Few more details on Monsters, Inc. delay

[nibblesandbits]

Great post EpcotServo, it's about time somebody said that. I think polarboi also made a point with his post not liking SGE even though he was trying to be open minded about it. Everyone is not going to love every attraction. If you have a ride that you go on several times each time you are in the park you are definetely going to be disappointed if it is replaced. If TTA was ever replaced I would be on the boards complaing, no matter how good the replacement was. I thought AE was just ok, same for SGE. Same thing for Mr. Toad vs. Winnie, I don't have a passion for any of these rides, but I don't hate them either. No this is not a thread drift, I just think this is what is going to happen to the Monsters Inc. show, no point in calling it the Laughing Floor according to just about every post from people who have seen it, I have yet to see a post that said it was funny, that many people can't be wrong. If they give it a rewrite, and get the right people to be in the show, and make it funny, it will be a big success. It has to compete with the memory of TK though, which already gives it strike one from the TK fans. I'm just happy they are trying to make it a good show, rather than just throwing something together. I think EpcotServo was dead on with so much of the dislike for certain attractions being fueled on the Internet. All I can say is GOD help the replacement attraction for CoP. That is only my opinion which my wife has told me isn't even worth 2 cents.

What a true, true post.

If Disney builds a new ride on a new patch of land or usually if they build a higher caliber ride in place of a lesser caliber ride...people seem to love it. Example: E:E and Soarin. But if they build a ride in place of one that was beloved and most often if it's the same caliber type ride, people get really upset about the whole thing and seem to disregard the attraction. This is seen multiple times. Examples: Test Track, Winnie the Pooh, the Laugh Floor, etc.

With those of us who are Disney dorks, the case is that people are more receptive to something totally new than we are to something that had to be updated for some (probably good) reason. My question is why is that? Why do we let the memories of the old infiltrate the impressions of the new and therefore contaminate any hope that we would otherwise have if the ride had been a totally brand new (or higher caliber) attraction?

 

[marni1971]

...Why do we let them memories of the old infiltrate the impressions of the new and therefore contaminate any hope that we would otherwise have if the ride had been a totally brand new (or higher caliber) attraction?

Perhaps because far too often the replacement is a disappointment. Up until the mid-90`s it was unheard of for a new attraction to be received by anyone - fan or joe public - with anything less than a stellar response. I agree the internet gets the opinions together and like-minded people spread their opinion of certain attractions and have influence - or maybe its because we have access now to so much information we can see the bigger picture. Case in point - Mission:Space. I would never have known about the real plans of the Journeys in Space pavilion, nor that the `fuge at one point was just the preshow to a much bigger experience had it not been for the web. I`d have said goodbye to Horizons, and seen the brand new 21st century version of the space pavilion non the wiser.

On the other hand, look at Alien Encounter. Arguments and sentiments aside, in 1994 it was a much needed replacement for Mission to Mars. As cute as MTM was, and as much as I enjoyed it as a kid, I cringe to imagine it in the MK today.

There again, anyone who rode JII and JIYI could tell the ride was shorter and had so much empty space.

For me personally its quality - Disney Quality. Once upon a time Disney had the best attractions bar none because they spent the money, paid attention to every last detail, didn`t cut corners, and insisted on the best. You`d never see an attraction at IOA and think `wow! Disney has nothing like that!" - my thoughts I`m sad to say after riding Spiderman. The above-the-norm of planning an individual car ridethru with a motion base, 2 and 3D visuals and visual effects, plus a top notch sound system into ONE attraction was only the preserve of WDI. Disney invented the EMV - they shouldn`t have rested on their laurels. As it is TDS` EMV is a 3rd generation design of a concept from the late 80`s for Paris. Where`s the 4th Gen? Universal!

They`ve shown they still have it (ToTs AGV, TDLs Pooh) given the resources. Where`s the cutting edge, one of a kind attractions of old? Turtle talk - great, but its CG synced to an audio input with some clever AI variables. The Adventures Club had 2 way communication with guests from a hidden CM in 1989. Everest has some of the best landscaping and theming in any park, but it`s nothing new, apart from a silent high speed lift hill. A rollercoaster in a mountain. Matterhorn. Switchback - Mummy. Backwards? Blackpool (ugh!) Even Soarin` - as good as it is - was beaten by the double Omnimax of Horizons in 1983, and this was just a small part of a much larger experience.

Where`s the cutting edge, take your breath away, knock your socks off attractions of tomorrow? The same `wow` you got for the first time when your ToT elevator moved forwards, Energys theatre spilt up, or when you got off of Splash Mounatin? Looking on the bright side, at least The Laugh Floor isn`t a 2 minute thrill attraction that`s high on excitement but lacking repeat value or depth.

