considered an attraction. But not at Disney. There's a Disney Standard when it comes to attractions (immersive, tells a story) and if the head people at TDO don't like that they shouldn't have started work at Disney in the first place.

Even though there was a time when a certain person in Disney who wanted to lower the Disney standard (say, after a certain person died, who was actually responsible for bringing Disney back and making the parks great again, but hardly ever gets credit for it), but that person is long gone now and maybe his "people" should follow him out... I think Lasseter and Jobs not only respect the parks but are going to Up the Disney standard in the future.

It might be to you, but a M&G at Disney is not an attraction.

 

[wizards8507]

A playground could be considered an attraction. But not at Disney. There's a Disney Standard when it comes to attractions (immersive, tells a story) and if the head people at TDO don't like that they shouldn't have started work at Disney in the first place.

Even though there was a time when a certain person in Disney who wanted to lower the Disney standard (say, after a certain person died, who was actually responsible for bringing Disney back and making the parks great again, but hardly ever gets credit for it), but that person is long gone now and maybe his "people" should follow him out... I think Lasseter and Jobs not only respect the parks but are going to Up the Disney standard in the future.

It might be to you, but a M&G at Disney is not an attraction.

It's so exhausting to hear about this "Disney standard" garbage. Entertainment is not an objective term. It depends on the audience. I am fully confident that a 3-year old would be more pleased with a well-themed playground than a technologically advanced dark ride. Little Timmy couldn't care less about the Peoplemover ride system versus this, that, and the other thing. He just wants to run around, see characters he knows, and play. This is what people forget. Play for a 50-something is not the same as for a 20-something and certainly not for a kindergartner. Not everything has to be knock-your-socks-off groundbreaking. Will I be interested in much of the FLE? Probably not, aside from Beast's Castle and Gaston's Pub(?). Then again, I didn't particularly enjoy MTTF either but that's okay. I don't have to. I flat-out GUARANTEE you that every meet and greet in the FLE will be an utter mob scene from day one to day one thousand. If that doesn't mean "success" in bringing joy to children and those children bringing joy to their families, then I don't know what the point of this whole this even is. We've gotten so spoiled that we want to travel to WDW every year and have something new and explosive that appeals to our interests. The fact is, NEW things ARE happening. Two $1 billion cruise ships, the FL expansion, a new resort in Hawai'i, expansion of Adventures By Disney, and the new Animation Resort are all either here or on the way, but nobody seems satisfied. Unless we see Beastly Kingdomme, a new park all together, or some other monster headliner, people will continue to complain that Disney isn't living up to its own "standard."

 

[misterID]

Blame Walt Disney. He started that standard "garbage." What a jerk spoiling people like that...

And before you go on another tirade about how ungrateful people are and how unsattisfied...

Other than that, I think its a good expansion. If it really cost half a billion for what they're getting and with the shape of the other parks, like AK, with its lack of attractions, I'd call it a waste of money. But for what it is, I think it'll be a really nice addition to MK. My niece will love it. And it'll be much easier to move around.

Just sayin.

 

[danlb_2000]

A playground could be considered an attraction. But not at Disney. There's a Disney Standard when it comes to attractions (immersive, tells a story) and if the head people at TDO don't like that they shouldn't have started work at Disney in the first place.

Are you sure about this? If you go to the official Magic Kingdom web site and click on Attractions, you will find Donald's Boat on the list and on the Attraction list for DHS you will find Honey, I Shrunk the Kids Movie Set Adventure. These are both basically playgrounds.

Over at the Disneyland site they even list Meet and Greets as attractions.

Dan

 

[Mr. Morrow]

Didn't I address that issue? Look again? :shrug:

And, if it's as cool as the concept art, Cinderella's M&G is an attraction to me. It's much more than a typical meet and greet.

And an 'attraction' is such a vague word and its only real purpose is to categorize on the park map. Why can't an attraction be anything you can physically do at the park?

What is so different besides her clothes changing, or making B-day cards for Sleeping Beauty? If you want to call it an experience go a head but a M&G is nothing more than a M&G no matter how you dress it up.

