Jim Hill on XPass attraction line-up

[spaceghost]

A few more talking points:

1. I re-read Mr. Hill's article and I'm not seeing where it talks about this costing extra. He talks about the regular "day guests" not having access to X-Pass, but that could refer to off-site vs. on-site hotel guests. Do we have inside knowledge that this will cost $ to all guests? Why would this not be just another perk for staying on-site, like EMH and Magical Express? Off-site guests maybe would be able to participate, but by paying extra? I can see there being some concern on the scope of the program if it was available to all hotel resort guests, but there are 2 things to keep in mind:

• Not everyone will use the system.
  
• There will be a limited amount of X-Passes available to each person and for each attraction (which is mentioned in the article).

2. To repeat what I said upstream, for those of you looking for the positives in this, they will probably not be there for the majority of us reading this site. The positives will be for a larger (although less vocal) portion of visitors who currently visit without a plan and who are generally clueless about what a WDW trip entails. The fact that this will not help us will not earn it much love in these parts. However, the fact that it could potentially assist a different segment of the park-going public should still be considered as having value to Disney and is not an inherently bad thing.

3. As far as the complaints from folks about "not wanting to schedule every last minute of my vacation" and "having to schedule things ahead of time isn't fun" I say two things:

• That is a bit of an exaggeration - if Mr. Hill's article is to be believed, there will be a limit on the number of things you can schedule. There will still be spontaneity for doing other things.
  
• I think that this plan borrows heavily from Disney's experience in the cruise industry. On a cruise you do have a schedule of activities set ahead of time, right? You have shore excursions, meals, and other activities that occur at set times. If you look at this, the dining plan, Magical Express, and more, Disney is trying to create a more sculpted, guided, inclusive experience for guests (and also capturing more of a visitor's $). I can see the merits in that, even if I don't 100% agree with it, or its execution.

Ok - fire away!

 

[PalisadesPkteer]

The less popular attractions are less popular for a reason you know.

Anyway, not sure I like the way they are implementing this.

Would have been better to say- pay$$$ for this X-pass and you get these special Fast pass tickets you get to use during your stay.

You get to use X-pass #1 on day 1 of vacation. It can be used at Any time during that day for any X-pass ride. But you can only use it 1 time per attraction for that day.
X-pass #2 for day 2 etc.

This way the times would be staggered and you still have spontaneity. You are not locked into a time just which day. Only other limit is the 1 time per X-pass ride. This would spreed out the X-pass people over the course of the day and spreed them out over all the X-pass rides. This would be more fair to everyone. And you would not be allowed to "hog" an attraction by trying to use it multiple times in a row etc.

As far as the parade thing. They would have to have multiple locations. And some of these would be just for X-passers BUT, some of them or parts of the Premo others would be available to other people just a slightly worse spot than the X-passers maybe. So X-passers get the ultimate best spots if they show up X amount of time before the parade etc. If they do not then they get what is left if any. No showing up 5 minutes before and expecting my premo spot anymore. That should be the planned part of it.

If the X-passers do not show up in enough time then the premo areas open would be available to others.

Think this would have been the best way to run it IMHO.

Once you have reached the 1 time per X-pass attraction for that day then you are in with the rest of us.

 

[disney fan 13]

Disney Animation hasn't been up to par with Pixar animation. Since Pixar has been making movies, they have bested every Disney animated movie made during the same time frame. Pixar has been the best thing to happen to the Disney corporation since Epcot opened.

To be honest. Lion king was the last disney great. ( coincidently katzenburg left about that time)

 

[spaceghost]

To be honest. Lion king was the last disney great. ( coincidently katzenburg left about that time)

While not as good as Lion King, Tangled was surprisingly really, really good. Some would even say great. It has become a favorite of many in my household, not just the 8 and 5 y/o girls.

 

[DisneyFan 2000]

Disney Animation hasn't been up to par with Pixar animation. Since Pixar has been making movies, they have bested every Disney animated movie made during the same time frame. Pixar has been the best thing to happen to the Disney corporation since Epcot opened.

To be fair that's not entirely accurate. Disney has had some impressive outings such as Lilo and Stitch, Emperor's New Groove and Treasure Planet. Problem is Disney diluted their product to a point where even their own feature films became something associated as cheap or quick money grabbers and unworthy as opposed to Pixar's offerings. Which, by the way, if keeping on-topic is my opinion to what Disney is doing with WDW should they continue the course of these quick fixer uppers instead of actually plussing the resort the way they used to.

Oh and for whoever pointed out Meet the Robinsons and Bolt as Lassetter failures, think again. If anything he arrived at the last second and fixed up house with those two, leading them to at least a mildly successful run both critically and commercially.

