Fresh FLE News for March 2010

headhoncho34

headhoncho34

Member
Oddysey said:
I may be looking at the expansion from a selfish point of view, but after reading the article I am beginning to lose the excitment that I originally had. All the elaborate princess M&G's seem a bit redundant. I admit that my wife and I dont have any children at this point; which skews my perspective, but it just does not seem like the expansion has much to offer.

Outside of the Little Mermaid there is nothing here that my wife and I will visit with any frequency. We wont be spending our day at MK interacting with multiple princesses, and I cant get excited about the relocation of an exsisting attraction (Dumbo) with a new interactive queue.

In my opinion, this expansion is short sighted and does not give guest a reason to repeat the experiences within the expansion. Especially if you are not a little girl who aspires to be a princess. I hate to be negative, but I am not excited and wish this money was being allocated to more ride based attractions and lasting experiences. The last thing that I truly was excited about in MK was an experience built in 1989 by the name of Splash Mountain. Sadly, and 20 years later there is still nothing new and exciting.
Click to expand...
You weren't excited about TOT because that is one of the most elaborate and stunning rides in history.
 
Wilt Dasney

Wilt Dasney

Well-Known Member
tirian said:
No.

WDW needs more detail, not "just enough" so that DL remains the crown jewel. That sort of fanboy drivel is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Would Mickey's and Minnie's houses really outweigh a detailed set of princess homes/settings? (That Belle mirror thing sounds pretty awesome to me.)

I love DL's Toontown, but if we're just talking about the houses, I think what they're building in this expansion sounds at least as interesting, if not more so.

Personally, I'd like to see a full-fledged Toontown at DHS, for reasons I've written before. If that had the mouse houses back, then good enough, but they could go in a different direction with it too.
 
headhoncho34

headhoncho34

Member
Wilt Dasney said:
Would Mickey's and Minnie's houses really outweigh a detailed set of princess homes/settings? (That Belle mirror thing sounds pretty awesome to me.)

I love DL's Toontown, but if we're just talking about the houses, I think what they're building in this expansion sounds at least as interesting, if not more so.

Personally, I'd like to see a full-fledged Toontown at DHS, for reasons I've written before. If that had the mouse houses back, then good enough, but they could go in a different direction with it too.
Click to expand...
Speaking of which anyone remember those runaway bus ride plans for MGM 20 years ago?
 
Lee

Lee

Adventurer
Oddysey said:
The last thing that I truly was excited about in MK was an experience built in 1989 by the name of Splash Mountain. Sadly, and 20 years later there is still nothing new and exciting.
Click to expand...
My feelings exactly.
Nearly 20 years, longer than many posters here have been alive, since MK got a true E-Ticket attraction.
That's just wrong on every level.

MK doesn't need meet and greets, MK needs a new headliner attraction.
Space Mountain 2.0 would have been a nice step in the right direction....:rolleyes:
 
Wilt Dasney

Wilt Dasney

Well-Known Member
Actually, it was DL's Splash that opened in '89. MK's version came much, much more recently...in 1992. :lookaroun

Man, I can remember watching the Disney Channel and seeing a "new" Splash Mountain and Typhoon Lagoon promoted on their interstital shows that gave you footage from the parks. Thinking of those shows, it's more than the parks that could use a shot in the arm these days.
 
Mr.EPCOT

Mr.EPCOT

Active Member
tirian said:
No.

WDW needs more detail, not "just enough" so that DL remains the crown jewel. That sort of fanboy drivel is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Excuse me, that's nothing like what I said. I'm in support of Disneyland and Walt Disney World being as unique from each other as possible. I wasn't suggesting that Disneyland should have higher quality over the Magic Kingdom. If anything, I feel that the Magic Kingdom should be the flagship out of the five Disneylands. Just because I don't think it's necessary to have Mickey and Minnie houses here doesn't mean I don't think we shouldn't get something as quality or better instead.
 
TP2000

TP2000

Well-Known Member
marni1971 said:
This gets more boring with each official snippet. Desperation is starting to filter through. It is good news for the park, but should be seen as a minor expansion for one small dermographic which has been needed for a decade or more and accompanied by real news of real family attractions being added. Mermaid is great. It should be the first of another 2 or 3 E tickets.

That would be news worthy.
Click to expand...