 

[wizards8507]

What is so different besides her clothes changing, or making B-day cards for Sleeping Beauty? If you want to call it an experience go a head but a M&G is nothing more than a M&G no matter how you dress it up.

–noun
1. the act, power, or property of attracting.

2. attractive quality; magnetic charm; fascination; allurement; enticement: the subtle attraction of her strange personality.

3. a person or thing that draws, attracts, allures, or entices: The main attraction was the after-dinner speaker.

4. a characteristic or quality that provides pleasure; attractive feature: The chief attractions of the evening were the good drinks and witty conversation.

5. Physics . the electric or magnetic force that acts between oppositely charged bodies, tending to draw them together.

6. an entertainment offered to the public.

 

[Mr. Morrow]

–noun
1. the act, power, or property of attracting.

2. attractive quality; magnetic charm; fascination; allurement; enticement: the subtle attraction of her strange personality.

3. a person or thing that draws, attracts, allures, or entices: The main attraction was the after-dinner speaker.

4. a characteristic or quality that provides pleasure; attractive feature: The chief attractions of the evening were the good drinks and witty conversation.

5. Physics . the electric or magnetic force that acts between oppositely charged bodies, tending to draw them together.

6. an entertainment offered to the public.

Sorry doesn't work when we are talking DIsney quality attractions.

 

[wizards8507]

Sorry doesn't work when we are talking DIsney quality attractions.

What does that mean? You can't just change the definition of words because they're being applied to Disney. You could say say that it's not a VERY GOOD attraction. Heck, even "it's not a Disney-quality attraction" is reasonable. But to deny the definition of a word in the English language is kind of crazy.

Example: If the Magic Kingdom premiered the worst fireworks show in the history of the world, you wouldn't DENY the fact that they were, indeed, "fireworks." You would just say "those fireworks are terrible... not 'Disney quality.'

 

[AndyMagic]

Just to devil's advocate for a minute...

Disney builds an expansion with one new ride, a couple rethemed rides, and a few minor new attractions here and there and years before it's done we label it a failure.

Universal builds an expansion with one new ride, a couple rethemed rides, and a few minor new attractions here and there and we label it the end-all thesis statement of theme park design?

Let's allow WDI to do what they do, they made this game.

I'd say the expansions are quite similar with regard to number of things to do. The enormous difference is that FLE's main attraction is a ride built on 1970s technology while Universal built a show-stopping E-ticket inside a huge castle with the most elaborate queue ever made which could count as an attraction itself. I don't think anyone, including WDI, thinks Little Mermaid will even approach the scale of Forbidden Journey.

 

[AndyMagic]

FB: No one over 6"6" or 265 that eliminates like 60% of the country. There are 2 hour lines just to get in the land. This can't last they will have to expand the land as well as increase the load for the main ride.

[/B]

I really can't stand when people flat-out make things up. The average weight of an American between the ages of 20 - 74 in America is 175 pounds. The average weight of a person from Europe is considerably less than that and Orlando gets a huge amount of travelers from overseas. Now considering about 1/4th of the people entering the castle are under the age of 20, I'd say the actual percent of people being turned away from Forbidden Journey due to weight is about 1% or less. It is about on-par with the number of people turned away from riding a B&M coaster that doesn't have the "fat seat," and word is that Universal is testing out a seat for the over 300 pound crowd anyway. :brick:

 

[wizards8507]

I'd say the expansions are quite similar with regard to number of things to do. The enormous difference is that FLE's main attraction is a ride built on 1970s technology while Universal built a show-stopping E-ticket inside a huge castle with the most elaborate queue ever made which could count as an attraction itself. I don't think anyone, including WDI, thinks Little Mermaid will even approach the scale of Forbidden Journey.

Little Mermaid isn't SUPPOSED to compete with Forbidden Journey. They were never meant to go head-to-head, and neither was FLE vs. WWoHP. The fact is, the Little Mermaid BRAND would never compete against the Harry Potter BRAND, regardless of the technology or innovation involved. There isn't much out there that could compete DIRECTLY with a well-executed Harry Potter land, but that's okay because they don't have to. I have confidence in the Imagineers, but if their goal were to "outdo" WWoHP directly, Disney would have to buy theme park rights to Star Trek or Lord of the Rings (i.e., not gonna happen.)