 

[lebeau]

And WHAT good has THAT done?? Meet the Robinsons was SO memorable. I mean that movie is timeless right? umm let's see......the destruction of the Living Seas, TS PLayland at HK, TSMM (let's make a ride out of a Wii that you can do at home), umm..MORE Nemo (DAK show, Subs), CarsLand (did ANYONE "dream" of visiting Radiator Springs?), oh yes, and Bolt was soooo amazing too. Lasseter is totally derived from Walt's DNA......

It seems you don't know much about the Disney company outside of the parks. I get that this forum is about the parks - specifically the ones in FL - but they are a relatively small part of the company as a whole. Others have already responded to your points, so I'll elaborate on their responses below.

That's really funny actually, since I just finished rereading it a half hour ago

Funny how that worked out. I really need to dust off my copy. It's been a while.

Disney Animation hasn't been up to par with Pixar animation. Since Pixar has been making movies, they have bested every Disney animated movie made during the same time frame. Pixar has been the best thing to happen to the Disney corporation since Epcot opened.

There were years when Pixar was the lone bright spot in the Disney empire (unless you count things like ESPN which people don't associate with Disney.)

The annual summer release from Pixar and the Pirates franchise are the only two tentpoles Disney has had at the box office in a long time. And there's only so much gas left in the Pirates tank.

To be honest. Lion king was the last disney great. ( coincidently katzenburg left about that time)

While not as good as Lion King, Tangled was surprisingly really, really good. Some would even say great. It has become a favorite of many in my household, not just the 8 and 5 y/o girls.

Lion King = over-rated
Tangled = under-rated

Discuss.

(Seriously, I don't get why so many people hold The Lion King in such high regard.)

To be fair that's not entirely accurate. Disney has had some impressive outings such as Lilo and Stitch, Emperor's New Groove and Treasure Planet. Problem is Disney diluted their product to a point where even their own feature films became something associated as cheap or quick money grabbers and unworthy as opposed to Pixar's offerings. Which, by the way, if keeping on-topic is my opinion to what Disney is doing with WDW should they continue the course of these quick fixer uppers instead of actually plussing the resort the way they used to.

You hit the nail on the head. A lot of Disney features that were actually pretty good under-performed at the box office because Disney burned their fanbase throughout the 90s. The direct-to-video sequels in particular made the Disney brand seem cheap. Eventually, families decided Disney = home video and they stopped going to the theaters for Disney features. Pixar, on the other hand, consistently put out a high quality product. And that is why Pixar movies are still considered events.

Oh and for whoever pointed out Meet the Robinsons and Bolt as Lassetter failures, think again. If anything he arrived at the last second and fixed up house with those two, leading them to at least a mildly successful run both critically and commercially.

Exactly.

Not saying Lassetter hasn't dropped the ball. Cars 2 was a disappointment. the Pixies franchise has under-performed. But Walt had flops too (not that I am comparing them).

I'm not saying Lassetter is any kind of savior. But Pixar's track record is the best in the industry. Eisner was intentionally antagonizing Lassetter to the point where Pixar was going to pick up shop and move (any guess where they probably would have landed? hint: it would have been a rival studio).

Eisner, by the way, had a long track record of torching relationships. At the same time he was driving Pixar into the arms of his rivals, he was also burning bridges with the Weinstein brothers.

Essentially, it was Pixar or Eisner. That's an easy choice. Eisner was bringing the company down all around him. Pixar was the source of Disney's only hits. It was a no-brainer to oust Eisner in order to retain the Pixar partnership.

If Eisner had his way, Disney would have retained the rights to all the Pixar properties up through Cars (I believe). They still would have saturated the parks with Pixar because they haven't been able to generate hits of their own. They would have made their own crappy sequels. And the post Eisner Pixar films like Wall-e, Rattatoile, and Up would have been released by a Disney rival. Heck, they might even have rides dedicated to them at Universal by now had Eisner not been replaced.

So, whatever Iger's sins are, we're still better off than we might have been.

 

[RSoxNo1]

To be fair that's not entirely accurate. Disney has had some impressive outings such as Lilo and Stitch, Emperor's New Groove and Treasure Planet. Problem is Disney diluted their product to a point where even their own feature films became something associated as cheap or quick money grabbers and unworthy as opposed to Pixar's offerings. Which, by the way, if keeping on-topic is my opinion to what Disney is doing with WDW should they continue the course of these quick fixer uppers instead of actually plussing the resort the way they used to.

Oh and for whoever pointed out Meet the Robinsons and Bolt as Lassetter failures, think again. If anything he arrived at the last second and fixed up house with those two, leading them to at least a mildly successful run both critically and commercially.

I enjoyed Bolt, and I was relatively indifferent towards Meet the Robinsons, Tangled, Princess and the Frog, and Lilo and Stitch. I didn't see Emperor's New Groove or Treasure Planet. It's possible my indifference towards Lilo and Stitch is tied to pre-existing negative thoughts rooted in the theme parks, and I understand I wasn't the target market for Tangled or Princess and the Frog.

