Rumor Figment, well, to be replaced by Figment

zipadee999

zipadee999

Well-Known Member
Not sure if this has been said before, but I’d love to see a Mystic Manor style attraction come out of the overhaul.

It could be trackless and start off pretty much identically to the original, but when Figment accidentally fills up the idea bag on the Dreamcatcher too much, the bag itself ‘pops’ and sparks of imagination are set free to go wild. We then follow dreamfinder and figment on a zany journey through the realms of imagination as they try to recollect the loose sparks. The only way they can recollect the sparks is by singing different verses of one little spark to use and organize the unruly sparks. At the end, the sparks are retuned to the dreamcatcher, but figment sees all of the wonderful ideas they created when recapturing the free sparks, and learns that imagination works best when it’s set free.

This might be too ambitious but this is the plot and style of attraction that I’d love to see. It keeps the feel of the original while making it a bit more zippy and interactive.
 
retr0gate

retr0gate

Well-Known Member
I wouldn't put too much emphasis on that concept art they released, especially that Figment statue. While I have no doubt the structure itself will look as pictured, I can't imagine (ha) we'll necessarily be seeing those particular artifacts. Disney even said in their blog post this is an example of what a Festival of the Arts exhibit could look like.

I can't imagine the Figment installation would be permanent, and even if it was, it probably won't look like that seeing as it appears to be stolen from somebody else. Weird that this is the second time this has happened with Figment specifically but alas
1678989862806.png
 
Tha Realest

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
zipadee999 said:
Not sure if this has been said before, but I’d love to see a Mystic Manor style attraction come out of the overhaul.

It could be trackless and start off pretty much identically to the original, but when Figment accidentally fills up the idea bag on the Dreamcatcher too much, the bag itself ‘pops’ and sparks of imagination are set free to go wild. We then follow dreamfinder and figment on a zany journey through the realms of imagination as they try to recollect the loose sparks. The only way they can recollect the sparks is by singing different verses of one little spark to use and organize the unruly sparks. At the end, the sparks are retuned to the dreamcatcher, but figment sees all of the wonderful ideas they created when recapturing the free sparks, and learns that imagination works best when it’s set free.

This might be too ambitious but this is the plot and style of attraction that I’d love to see. It keeps the feel of the original while making it a bit more zippy and interactive.
Click to expand...
A mischevious Figment in the place of Albert in a Mystic Manor attraction is a great idea
 
Inspired Figment

Inspired Figment

Well-Known Member
CHOX said:
Legitimate question: What if Dreamfinder was brought back but played by older Eric Idle?
Click to expand...
No, no no… we don’t need the association with Eric Idle anymore after 2 bad versions with him involved. Bad enough he’s associated with the character he is, the one along with his “Imagination” institute that ruined the pavilion. It’d only feel like a troll/slap in the face to fans of the original version. I like Eric as an actor, but in regards to the Imagination pavilion, he needs to be as far away from that pavilion as possible going forward.
 
Last edited:
Inspired Figment

Inspired Figment

Well-Known Member
Andrew25 said:
Doesn't really care about the ride, but Disney adults on the other hand...
Click to expand...
All the reason more he shouldn’t be involved. Anybody that calls Figment a “little f***er” shouldnt be involved with ‘his’ ride. If he has no love or passion for it, he shouldn’t be involved. My theory is, the 2 biggest creative forces behind the last 2 iterations, Tom Fitzgerald & Kathy Mangum didn’t/don’t have any love or passion for it either. I think they used the Dr. Channing character as a proxy for themselves & their attitude (it’s there for us all to see.. look at the Sight chart next time you’re on the ride… they even have their initials put on it) and Figment as the fans they hate that (rightfully) proved & showed them that they were wrong. I think that’s why they portrayed Figment the way they did, as an interference that farts in your face, etc.. They ‘hate’ Tony Baxter along with the fans of & other folks involved with the original’s legacy behind the scenes. Look deeper on the web and you’ll find out more about that constant inner battle that’s been going on for FAR too long now when we clearly know who truly is in the wrong here and what’s been causing the most damage.. (that being the ones in charge and that support the garbage decisions done to the ride
 
