• 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.

How many people actually prefer Winnie the Pooh over Mr. Toad's Wild Ride?

Mr Toad vs. Winnie the Pooh

  • Mr. Toad's Wild Ride

    Votes: 123 63.4%
  • Winnie the Pooh

    Votes: 71 36.6%

  • Total voters
    194

rkleinlein

Well-Known Member
Why go to hell? Why not go to hell?

Vintage MK was a very different beast from today's park. The castle looks the same and some other stuff looks similar, but the MK has changed immensely in character. Today's park is a girlie, kiddie toddler playground. Vintage MK had a subversive edge, was an adult park.

The Jungle Cruise skipper fired at the animals with his pistol. The pirates pillaged and burned and raped.The Mansion was scary. Snow White was a horror movie. 20k was a claustrophobic death trap under actual water, fighting undersea beasts. Above was the Skyway. Small kids dangling 50 feet above ground in open buckets. Main Street had actual cars. Ariel was topless, bare breasted. If You Had Wings had boys and girls dancing in skimpy bikinis and trunks. Lots of replica toy guns were for sale in Adventureland and Frontierland. You had to physically row your canoe. Psychedelic bands played in Tomorrowland. And Toad was a drugged up DUI ride to hell.
The Empress Lilly, this is the funniest and most perceptive post I've read on here.

Now I have a better understanding of why my own kids don't love Disney like I did when I was their age: because it IS a kiddie playground with very little that's unexpected or subversive.

Your post made me think of my first trip to WDW in the late '70s when I was in third grade. I remember a contraption in the Penny Arcade where you grabbed two doorknobs to see how long you could hang on. You didn't know ahead of time what was going to happen which was part of the appeal. They started vibrating, gently at first and then with increasing intensity. It was so violent you had to let go because it actually hurt. My horrified mom said, "Did it electrocute you?" Then we all laughed and my younger sister wanted to try. I still remember it 40 years later.

I also remember running into Donald Duck (this was before you had to wait in line or book an appointment to see characters) and tugging on his tail. He quacked and spun around. I kept doing it and at one point he spun around and swatted my hand, making contact. It was gentle, of course, but I was momentarily stunned until everybody laughed. If that happened today there'd be a lawsuit for assault.

The subversive edge you so accurately and vividly describe is not just appealing to adults. Kids like those thrills and surprises too. Thrills and surprises that are more subtle, unexpected, and subversive than rollercoasters or free falls; thrills like a beloved character that might hit a bratty kid or innocent-looking doorknobs that could shake a little boy's arms right out of their sockets.
 
Last edited:

DuckTalesWooHoo1987

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
Rode them both. Incredible charm in both. Loved Winnie even before we had kids but once we had our little boy we saw how much kids love the ride and appreciated it even more. Then once we had our little girl we got to see her fall in love with it also all over again. I also always love looking back in the ride and seeing Mr. Toad giving away the deed and I always love leaving the Haunted Mansion and looking at Mr. Toad up in the graveyard.
 

DuckTalesWooHoo1987

Well-Known Member
Mr. Toad looks bad because it was built in 1955. Winnie the Pooh should be so much more advanced than it is considering when it was built.

Then again, I don’t like to take technological advancement too far on dark rides. The lack of tech is part of the charm, IMO. Compare these two rides to Frozen Ever After or Na’Vi River Journey. I enjoy the latter two, but I wouldn’t call them “charming.” They’re just aesthetically pleasing.
The simplicity of Winnie is where the charm is at for me. I really just feel like Frozen is almost a sort of stop gap afterthought of an attraction that was just thrown together to meet the incredible demand for ANYthing Frozen at the time. Not that Frozen is a "bad" ride but I just think if Disney had felt like they had more time to develop it then it would have been much more advanced and immersive than it wound up being. I actually think the loading area is maybe more charming than the actual ride itself. Kids still love it though and ultimately that was the goal of it anyway. I still prefer Pooh to Frozen as a ride and IP though.
 

Chef Mickey

Well-Known Member
OK, fess up... some of you folks figured out a way to vote more then once. How can you all like something that was just half a step up from a roadside carnival fun house. A ride where you die at the end and go to hell after looking at a large selection of day glow painted plywood. I went to it once and never went back again. Pooh isn't the best dark ride ever build but at least it had a happy story line and a character the most people could relate too.
I honestly think I can relate more to the life struggle of Mr. Toad than a talking bear that only wants to eat honey.
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
I honestly think I can relate more to the life struggle of Mr. Toad than a talking bear that only wants to eat honey.
I wasn't referring to life experience. If I was the hell scene is absolutely on target. I was referring to the recognition of the character itself.
 

Fox&Hound

Well-Known Member
Yeah, I picked Toad too, and I started this thread! People are right, it had a charm to it. I like Pooh as well, it had a place but for some reason with the upcoming Animal Kingdom at the time and two rides that have animals in them they didn't find room for either in 1998, but instead had to remove one. The whole "it was just a carnival ride" is overplayed I think. I have never been to a carnival ride that was as good as that. The whole train thing was a little scary to a 10 year old riding it (I mean me).

Lastly, does anyone remember why the train and hell scene were added? So basically in 1955 when this ride was built it would have been in there as well at Disneyland? I am just wondering what the angle was with that. Disney has some dark moments in their rides, Pinocchio comes to mind, but that was pretty dark and maybe even controversial. I mean, why did Mr. Toad die? Or go to hell? Always wondered how that came about.
Neither would really fit AK. Just because they feature animals does not necessarily mean they belong in AK. I wouldn't lose sleep over it but it seems like Disney runs AK with more of a "real animal vibe" rather than animals who wear clothes, drive cars, and in general, act like humans...
 