 

[polarboi]

Where`s the cutting edge, take your breath away, knock your socks off attractions of tomorrow? The same `wow` you got for the first time when your ToT elevator moved forwards, Energys theatre spilt up, or when you got off of Splash Mounatin?

But let's think about the examples you just mentioned. When the UoE theater split up or the ToT elevator moved forwards, I was "wowed" because I didn't expect it. The actual technology (moving ride vehicles; a vehicle moving in two directions) wasn't so shockingly innovative... it was the element of surprise, expecting a "theater" to be stationary and an "elevator" to move vertically. Had I read in advance about those elements on a fan forum, much of the "wow" factor would have been lost.

Now don't get me wrong; I do realize that in many Disney attractions, including UoE, ToT, and Splash, there are elements of the technology that were completely innovative at the time. But I don't think it's the technology itself that gave those moments their "wow" factor. It's being drawn into the story, not knowing what to expect, and sometimes finding your expectations violated in fun and imaginative ways. And as much as I hate to admit it, sometimes we fans are so eager to know what's coming in this internet age, we spoil those experiences for ourselves by peeking at our presents before Christmas morning and then wonder why we don't feel that same feeling we felt when everything about the parks was new and unknown to us.

I honestly don't think it's Disney that's changed. I think it's us.

-p.b.

 

[marni1971]

I honestly don't think it's Disney that's changed. I think it's us.

-p.b.

Nice comment :wave:

 

[EpcotServo]

On the topic of Laugh Floor not being funny- While the show was just amusing, rather than funny, there were some VERY funny gags in the waiting area. My favorite was that all the trash cans beyond the Monsters Inc. door have a picture of a monster eating trash and below that it reads "We refuse no refuse!"
:lol:

 

[lpet11984]

From reading threads on here, we can conclude that TLF's issues include it's not funny, the queue lacks in theming, its not TK, and the technology is lacking in refinement. My questions to those who have seen TLF in its early stages then are these: how would you change it? What does TLF need in order to make it a high quality production? If you were to design this attraction, how should it look/feel/work? What does it need?

I ask not to provoke spite or argument, but out of interest and curiousity...I think this attraction has a lot of *potential*, but we have yet to see that potential seriously developed. So far, it sounds like I could get a better show by going to Chuck E. Cheese and watching the broken AAs on stage sing the glories of cardboard pizza, overpriced arcade games, and cheap prizes that will be lucky to make it through the car ride home...

 

[shoppingnut]

TLF needs better cross over comedy that so many other attractions have, like turtle talk. Saying "Dude" as much as you can all day long and the bathing suit thing. The two commedians was boring and the third was just okay and other than one being Mike's nephew, I don't even know if those two were in the movie. There is no story ending really, it just sorta ends. I think Sully needs to come in and save the day by putting them over the laugh quota. How about Boo terrorizing the commedians when they are performing or something. Most of the kids were laughing, but very few adults were. The beginning with Roz starting the show was hysterical, Roz is excellent.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I don`t - I blame management. Timekeeper was a great attraction, in my opinion (you didn`t think so - not a problem) but what Irks me most is attractions that are popular (AE, TK for example) are removed for no good reason. New Tomorrowland and its attractions has been discussed heavily in the past, so I won`t go into it again. Neither attraction was showing its age (NYC could have been reshot or cut out; the original From Time to Time has a few minutes of extra footage that could have even been cut in if need be) and both were original.

AE was removed (as we`ve again discussed many times) due to complaints from guests who ignored the mutliple warnings about the ExtraTERRORestrial attraction. Perhaps, like Pulp Fiction, it ended up being too un-Disney to be Disney.

TK was dropped into the all too familiar seasonal opening. Shame of Disney. 15 years ago there was no such thing as seasonal for major attractions. In other words, it`s not filling the theatre everytime; lets save money. The CV was a people eater; no wonder it wasn`t always full. The official reasoning was that the exterior signage wasn`t clear enough there was an attraction inside. So... promote it more. Put up better signs (not just a sandwich board and LED display) Film quality is an issue all over WDW; I`ve heard not good things about the state of Ellens Energy projections; in this day and age it must be time to go digital for storage in the parks? Even 9 projectors running off hard discs or similar would be more cost effective than running 9 35mm projectors with 9 sets of 35mm stock, but that`s another thread drift in an already drifted thread.