Al Lutz had mentioned a few months ago that the FLE budget was being scaled back a bit. Many folks on the boards threw a fit over that suggestion from Lutz. :lol:

But perhaps interviews with Imagineers working on FLE, like this latest one, are further proof that the FLE project has actually been scaled back a tad in certain areas?

If anything, FLE doesn't seem to be a project whose scale and scope is expanding or moving quickly towards Phase Two.
 
Wilt Dasney

Wilt Dasney

Well-Known Member
TP2000 said:
If anything, FLE doesn't seem to be a project whose scale and scope is expanding or moving quickly towards Phase Two.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't even expect a Phase Two, knowing Disney's track record on things like this.

They've backed out of enough projects that were supposedly sure things, heavily advertised in the parks. Saying that there's going to be more to come when they clearly haven't even finalized what's going to be in this first wave? Sounds like the kind of thing they're just as liable to shelf as move ahead on.
 
EPCOT Explorer

EPCOT Explorer

New Member
marni1971 said:
This gets more boring with each official snippet. Desperation is starting to filter through. It is good news for the park, but should be seen as a minor expansion for one small dermographic which has been needed for a decade or more and accompanied by real news of real family attractions being added. Mermaid is great. It should be the first of another 2 or 3 E tickets.

That would be news worthy.
Click to expand...
Agreed in full.


Though, I am excited for the expansion, it really could use something in it that's outstanding Mermaid comes close...but it needs something BIG.


We'll see. Maybe TLM will do it.
tirian said:
No.

WDW needs more detail, not "just enough" so that DL remains the crown jewel. That sort of fanboy drivel is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
With the size of MK, and the entire resort behind it, that title could easily be ours.

Wilt Dasney said:
I wouldn't even expect a Phase Two, knowing Disney's track record on things like this.

They've backed out of enough projects that were supposedly sure things, heavily advertised in the parks. Saying that there's going to be more to come when they clearly haven't even finalized what's going to be in this first wave? Sounds like the kind of thing they're just as liable to shelf as move ahead on.
Click to expand...
If anything, P2 will be for PH and it's "attraction".


I really hope that happens.
 
Victoria

Victoria

Not old, just vintage.
Wilt Dasney said:
Yeah...and it sounds like that's still a big question mark as to whether it will even happen.
Click to expand...

I would honestly be surprised if we ever actually see Pixie Hollow. I know the popularity of Tinker Bell and her pixie friends has increased exponentially in the last few years, but I am not sure that they can keep it going long enough to actually build PH. I would imagine they are aware that Pixie Hollow would be a huge risk since the longevity of the Pixies' popularity is merely a blip in the Disney time line. Aurora, Cinderella, Belle, and Ariel have all been around a lot longer and have held their own this entire time.
 
Wilt Dasney

Wilt Dasney

Well-Known Member
tiggerific418 said:
I would honestly be surprised if we ever actually see Pixie Hollow.
Click to expand...
I hope we don't. As much as people complain about this being a girly expansion, at least Cinderella, B&B, SB and TLM are fully realized stories that boys and adults can enjoy if they want to. This pixie business seems like the kind of thing that you have to be under 10 and female to get anything out of. That's my impression, anyway.
 
Victoria

Victoria

Not old, just vintage.
Wilt Dasney said:
I hope we don't. As much as people complain about this being a girly expansion, at least Cinderella, B&B, SB and TLM are fully realized stories that boys and adults can enjoy if they want to. This pixie business seems like the kind of thing that you have to be under 10 and female to get anything out of. That's my impression, anyway.
Click to expand...


I had planned to mention the girly factor in my previous post too. I got distracted and forgot. :lol: I have always been very girly but I'm not sure that even I could tolerate a jaunt through Pixie Hollow. :shrug: I have tried to watch some of the Tinker Bell DVDs and after about 20 minutes I give up. If Pixie Hollow actually comes to fruition I can envision a bunch of young boys lined up around the perimeter throwing tantrums about having to be subjected to all the Pixie nonsense.
 
Victoria

Victoria

Not old, just vintage.
EPCOT Explorer said:
I agree. :lol:


But this would REALLY be cool. Really, really.:lookaroun


Heck...It's Tink, and I would go see it.:lookaroun
Click to expand...

Ok...so you have to be either a girl under that age of 10 or a teenage boy to enjoy Pixie Hollow. Where does that leave the rest of us? :lookaroun :lol:
 

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

Back
Top Bottom