Musical Mermaid

Active Member
I was a child when Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride was still at MK and had never watched Disney’s Mr. Toad, but then again, I’d never seen Song of the South either and that didn’t prevent me from enjoying both attractions. Not only do I prefer Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride to Pooh, but when I was young, I also preferred it to Snow White’s Scary Adventures and Peter Pan. Those rides were ok, but they were just retelling the story and they weren’t as fun as steering a car and getting into trouble. In my young mind, Peter Pan and Snow White felt like kiddie rides, whereas Mr. Toad felt more like a big kid ride. When I heard it was being replaced by Pooh, something I also associated with babies and toddlers, Fantasyland was much more of a disappointment (losing the Skyway didn’t help either). It didn’t matter that Toad had wooden cutouts. It had 2 different tracks, it provided a different story than watching the film, and it was a lot of fun.
 

Brer Panther

Well-Known Member
Pooh is overhated. I'm sure that Mr. Toad was a great ride and all, but on my most recent trip to Disney I've went on Pooh twice and I personally believe that it is a great ride. Yeah, it's obvious that the budget for it wasn't as high as the budget for Tokyo's, but I think they made the best of it. If Pooh had taken the place of some ride that wasn't Mr. Toad, everyone who's talked smack about it in this thread likely wouldn't mind it. There's obviously a bias here.

By the way, I find it kind of funny that people use Tokyo's Pooh as a reason why our Pooh sucks due to its clearly higher budget... and yet they all praise Mr. Toad, which was no more technologically-advanced than Pooh. A ride full of plywood cutouts was closed to make room for a ride that ALSO had lots of plywood cutouts. Again, there's an elephant in the room and its name is BEING BIASED.
 

PiratesMansion

Well-Known Member
In fairness to MK's Pooh, it came into the world BEFORE Tokyo's version, the only one to do so. SO I don't know that "It's not Tokyo's" is as much of a legitimate complaint as it would be at the other parks.

BUT Toad was an unexpected highlight of my first WDW trip, to the point that on our last day we went back to MK to ride it (and HM and a few other rides, but point is we specifically sought out a reride). It had real personality and character in a way that Pooh does not. Pooh is the ultimate committee-approved ride, taking something interesting and memorable but "(fill in this space with any 90s-style parent objection you can think of)" and replacing it with a vanilla ride that is perfectly pleasant and inoffensive and not much more. Even my mother, who considers Pooh her favorite character, came off it feeling very meh about the whole thing (She LOVED Tokyo's!) It's the type of ride that people like who go to the parks because they like the characters and TEH DIZNEY while not actually caring about the parks or what really makes them tick.

In hindsight we were very lucky that we went in Summer 98: we got to hit the original Imagination ride and Toad just before they closed.
 

Pooh.sHoneyHuntTDL

Well-Known Member
Pooh is overhated. I'm sure that Mr. Toad was a great ride and all, but on my most recent trip to Disney I've went on Pooh twice and I personally believe that it is a great ride. Yeah, it's obvious that the budget for it wasn't as high as the budget for Tokyo's, but I think they made the best of it. If Pooh had taken the place of some ride that wasn't Mr. Toad, everyone who's talked smack about it in this thread likely wouldn't mind it. There's obviously a bias here.

By the way, I find it kind of funny that people use Tokyo's Pooh as a reason why our Pooh sucks due to its clearly higher budget... and yet they all praise Mr. Toad, which was no more technologically-advanced than Pooh. A ride full of plywood cutouts was closed to make room for a ride that ALSO had lots of plywood cutouts. Again, there's an elephant in the room and its name is BEING BIASED.
Have you ever riden Poohs Honey Hunt?
 

Professor_Jason

Active Member
Pooh bad, Toad good :p
All kidding aside Pooh is a fun and cute ride but it's something we tend to skip and not even notice we didn't do until we get home. I'm sure as my niece and nephew start to get a little bit older and start to go with us it's something we'll be doing A LOT more of. That said I'd still prefer to have Mr. Toad, it was wacky fun, we always came off laughing and had to ride it at least twice so we could get both sides
 
Last edited:

Big Phil

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Neither would really fit AK. Just because they feature animals does not necessarily mean they belong in AK. I wouldn't lose sleep over it but it seems like Disney runs AK with more of a "real animal vibe" rather than animals who wear clothes, drive cars, and in general, act like humans...
A Bug's Life, Lion King, etc., I mean there is a precedent for Disney cartoons. I just figure it would have softened the blow a bit more if they moved a classic ride like Toad to Animal Kingdom rather than getting rid of it completely.

From what I understand of all the Disney parks Toad only remains in Disneyland, correct? It seems to me the locals have a lot more say about whether or not classic rides remain.
 

PiratesMansion

Well-Known Member
From what I understand of all the Disney parks Toad only remains in Disneyland, correct?
Correct. Toad never made it to any of the international parks. They instead decided to export (sigh) Pinocchio instead.

I don't know if the local's park aspect will save Toad so much as the space that is way too tiny for modern Disney to know what to do with.
 

Big Phil

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Correct. Toad never made it to any of the international parks. They instead decided to export (sigh) Pinocchio instead.

I don't know if the local's park aspect will save Toad so much as the space that is way too tiny for modern Disney to know what to do with.
The local contingent seems to have a larger voice in California than Florida. Obviously because of the volume of people I would assume. I don't see it going anytime soon.
 
Top Bottom