Having said that, I will undoubtedly be looking at Brave as a point of comparison for the last two. I have every expectation that Brave will be a far superior film compared to Tangled or Princess and the Frog. I understand that Pixar is Disney, but they have separated themselves as an entity. John Lasseter wouldn't allow Pixar to release certain movies (like Planes for example). Tangled has been successful for the company, but I honestly view it as a similar movie to Cars. Not all that great, but incredibly marketable (although the original trailer for Tangled was awful).

Pixar changed the way animated movies are made, and has essentially replaced what Disney was best known for. Pixar today is what Disney Animation was in the late 80s/early 90s.

Having said all that, Wreck-It-Ralph looks like it could be a really fun movie and I'm looking forward to it more than Brave.

 

[COProgressFan]

Essentially, it was Pixar or Eisner. That's an easy choice. Eisner was bringing the company down all around him. Pixar was the source of Disney's only hits. It was a no-brainer to oust Eisner in order to retain the Pixar partnership.

If Eisner had his way, Disney would have retained the rights to all the Pixar properties up through Cars (I believe). They still would have saturated the parks with Pixar because they haven't been able to generate hits of their own. They would have made their own crappy sequels. And the post Eisner Pixar films like Wall-e, Rattatoile, and Up would have been released by a Disney rival. Heck, they might even have rides dedicated to them at Universal by now had Eisner not been replaced.

So, whatever Iger's sins are, we're still better off than we might have been.

Well said explanation about the Eisner situation. I am not a fan of Iger (he's too much of a generic "manager" looking to make Wall St. happy rather than be a true "leader" of a creative company) but I think the potential alternative (more years of Eisner as he continued to burn more bridges) could have been worse.

 

[lebeau]

Well said explanation about the Eisner situation. I am not a fan of Iger (he's too much of a generic "manager" looking to make Wall St. happy rather than be a true "leader" of a creative company) but I think the potential alternative (more years of Eisner as he continued to burn more bridges) could have been worse.

Yeah, I'd have preferred option C if option C were a candidate better than Iger. I share your assessment of him for the most part. But if I have to choose between more years of Eisner and what we got from Iger, I wouldn't hesitate to choose Iger.

 

[MarkTwain]

Lion King = over-rated
Tangled = under-rated

Discuss.

Sorry to drive this thread further off-topic, but I agree completely! I didn't think I'd ever find anyone that shared that opinion. Lion King is good, but IMO some of the films that followed it surpass it in almost every possible way. Tarzan and Mulan (particularly the former) IMO both have far super animation, cinematography, and art direction, and don't get nearly the attention that Lion King does in the public. Mulan's watercolor-style backgrounds are beautiful, and there are scenes in Tarzan which absolutely steal your breath away... whether from the stunningly rendered animation or the sheer drama of the story. I wish these films got a little more attention from the public and Disney fans alike.

And as for Tangled... I read a lot of animator's blogs, and it's funny to read comment sections with professional animators arguing over whether Tangled is better than Beauty & the Beast. Many keep saying that it's the best animated film since Walt Disney was alive. :lookaroun I don't know all of the esoteric qualities animators use to judge the quality of animation, but apparently there's something there that they like...

 

[lebeau]

Sorry to drive this thread further off-topic, but I agree completely! I didn't think I'd ever find anyone that shared that opinion. Lion King is good, but IMO some of the films that followed it surpass it in almost every possible way. Tarzan and Mulan (particularly the former) IMO both have far super animation, cinematography, and art direction, and don't get nearly the attention that Lion King does in the public. Mulan's watercolor-style backgrounds are beautiful, and there are scenes in Tarzan which absolutely steal your breath away... whether from the stunningly rendered animation or the sheer drama of the story. I wish these films got a little more attention from the public and Disney fans alike.

And as for Tangled... I read a lot of animator's blogs, and it's funny to read comment sections with professional animators arguing over whether Tangled is better than Beauty & the Beast. Many keep saying that it's the best animated film since Walt Disney was alive. :lookaroun I don't know all of the esoteric qualities animators use to judge the quality of animation, but apparently there's something there that they like...

Fully and whole heartedly agree.

(apologies for continuing thread drift - I realize I am a repeat offender)

Lion King is entertaining. But the plot is recycled Hamlet. The humor is fart jokes and bugs. I think it's popularity stems from the number of kids who saw it at the peak of Disney's popularity.

There were other films in the 90s that were as good or better. But they never got the recognition they deserved. Mulan and Tarzan are definitely among the better films of the era. I also enjoyed Hercules every bit as much as The Lion King. But by then, people were tiring of the Disney musical formula.

Tangled reminded me a lot of Beauty and the Beast (which was always one of my favorites). I can't speak from the point of view of an animator. But I have heard animators disparage BatB. I can see how some would prefer Tangled from an animator's point of view. As a viewer, I still prefer BatB, but I consider Tangled to be nearly its equal and superior to just about any Disney animated film (Pixar excluded) since BatB.

I'm glad we could meet online and share our minority opinion! :sohappy:

 

[KevinYee]

Bottom line:

Summer of 2014 is going to look a lot like summer of 2010 when it comes to how many rides and e-ticket rides you get on, if you are a 'planner' and use FastPass currently. The only difference will be that you now paid $200/night MORE for your hotel (since you upgraded to Deluxe) or else you paid about $200/day MORE for the xpass privilege.

Don't want the upgraded service of xpass? Don't buy it, and you really could spend the same in 2014 that you spent in 2010. Just don't expect to get on the same number of rides.

 

[njDizFan]

Bottom line:

Summer of 2014 is going to look a lot like summer of 2010 when it comes to how many rides and e-ticket rides you get on, if you are a 'planner' and use FastPass currently. The only difference will be that you now paid $200/night MORE for your hotel (since you upgraded to Deluxe) or else you paid about $200/day MORE for the xpass privilege.

Don't want the upgraded service of xpass? Don't buy it, and you really could spend the same in 2014 that you spent in 2010. Just don't expect to get on the same number of rides.

Kevin, this $200 figure you mentioned is that something you heard or just using as a hypothetical?

 

[KevinYee]

Kevin, this $200 figure you mentioned is that something you heard or just using as a hypothetical?

Oh, that was just a throwaway number (hypothetical). I was mostly thinking about the price of deluxe hotels vs. moderates, but it would be a different number of course if you had to start using deluxes when you usually use value resorts.

 

[Rasvar]

Tangled reminded me a lot of Beauty and the Beast (which was always one of my favorites). I can't speak from the point of view of an animator. But I have heard animators disparage BatB. I can see how some would prefer Tangled from an animator's point of view. As a viewer, I still prefer BatB, but I consider Tangled to be nearly its equal and superior to just about any Disney animated film (Pixar excluded) since BatB.

I do have to chuckle on this. The only group I know that gripes about what it loves more than Disney fans are professional animators. Not saying any of it is off base. The only time I have ever understood how a non-techie feels when stuck with two techies arguing is when at a dinner where two animators were arguing over line style and shading in certain animated films for over an hour. :lol:

 

[the-reason14]

Sorry, now I have to jump in and keep things off topic. But no, imo Lion King is tops and one of the best if not the best animated movie Disney has ever done. I guess mostly because I'm a 90s kid, so I grew up with it as well as many classics like Peter Pan, Pooh, Pinocchio, etc. But the lion king was the only 90s Disney movie besides toy story that I actually watched. All the others, BaTB, Mulan, I discovered later. And while they are good, they simply can't sit in the same room as the Lion King. Yep, it's a Hamlet knock off, but what animated Disney movie is 100% original besides, what Lilo and Stitch and maybe one or two others? I'm in an online movie course where we're learning how other things can contribute to a story, whether it's in animation or not. I probably should take the nostalgic glasses off and view all of them and get back to this topic, but I think there's a reason why Lion King did as well as it did and the other Disney movies after it did not.

 

[ChrisFL]

Lion King is entertaining. But the plot is recycled Hamlet.

or recycled Kimba The White Lion:

http://www.kimbawlion.com/rant2.htm

 

[Scuttle]

Sorry, now I have to jump in and keep things off topic. But no, imo Lion King is tops and one of the best if not the best animated movie Disney has ever done. I guess mostly because I'm a 90s kid, so I grew up with it as well as many classics like Peter Pan, Pooh, Pinocchio, etc. But the lion king was the only 90s Disney movie besides toy story that I actually watched. All the others, BaTB, Mulan, I discovered later. And while they are good, they simply can't sit in the same room as the Lion King. Yep, it's a Hamlet knock off, but what animated Disney movie is 100% original besides, what Lilo and Stitch and maybe one or two others? I'm in an online movie course where we're learning how other things can contribute to a story, whether it's in animation or not. I probably should take the nostalgic glasses off and view all of them and get back to this topic, but I think there's a reason why Lion King did as well as it did and the other Disney movies after it did not.

I'll even go further and say it's the best animated movie from the post Walt era. The Lion King is the one modern Disney movie that can hang with the classics from the 40's and 50's IMO.

 

[lebeau]

I'll even go further and say it's the best animated movie from the post Walt era. The Lion King is the one modern Disney movie that can hang with the classics from the 40's and 50's IMO.

How old were you when you saw it, just out of curiosity?

 

[Scuttle]

How old were you when you saw it, just out of curiosity?

That really doesn't have anything to do with it. I watched it a few months ago.