You kind of contradict yourself here. You said that AE and TK were popular attractions that were removed for no reason. Then you went on to say that AE received complaints about how frightening it was despite the signage suggesting it my frighten children. AE wasn't popular enough to supercede these complaints. I'm sure that Tower of Terror illicits similiar complaints, but on the whole it is one of the most well received (and instant classic) attractions on Disney Property. AE didn't share this same billing - I miss it, but Disney saw it as a way to put Stitch in the parks, and reduce complaints.

As for Timekeeper - It was one of my favorite shows, but just because it has a cult/internet following doesn't mean that it was "popular". There was humor in it, and the voices of Robin Williams and Rhea Pearlman bring a level of familiarity to the "story". With that said, it was an easily replaceable attraction. It didn't have seats, and rarely had waits. Sure circlevision was impressive when it first came out, but that is no longer the trend. After seeing the success of Turtle Talk, it makes sense for a similiar attraction to crop up elsewhere.

 

[marni1971]

You kind of contradict yourself here. You said that AE and TK were popular attractions that were removed for no reason. Then you went on to say that AE received complaints about how frightening it was despite the signage suggesting it my frighten children.

Sorry - I meant no valid reason. Ignorant guests are not a reason; they either need educating better or being told it was their own fault - something that`d never happen of course.

As for Timekeeper - It was one of my favorite shows, but just because it has a cult/internet following doesn't mean that it was "popular".......

I don`t have figures at hand, but we know CV theatres can be people eaters. I`m not saying it was always full, but not running at capacity all the time, even a lot of the time, dosn`t mean it wasn`t popular. Maybe it wasn`t - I don`t know. I certainly feel the envelope was just starting to be pushed with immersive effects and a storyline in a CV film, and feel it could have gone much further. The original Visionarium plans used screen morphing technology, bluring in-theatre AAs and motion picture; much like T2:3D. Only Universal got the technology to work after a fashion. WDI started to get it right with WDSPs Cinemagique - if only it had been developed to its full potential in the round.

After seeing the success of Turtle Talk, it makes sense for a similiar attraction to crop up elsewhere.

Indeed - that`s my point. There are plenty of places for it to have been built instead of swapping one attraction for another.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

I also think this is an area that has raised skepticism in Disney's recent past. While we are much more "in the know" than the average guest, Disney has tended toward repeating technology for technology's sake. The major attractions, while utilizing similar ride systems, relied more heavily on story. It wasn't just because people liked how it worked; it was what they were seeing.

I'm not saying that as a criticism here, since Disney is clearly trying to fix this to work. If the setting doesn't work, it shouldn't open. Period. I agree that when you lose an attraction, the replacement has to be top notch/"more worthy" to get a positive response. I like the fact that they are going in this direction and not serving something they are not proud of for the sake of an opening. If it isn't fixed until 2008, so be it. That is a much better result IMHO.

 

[dxwwf3]

I agree that when you lose an attraction, the replacement has to be top notch/"more worthy" to get a positive response. I like the fact that they are going in this direction and not serving something they are not proud of for the sake of an opening. If it isn't fixed until 2008, so be it. That is a much better result IMHO.

Exactly. Case in point, there are some people who don't like M:S for various reasons, but even though it replaced one of the most popular WDW attractions ever among fans, the complaints have been much lighter than they would have been if the attraction had been done with less quality. I loved Horizons and I wish it was back, but I'm also typing this with my M:S sweatshirt on so that should tell you what I think about that attraction.

Fans of certain attractions are naturally going to be upset if they feel that their favorite attraction's replacement is sub par. But they can also be upset if their favorite is replaced by even a good attraction. I guarantee there is a few Food Rocks/Kitchen Kabaret fanatics out there that would rather have that show back than Soarin'. And I think that it is fine to express that on message boards. That's why forums are created. But I don't think anyone can say that putting Soarin' there was a bad business and creative decision.

For an example closer to home, if SGE had turned out to be a big hit and was universally praised, I would have just had to eat my crow and accept it. However fans of AE and Journey Into Imagination (among a few others) have had their favorites replaced by sub par attractions in the minds of many guests. And you didn't have to see the original attraction to have that opinion about their replacements.

I got to see The Seas With Nemo and Friends for the first time on NYE and I thought Disney did an ok job with the ride and the refurbishment, but it didn't wow me quite like I had hoped. However, I think it was still a good change and it at least looked like time and money was spent on it, so that is a certain plus. It wasn't bad by any stretch, but I didn't think it was that much of a change from what we had seen before.

 

[EpcotServo]

From reading threads on here, we can conclude that TLF's issues include it's not funny, the queue lacks in theming

I state again, the waiting area was very well themed. Those who say otherwise at this point in time have either judged it by two iffy at best pictures or didn't really take the time to have a good look around it were they were there.