Side note: That would be cool though... a life-size replica of the Starship Enterprise in Tomorrowland, or an entire Middle Earth land with Minas Tirith on one side and Barad-Dur/Mt. Doom on the other... :animwink:

 

[Mr. Morrow]

What does that mean? You can't just change the definition of words because they're being applied to Disney. You could say say that it's not a VERY GOOD attraction. Heck, even "it's not a Disney-quality attraction" is reasonable. But to deny the definition of a word in the English language is kind of crazy.

Example: If the Magic Kingdom premiered the worst fireworks show in the history of the world, you wouldn't DENY the fact that they were, indeed, "fireworks." You would just say "those fireworks are terrible... not 'Disney quality.'

A DIsney attraction is different than attractions else where there are at a different standard. If you can't see that I am not sure why you post here?

Ok to get arround you little definition I will amend what I said they are M&G's not DISNEY ATTRACTIONS.

 

[AndyMagic]

Little Mermaid isn't SUPPOSED to compete with Forbidden Journey. They were never meant to go head-to-head, and neither was FLE vs. WWoHP. The fact is, the Little Mermaid BRAND would never compete against the Harry Potter BRAND, regardless of the technology or innovation involved. There isn't much out there that could compete DIRECTLY with a well-executed Harry Potter land, but that's okay because they don't have to. I have confidence in the Imagineers, but if their goal were to "outdo" WWoHP directly, Disney would have to buy theme park rights to Star Trek or Lord of the Rings (i.e., not gonna happen.)

But I'm not talking about the intellectual rights to the Harry Potter property as being the reason Universal's expansion is more impressive. I was strictly speaking about the quality and scope of the attraction. If Disney chose to build something along the lines of "The Incredibles" ride that they had in the works which involved a similar ride system to the Harry Potter one, then I'd be impressed with FLE. Instead they decided to build another omnimover and thus, I'm not impressed. It's funny to me that Universal managed to get the best of both worlds with Forbidden Journey. It loads and has the capacity of an omnimover but provides for the excitement and intimacy of a ride with standard vehicles. It's pretty genius.

 

[misterID]

Are you sure about this? If you go to the official Magic Kingdom web site and click on Attractions, you will find Donald's Boat on the list and on the Attraction list for DHS you will find Honey, I Shrunk the Kids Movie Set Adventure. These are both basically playgrounds.

Over at the Disneyland site they even list Meet and Greets as attractions.

Dan

I didn't mean literally, of course they'll call a playground an attraction! I meant more, "Disney set the bar for an attraction. Kept raising it. And expected the people who worked for Disney to do the same" kind of thing. Not sticking a playground in the place of a real attraction and then trying to call it one. Whether they choose to follow that is up to them.

 

[mamamouse]

rofl !!!!

i guess that's debatable! :lol:

 

[RadioHead]

But I'm not talking about the intellectual rights to the Harry Potter property as being the reason Universal's expansion is more impressive. I was strictly speaking about the quality and scope of the attraction. If Disney chose to build something along the lines of "The Incredibles" ride that they had in the works which involved a similar ride system to the Harry Potter one, then I'd be impressed with FLE. Instead they decided to build another omnimover and thus, I'm not impressed. It's funny to me that Universal managed to get the best of both worlds with Forbidden Journey. It loads and has the capacity of an omnimover but provides for the excitement and intimacy of a ride with standard vehicles. It's pretty genius.

I don't get this big hoopla about the Forbidden Journey ride? I went there yesterday for the first time with my family, had a 2 hour wait. The queue is beautiful, and really feels like an attraction of it's own.

I had enormous expectations for this attraction, and to be honest I was really letdown.

The whole attraction consisted of various motion effects, and was basically like a more advanced Soarin', only more advance-er. My wife felt extremely nauseous, and had to lay down on a bench for half an hour.

I would much rather prefer a state of the art dark ride, with 100's of detailed, and advanced AA, than a bunch of screens.

If you ask me the Indian Jones ride in Disney Land is easily the best attraction in America, if you ask me.