DisneyFan 2000 said:
Please tell me you are joking......super heroes = sci fi.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Let's just close WDW since they just can't do anything right anyway
- Thread starter speck76
- Start date
Please tell me you are joking......super heroes = sci fi.
wannab@dis
Well-Known Member
well, actually, I would see "super heroes" as more fantasy than sci-fi.hakunamatata said:
DisneyFan 2000
Well-Known Member
Read above quote... :wave:
OGL....... :zipit: :zipit: :zipit:
DisneyFan 2000
Well-Known Member
Huh? 
wannab@dis
Well-Known Member
care to elaborate? :veryconfuhakunamatata said:
DisneyFan 2000 said:Huh?
OGL = Oh Good Lord.......... :wave:
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
This seems to be an appropriate response for some rants (although I started in the Living with the Land thread).
What people on this board need to realize is that Disney is a publically traded company and it's first obligation is to it's stockholders, many of which I can assume post on this site, so you'll recognize where I'm coming from. Certainly with the unlimited budget for new attractions that many people here invision, the parks would be that much better then they already are. That being said, here is my list of complaints/future problems facing Disney's theme parks
1. Movie based attractions: With conventional animation taking a huge hit b/c of dreamworks and pixar - Disney has been at a loss for animated characters to place in new park attractions. The Incredibles could make for a nice new ride, as could the future release of the last Disney/Pixar movie Cars. Speculation has led some people to fear that Disney will continue going the other direction with movies based on attractions. They did very well with Pirates of the Carabbean, and will likely do just as well with it's sequal. In a revamp of the ride I won't be suprised to see Jack Sparrow or a change in colors of the ship's sails in the first room with the underwater air cannons. They were hurt by the Haunted Mansion and I don't know how the Jungle Cruise movie will fair. That being said, any revamping of the Magic Kingdom or Camp Minnie Mickey will likely involve older movie characters as opposed to newer ones (Aladdin?)
2. Ride capacity and breakdowns of Test Track: If you were to ask anyone that recently went to Disneyworld what attraction had the longest wait, undoubtedly the answer will be Test Track. The fast passes are usually distributed for the day by 11 AM, or just around the time of the first scheduled break down. I'm not sure of the rides capacity when fully running, but I recognize that there is very little time between the cars on the loop. Short of building another track the best way to improve throughput time at this attraction is a larger car which we won't see until the current ones hit 10 years old. Shutting down the ride for a few months to decrease breakdowns is not exactly an option at this point because of the limited amount of activities in Epcot right now. Even after Soarin' opens - that's only one e-ticket attraction for guests that get nauseous on Mission: Space. I think another e-ticket attraction is necessary before a serious revamping of Test Track can be done. (Brother Bear Rapid Ride, Mt. Fuji?, Timeracers, Imagination roller coaster)
3. MGM's unused studios: I loved Superstar Television, and I always remembered a large crowd for it. The routes of MGM were shows like this, and I would like to see more of them. Who Wants to be a Millionare is quite popular, but Sounds Dangerous is a joke. Also, if the rumors are true that Indiana Jones is gone after Lights Motors Action opens, then they really haven't added much to the park, they've just changed it. Indy has always drawn crowds, Lights, Motors, Action! will also draw large crowds, but when you have two high capacity shows you can please more guests at once.
What people on this board need to realize is that Disney is a publically traded company and it's first obligation is to it's stockholders, many of which I can assume post on this site, so you'll recognize where I'm coming from. Certainly with the unlimited budget for new attractions that many people here invision, the parks would be that much better then they already are. That being said, here is my list of complaints/future problems facing Disney's theme parks
1. Movie based attractions: With conventional animation taking a huge hit b/c of dreamworks and pixar - Disney has been at a loss for animated characters to place in new park attractions. The Incredibles could make for a nice new ride, as could the future release of the last Disney/Pixar movie Cars. Speculation has led some people to fear that Disney will continue going the other direction with movies based on attractions. They did very well with Pirates of the Carabbean, and will likely do just as well with it's sequal. In a revamp of the ride I won't be suprised to see Jack Sparrow or a change in colors of the ship's sails in the first room with the underwater air cannons. They were hurt by the Haunted Mansion and I don't know how the Jungle Cruise movie will fair. That being said, any revamping of the Magic Kingdom or Camp Minnie Mickey will likely involve older movie characters as opposed to newer ones (Aladdin?)
2. Ride capacity and breakdowns of Test Track: If you were to ask anyone that recently went to Disneyworld what attraction had the longest wait, undoubtedly the answer will be Test Track. The fast passes are usually distributed for the day by 11 AM, or just around the time of the first scheduled break down. I'm not sure of the rides capacity when fully running, but I recognize that there is very little time between the cars on the loop. Short of building another track the best way to improve throughput time at this attraction is a larger car which we won't see until the current ones hit 10 years old. Shutting down the ride for a few months to decrease breakdowns is not exactly an option at this point because of the limited amount of activities in Epcot right now. Even after Soarin' opens - that's only one e-ticket attraction for guests that get nauseous on Mission: Space. I think another e-ticket attraction is necessary before a serious revamping of Test Track can be done. (Brother Bear Rapid Ride, Mt. Fuji?, Timeracers, Imagination roller coaster)
3. MGM's unused studios: I loved Superstar Television, and I always remembered a large crowd for it. The routes of MGM were shows like this, and I would like to see more of them. Who Wants to be a Millionare is quite popular, but Sounds Dangerous is a joke. Also, if the rumors are true that Indiana Jones is gone after Lights Motors Action opens, then they really haven't added much to the park, they've just changed it. Indy has always drawn crowds, Lights, Motors, Action! will also draw large crowds, but when you have two high capacity shows you can please more guests at once.
Nice post....great points.
1. I posted a thread a while back wondering if Belle and Ariel were getting too saturated in the parks. With a lack of new characters that have become popular with guests, the parks seem to be using the classic characters more and more, I often wonder how many attractions and shows can have the same old characters included before guests begin to say "I have seen Belle 14 times today.....can't I see something else?"
2.Test Track gets a lot of heat from having low capacity and many breakdowns. The ride is a problem, it is not filling the role that it was built for (high-capacity thrill ride) and instead always has a wait much longer than ever anticipated.
Test Track though was a "first of its kind" ride....a prototype....and when you build prototype rides, this type of thing can happen.
I guess for those that do not like clones, and want WDC to build cutting-edge rides with new technology, situations like Test Track are always an unfortunate possibility.
3. I feel MGM is the most "broken" of the parks. MGM is not the park it was when it opened (which is fine I guess) but it was not designed to be the park that it is today.....it also seems that many of the expansion have not been thought through very well. To have 4 popular attractions (ToT, RnRC, B&tB, and Fantasmic) all on a dead-end street was not a genius move in planning. I have heard that Indiana Jones is going away after LMA opens, but I have also heard that it is staying. I have heard from a very reliable source that MGM will be getting two new attractions after LMA opens, a show (based on Power Rangers or Incredibles) and a ride....I am not sure if the ride is IJA or not.
1. I posted a thread a while back wondering if Belle and Ariel were getting too saturated in the parks. With a lack of new characters that have become popular with guests, the parks seem to be using the classic characters more and more, I often wonder how many attractions and shows can have the same old characters included before guests begin to say "I have seen Belle 14 times today.....can't I see something else?"
2.Test Track gets a lot of heat from having low capacity and many breakdowns. The ride is a problem, it is not filling the role that it was built for (high-capacity thrill ride) and instead always has a wait much longer than ever anticipated.
Test Track though was a "first of its kind" ride....a prototype....and when you build prototype rides, this type of thing can happen.
I guess for those that do not like clones, and want WDC to build cutting-edge rides with new technology, situations like Test Track are always an unfortunate possibility.
3. I feel MGM is the most "broken" of the parks. MGM is not the park it was when it opened (which is fine I guess) but it was not designed to be the park that it is today.....it also seems that many of the expansion have not been thought through very well. To have 4 popular attractions (ToT, RnRC, B&tB, and Fantasmic) all on a dead-end street was not a genius move in planning. I have heard that Indiana Jones is going away after LMA opens, but I have also heard that it is staying. I have heard from a very reliable source that MGM will be getting two new attractions after LMA opens, a show (based on Power Rangers or Incredibles) and a ride....I am not sure if the ride is IJA or not.
DisneyFan 2000
Well-Known Member
hakunamatata said:
lol I knew that. My question is WHY was it said?
I just see fantasy and sci fi in the same catagory.
Pixie Duster
New Member
The point of Tomorrowland is not just sci fi, but the promise of tomorrow . SGE is a stretch, but Incredible is most certainly more of stretch. There is nothing about progress or science that is profound in the theming of that movie, it is mainly heroics. Incredibles belongs at MGM.
General Grizz
New Member
I wholeheartedly agree. You rock.Pixie Duster said:
HennieBogan1966
Account Suspended
Shut it down?
I for one, love The Disney Company, and think it would be horrible to EVER see it go by the wayside. Having said that, things can ALWAYS be improved upon.
I think, once again, that one of the problems that people here tend to have is that they believe that Disney has unlimited budgets for any and everything they do. This is simply NOT the case. No matter how much this arm or that arm of the company makes, it also takes millions to run those arms individually.
Secondly, I wholeheartedly agree that there has been some dramatic changes with the company over the years, and a somewhat disturbing trend toward lowering of the "family values" standards that once were a staple with this "brand". I know, there will be MANY of you out there who will say "That's what they have to do to grow the company."
Question: Where does it end? When do they (Disney) say, we've crossed a line here, and we're not going to do business this way anymore.
I agree that it takes a lot of capital at that level of business in order to stave off competition, and hostile takeovers. But you do have a choice as to what type of "values" you are going to reflect throughout your business.
And a great example of this would indeed be Michael Eisner. When he first happened on the scene, I'm sure that many were excited about his vision for the future, and his ideas, which helped to take Disney to another level for some time. However, over time, he has perpetuated a certain reputation amongst not only castmembers, but guests and business partners as well.
So you then read endless #'s of threads bashing him up one side and down the other, based on the actions he has taken regarding the direction of the company.
Indeed, I do believe that it is STILL possible to stay with a high standard of moral values, and make money in this country. You don't always have to sell out to make money.
Could they improve things? Sure. Couldn't we all? !!!! Of course!!!
One of the great things about freedom, (provided by the men and women of the Armed Services I might add), is our freedom to express our views. Views that are sometimes critical of the way things are done within the company.
I love this site, and love the debate that goes on amongst all of us. But is it always supposed to be only happy, and do we all have to ALWAYS agree with each other on EVERY issue?
Is that real freedom to you?
I encourage the opposing viewpoints, and any and all are welcome as far as I am concerned.
MERRY CHRISTMAS, and HAPPY NEW YEAR, everyone.
I for one, love The Disney Company, and think it would be horrible to EVER see it go by the wayside. Having said that, things can ALWAYS be improved upon.
I think, once again, that one of the problems that people here tend to have is that they believe that Disney has unlimited budgets for any and everything they do. This is simply NOT the case. No matter how much this arm or that arm of the company makes, it also takes millions to run those arms individually.
Secondly, I wholeheartedly agree that there has been some dramatic changes with the company over the years, and a somewhat disturbing trend toward lowering of the "family values" standards that once were a staple with this "brand". I know, there will be MANY of you out there who will say "That's what they have to do to grow the company."
Question: Where does it end? When do they (Disney) say, we've crossed a line here, and we're not going to do business this way anymore.
I agree that it takes a lot of capital at that level of business in order to stave off competition, and hostile takeovers. But you do have a choice as to what type of "values" you are going to reflect throughout your business.
And a great example of this would indeed be Michael Eisner. When he first happened on the scene, I'm sure that many were excited about his vision for the future, and his ideas, which helped to take Disney to another level for some time. However, over time, he has perpetuated a certain reputation amongst not only castmembers, but guests and business partners as well.
So you then read endless #'s of threads bashing him up one side and down the other, based on the actions he has taken regarding the direction of the company.
Indeed, I do believe that it is STILL possible to stay with a high standard of moral values, and make money in this country. You don't always have to sell out to make money.
Could they improve things? Sure. Couldn't we all? !!!! Of course!!!
One of the great things about freedom, (provided by the men and women of the Armed Services I might add), is our freedom to express our views. Views that are sometimes critical of the way things are done within the company.
I love this site, and love the debate that goes on amongst all of us. But is it always supposed to be only happy, and do we all have to ALWAYS agree with each other on EVERY issue?
Is that real freedom to you?
I encourage the opposing viewpoints, and any and all are welcome as far as I am concerned.
MERRY CHRISTMAS, and HAPPY NEW YEAR, everyone.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
That was a little too dramatic - but it does get the point across. The fear amongst people (myself included) is that Disney will be unable to maintain the Disney Magic at the level we've all grown accustomed to. The ideas of the imagineers seem to be too advanced for Disney's budget, and the recognition exists that if corners are cut and bottom lines are met, attendance figures may still be maintained.
RSoxNo1 said:
That is a great point and a great dilemma.
Technology is expensive.....maybe it is too expensive.
I will use AA's as an example here:
I think one of the biggest failures of WDI is that they have never found a way to mass-produce AA's at a reasonable price. The technology has been around since the early 60's to create these figures, and yes, they have been improved since the originals, but they are very expensive (from what I have read, they can cost $1million+ for 1 figure).
Now, if an attraction is "over-budget" and has many AA's, how easy it is for the bean-counters to simply say "cut 5 AA's and we are back on budget".
Now, is the technology that makes the AA's so expensive that important? If a "life-like" AA like Ellen in the UoE costs $1million+, but a "semi-life-like" AA like that in COP has a lesser price tag, which is the better deal? How many people will notice? Is it that imporatant to the casual fan or the general public?
Trainee031589
New Member
They do if the stock is traded within the corporation. iI know the company I work for is privately traded and each share is about $52 each.Pixie Duster said:
testtracker
New Member
speck76 said:
I believe over 40% of these stockholders (most of them banks and brokerage firms as speck described) voted to remove Eisner as CEO. And last i checked disney stock was rock bottom. If disney stock was doing great the i'm sure some of these "activist" would understand that it is a buisness and they have to make choices that keep shareholders happy. Well right now the stock is down and disney "activist" (most of them) are not happy with recent changes. So I would say someone is not doing their job very well.
Budahman
New Member
OK---here's my tiny 2 cents on the issue.
1st off: I love Disney.! :sohappy:
I do not own stock or have any money invested in the company. I am just a HUGH Disney fan. To me WDW is just entertainment. A FUN break from the daily work and grind at my job and sometimes real life.
I have commented many times on these boards that I am all for some changes at WDW.
People always comment on the "Hat" at MGM, and the "wand" and Epcot and how they hate stuff like that. Also people complain about when older rides close.
I get bummed too when some rides cloes and all, but I know it's part of Disney growing. It is sad, but somethings have to change. Change is for the better. It may not seem like it sometimes, but as the earlier post mentioned, we all dont want to have some old rusted rides squeeking around our favorite parks.
1st off: I love Disney.! :sohappy:
I do not own stock or have any money invested in the company. I am just a HUGH Disney fan. To me WDW is just entertainment. A FUN break from the daily work and grind at my job and sometimes real life.
I have commented many times on these boards that I am all for some changes at WDW.
People always comment on the "Hat" at MGM, and the "wand" and Epcot and how they hate stuff like that. Also people complain about when older rides close.
I get bummed too when some rides cloes and all, but I know it's part of Disney growing. It is sad, but somethings have to change. Change is for the better. It may not seem like it sometimes, but as the earlier post mentioned, we all dont want to have some old rusted rides squeeking around our favorite parks.