Last edited:
Andrew25

Andrew25

Well-Known Member
Inspired Figment said:
All the reason more he shouldn’t be involved. Anybody that calls Figment a “little f***er” is disgraceful being involved with ‘his’ ride. If he has no love or passion for it, he shouldn’t be involved. Truth be told, the 2 biggest creative forces behind the last 2 iterations, Tom Fitzgerald & Kathy Mangum don’t either. They used the Dr. Channing character as a proxy for themselves & their attitude (it’s there for us all to see.. look at the Sight chart next time you’re on the ride… they even have their initials put on it) and Figment as the fans they hate. That’s why they portrayed Figment the way they did, as an interference that farts in your face, etc.. They ‘hate’ Tony Baxter along with the fans of & folks involved with the original’s legacy behind the scenes. It’s an absolute fact.
Click to expand...

He was joking, he was making fun of people assuming figment was a real thing. He was a last minute casting decision, can't really blame him for that
 
Inspired Figment

Inspired Figment

Well-Known Member
D95F970A-8620-4664-A35B-4BFE14723B4C.jpeg

The absolute irony here is that the Oxford dictionary proves their mindset/chart wrong. ;
8AACE7AE-07B7-49E5-B4BA-F77E85D84100.jpeg

Right there; “not present to the senses”. Their ride is about perception & stimuli rather than the actual creative process; forming & combining various ideas or thoughts to create new ones or create a new result in how those ideas are combined together
 
Last edited:
Inspired Figment

Inspired Figment

Well-Known Member
Andrew25 said:
He was joking, he was making fun of people assuming figment was a real thing. He was a last minute casting decision, can't really blame him for that
Click to expand...
Nobody genuinely believes he’s real. Anyone with a form of common sense & rationality and anyone that understands the creative process (lol! Oh, how ironic) would realize this. Being a comedian and someone in entertainment, you’d understand the difference of people taking part & enjoying/appreciating the creative aspects of it ‘sincerely’ rather than insincerely. Sincere appreciation is not the same as believing he’s a real person, it’s respecting the process & qualities involved in crafting those characters and works the way they were/are. If they can’t understand or wrap their minds around that, they are in the wrong, period. (Eric included, I could care less about his supposed stature as a comedian or actor)
 
Last edited:
Cmdr_Crimson

Cmdr_Crimson

Well-Known Member
Inspired Figment said:
No, no no… we do ‘not’ need the association with Eric Idle anymore after 2 ‘terrible’ versions with him involved. Bad enough he’s associated with the character he is, the one along with his “Imagination” institute that ruined the pavilion. It’d only feel like a troll/slap in the face to fans of the original version. I like Eric as an actor, but in regards to the Imagination pavilion, he needs to be as far away from that pavilion as possible going forward.
Click to expand...
I find it ironic he voiced a dragon for Warner Bros that looks quite suspiciously close to another dragon...
2.jpg
 
Haymarket2008

Haymarket2008

Well-Known Member
gianguy said:
I wouldn't put too much emphasis on that concept art they released, especially that Figment statue. While I have no doubt the structure itself will look as pictured, I can't imagine (ha) we'll necessarily be seeing those particular artifacts. Disney even said in their blog post this is an example of what a Festival of the Arts exhibit could look like.

I can't imagine the Figment installation would be permanent, and even if it was, it probably won't look like that seeing as it appears to be stolen from somebody else. Weird that this is the second time this has happened with Figment specifically but alas
View attachment 704205
Click to expand...

I don’t think that Figment statue is 100% coming. I think that was probably just a rendering of the type of things one might see in that space.
 
Tha Realest

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
Inspired Figment said:
No, no no… we do ‘not’ need the association with Eric Idle anymore after 2 ‘terrible’ versions with him involved. Bad enough he’s associated with the character he is, the one along with his “Imagination” institute that ruined the pavilion. It’d only feel like a troll/slap in the face to fans of the original version. I like Eric as an actor, but in regards to the Imagination pavilion, he needs to be as far away from that pavilion as possible going forward.
Click to expand...
Once Seth Rogen does his take on this character we’ll be pining for the Eric Idle days
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom