MK Little Mermaid in 3D canceled

[TP2000]

that's the entrance for Be Our Guests, not Mermaid.

And that also wasn't the entrance to Mermaid at DCA. It was the side of the building (taken with a telephoto lense from across the bay, for good measure.)

This is the actual entrance to the Mermaid ride at DCA. How could you miss it?

If you don't like the Victorian architecture, that's cool. But they spent a fortune on it, you can tell by the real stone and marble and expensive chandeliers and brass finials in the queue and loading area. I doubt any of it was "cheap" for Disney.

The ride is what it is, on both coasts. At DCA there is no Fastpass to create a Standby line, and the high-capacity Omnimover system sucks up 2,000 riders per hour and the line just shuffles in. I've never waited more than 5 minutes for Mermaid at DCA, and often you walk right in and wait perhaps 60 seconds before stepping into a vehicle.

That people are waiting in a 60+ minute Standby line for this ride at Magic Kingdom tells me Magic Kingdom is still woefully short of overall ride capacity, and that the Fastpass system creates demand for a "big ride" that people think they should do. I imagine a lot of the folks waiting for an hour in Standby for Mermaid at Magic Kingdom are a little ticked off by the time they get off the actual ride.

 

[Can we go yet?]

Yeah, this. Personally, the 3D is a deterrent -- the cost is too high and IMHO doesn't add anything to these animated films. Plus, with my youngest (who is now starting to be able to sit through a movie), he doesn't keep the glasses on.

If Disney would just pick, say, one classic movie a year to release in theaters in regular 2D, I think it would do great. Parents like myself are always interested in things to do with the kids and there is a nice experience with going to the movies. Just re-release films the year before they intent to release them from the "vault" for DVD.

Maybe I'm crazy, but it seems like easy money to me.

YES! Is that so hard Disney?!

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

I imagine a lot of the folks waiting for an hour in Standby for Mermaid at Magic Kingdom are a little ticked off by the time they get off the actual ride.

Nah, they're all on the pixie dust there. Clearly, Little Mermaid is a marvelous Disney attraction and already a classic.

Or not.

I actually think the DCA exterior is perhaps superior to WDW. Magic Kingdom's is a highly unrealistic and overblown buildup to a mediocre ride. You would expect something on the level of Pirates of the Caribbean or something after the queue line. The Disneyland version is more modest.

It's weird, when 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea was there, the queue line was more unassuming and the ride basically pitched itself to guests with the Nautilus in the lagoon. Mermaid is the polar opposite.

 

[pmaljr]

I'm not trying to start a war and I can't believe I'm the one defending Disney on this, but come on. TLM is not a mediocre ride. We really loved it. I think some of you have never actually ridden TLM or only watch youtube videos or something of the ride. Yeah, the last couple of scenes are a little weird and it isn't a complete recreation of the movie, but that doesn't mean it's not fun, that it's not well done, and that it's not a worthy addition to the Magic Kingdom because it is all of those things. I get the complaining about closing Snow White (I was absolutely livid about that), having two dumbos?!?, BatB not having a dark ride with all of that space, etc. But, TLM itself is fun, well-themed, and it has shown that Disney can still make a good, classic dark ride with newer technology. That ought to be worth something and it sure doesn't deserve all the bashing it is getting. You can say all you want about how much Pixie Dust is floating in the air in this post, but you can't take away the fun we've had on that ride. Reading a lot of the posts on this board the last couple of weeks, I'm starting to think some of you folks have gone off of the deep end.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

As for the Little Mermaid building at DCA, I was just there this past Tuesday. I rode Little Mermaid for the first time ever and I thought it was delightful. I thought it was better than Mr. Toad's, Pinnochio, and Snow White's Scary Adventure. I did not like it as much as Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland though. Those two are the best dark rides in my opinion, but I would rank Little Mermaid third.

I think the great thing about Alice in Disneyland is that you've got the Teacups and the unbirthday music going and the little touches like the White Rabbit's house. If you go into the Mad Hatter and look at the mirror over the cash register, eventually the Chesire Cat will appear behind the mirror (two-way mirror). The whole area is like an Alice mini-land.

Mermaid was big enough that they could have done a Mermaid area, meaning a Mermaid E-Ticket, a D-Ticket and a restaurant/shop. As is, I'm sure a lot of guests walk right by Mermaid without knowing what is inside.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

And that also wasn't the entrance to Mermaid at DCA. It was the side of the building (taken with a telephoto lense from across the bay, for good measure.)

This is the actual entrance to the Mermaid ride at DCA. How could you miss it?

If you don't like the Victorian architecture, that's cool. But they spent a fortune on it, you can tell by the real stone and marble and expensive chandeliers and brass finials in the queue and loading area. I doubt any of it was "cheap" for Disney.

The "entrance" is the repurposed Palace of Fine Arts from the Golden Dreams attraction. There are seashells pushed into the cement, but I haven't seen any "marble", and $400 for a chandelier, versus $150 . . . kinda a small difference when you look at the whole budget.

Here is how you "miss" Mermaid.

1. The people going from left to right across the screen have just walked by the long side of the building, which doesn't say Mermaid save for a King Triton statue way up high, and at the point in the picture, they're looking at the Carsland area to the right, or in the general direction of the photographer which is Paradise Lagoon/that boardwalk entrance to Paradise Pier.

2. The sign is so high up in the air that some folks gotta miss it.

3. Even if you see the sign, it looks more like the Little Mermaid exhibit versus a dark ride. Why? Because nothing about the building communicates Ariel's world, unless you equate pier side amusement park aquariums with Mermaids.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

TLM is not a mediocre ride. We really loved it.

. . .

But, TLM itself is fun, well-themed, and it has shown that Disney can still make a good, classic dark ride with newer technology. That ought to be worth something and it sure doesn't deserve all the bashing it is getting.

Well, you do, of course, realize that guest reactions to attractions vary greatly. Just because one family loves it, doesn't mean that the ride is a hit! Look at Superstar Limo in DCA, some people loved that . . . but they were in the minority.

I've probably ridden Mermaid eight times or so since it opened. It's not on my must see list, and I only ride it to force our five year to experience the attraction because we figure she must get something out of it, though she is a super big Ariel fan, at DLR she asks for other rides, such as Jungle Cruise, Pirates, Small World, HMH by name . . . and doesn't really care for the ride.

I don't really care if I ride Mermaid or not as I don't have a "good time" on the attraction. Maybe I can't get over the cheap final scenes or the cheap/cheesy exterior (IMHO), but everybody's got their opinion.

 

[flynnibus]

Here is how you "miss" Mermaid.

1. The people going from left to right across the screen have just walked by the long side of the building, which doesn't say Mermaid save for a King Triton statue way up high, and at the point in the picture, they're looking at the Carsland area to the right, or in the general direction of the photographer which is Paradise Lagoon/that boardwalk entrance to Paradise Pier.

2. The sign is so high up in the air that some folks gotta miss it.

3. Even if you see the sign, it looks more like the Little Mermaid exhibit versus a dark ride. Why? Because nothing about the building communicates Ariel's world, unless you equate pier side amusement park aquariums with Mermaids.

My god.. I hope you didn't have an cow trying to find Space Mountain...

 

[Patricia Melton]

I'm not trying to start a war and I can't believe I'm the one defending Disney on this, but come on. TLM is not a mediocre ride. We really loved it. I think some of you have never actually ridden TLM or only watch youtube videos or something of the ride. Yeah, the last couple of scenes are a little weird and it isn't a complete recreation of the movie, but that doesn't mean it's not fun, that it's not well done, and that it's not a worthy addition to the Magic Kingdom because it is all of those things.

I think ALL of the dark rides have an abridged weirdness to them that's kind of jarring.

I try to imagine what they must be like for foreigners who speak no English and who have never seen the cartoons...these rides must make no sense at all.

* Snow White Scary Adventures = it's completely disjointed and is really just random scenes thrown together...and then it ends abruptly and there's a storybook. It's kind of a shock when it's over.

* Alice in Wonderland = it's surprising when you go outside and then back inside and then there's an unbirthday cake and it's randomly over and you are back outside again.

* Mr. Toad's Wild Ride = I saw the movie many, many years ago and I have no idea whatsoever what's happening in that ride. Just that in it we go to Hell and see Satan and then suddenly we are outside again.

* Peter Pan = this one makes the most sense of all, I think. I think it does a pretty good job of telling the story.
* Pinocchio = Does a good job with the pleasure island parts but then suddenly the whale swallows you and it gets muddled at the end.

I've always kind of wished the dark rides would focus on just one part of a movie instead of trying to tell the whole story. There's no time for the whole story, but there is time for a condensed version of one or maybe two scenes.

Little Mermaid's approach is novel in that it features all the main songs from the movie and tells the story that way. If you think about it, it actually ends up doing the best job of telling the story of the movie.

 

[iheartdisney91]

I'm not trying to start a war and I can't believe I'm the one defending Disney on this, but come on. TLM is not a mediocre ride. We really loved it. I think some of you have never actually ridden TLM or only watch youtube videos or something of the ride. Yeah, the last couple of scenes are a little weird and it isn't a complete recreation of the movie, but that doesn't mean it's not fun, that it's not well done, and that it's not a worthy addition to the Magic Kingdom because it is all of those things. I get the complaining about closing Snow White (I was absolutely livid about that), having two dumbos?!?, BatB not having a dark ride with all of that space, etc. But, TLM itself is fun, well-themed, and it has shown that Disney can still make a good, classic dark ride with newer technology. That ought to be worth something and it sure doesn't deserve all the bashing it is getting. You can say all you want about how much Pixie Dust is floating in the air in this post, but you can't take away the fun we've had on that ride. Reading a lot of the posts on this board the last couple of weeks, I'm starting to think some of you folks have gone off of the deep end.

Thank You!
TLM has quickly become my 2nd favorite ride in WDW
(yes i may be biased) but still!
i REALLY enjoyed it. it's a great attraction that WDW should have had a long time ago.

not to mention how neat it is when you "go underwater" and scuttle "talking" to the crowed in the queue

i just really don't understand the negativity.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

The rides aren't supposed to tell the story of the movie, though. Why ride it when you can just watch it? That's why the other dark rides that draw inspiration from the material and create an original experience (rather than just retelling the movie like a children's storybook) are more entertaining.

 

[Patricia Melton]

Thank You!
TLM has quickly become my 2nd favorite ride in WDW
(yes i may be biased) but still!
i REALLY enjoyed it. it's a great attraction that WDW should have had a long time ago.

not to mention how neat it is when you "go underwater" and scuttle "talking" to the crowed in the queue

i just really don't understand the negativity.

The Chorus of Malcontents just enjoys being negative. If there was no Mermaid ride, they'd be upset and would complain about that. Since there is a Mermaid ride, they are upset and complain about it. This is part of the reality that some people who claim to be Disney fans really just love to complain about Disney.

They are bigger fans of the complaining than they are of Disney.

 

[iheartdisney91]

The Chorus of Malcontents just enjoys being negative. If there was no Mermaid ride, they'd be upset and would complain about that. Since there is a Mermaid ride, they are upset and complain about it. This is part of the reality that some people who claim to be Disney fans really just love to complain about Disney.

They are bigger fans of the complaining than they are of Disney.

sigh...thats true. i for one am a fan of everything in the new expansion. i loved experiencing it last week.
Disney imagineers should be proud they created something create. just my opinion.

 

[Patricia Melton]

sigh...thats true. i for one am a fan of everything in the new expansion. i loved experiencing it last week.
Disney imagineers should be proud they created something create. just my opinion.

I won't get to experience it until May...but I am so excited! I am very impressed with everything I see on the videos and in pictures and have loved reading people's wonderful trip reports.

I kind of wish there was an expansion of Adventureland that included a small Aladdin area and something with Lion King...then the big Disney animated movies of the 90s would all be represented. Adventureland really is weak in terms of attractions and could use a few sub-areas like Fantasyland just received. I suggest a Lion King dark ride and a coaster for Aladdin that's based on a flying carpet. In building this, they can then remove the Aladdin Flying Carpets spinner.

 

[Magenta Panther]

They just traced scenes from the film versions themselves.

OR - the animators looked at the flipbooks and paper drawings kept in storage. Quite a few of those still exist. I suspect that the apparent copying from prior films wasn't tracing, so much as the old scenes and moves were being used for reference when creating new ones.

Still, it is a shame to see Disney "re-purposing" animation like that. (Although I'm not sure the Kaa/Sir Hiss comparison is really fair. There are nuances in the former that aren't visible in the latter). I have read that Woolie Reitherman, an animator/director at the Studios, liked doing that to cut costs. He was the guy responsible for "101 Dalmatians", and that was the first film that used the Xerox outline process instead of the inks and paints used in prior Disney animated films. If you look close while watching "Dalmatians", you'll see a bit of re-purposing going on within the film itself - a Pongo reaction scene, where he's in the park trying to get his owner to meet up with a pretty lady and her pretty Dalmatian, is used again later during an escape scene. Reitherman did that because the preceding Disney film, "Sleeping Beauty", had been a costly failure, so it was necessary to do "Dalmatians" on as tight a budget as possible. Reportedly, Walt liked that "Dalmatians" was a financial success, but he disliked the film itself, primarily because of the Xerox process and some of the (to him) cutting-of-corners. He wanted to make beautiful animated films, not cheap ones. Reitherman once said that when Walt was terminally ill with cancer, he visited his studio and chatted a bit with Reitherman. At one point during the conversation, as Woolie recalled later, Walt looked hard at him, and Woolie got the feeling "that Walt had finally decided to forgive me for '101 Dalmatians'."

For my part, I've never thought that Reitherman was a very good director. When I bought a "101 Dalmatians" DVD a few years ago and watched it, I was surprised how underwhelming it was. I'd loved the film as a kid, but as an adult, I wasn't overly impressed with it. I wound up giving the DVD to my local library. And if you look at some of Reitherman's other Disney films, they too are sub-par - "Robin Hood", for instance, is very tepid, and there's no real drama or darkness or feeling of excitement. The villains are weak too. I've always thought that Reitherman would have been better suited to working for Hanna-Barbera. He just didn't have the storytelling skills a good Disney film needs. End of digression.

 

[Magenta Panther]

Presence in theme parks should not be the automatic response to well done and financially performing films. It's essentially the same attitude that lead to the "cheapquels." If there is something to be said that works in themed entertainment, then it should be done and should be able to stand apart from the film.

I agree. However, I think a Lion King dark ride would be a perfect fit for AK, much better than would Avatar. And so would The Jungle Book. But of course an original concept for a ride would be much better. I wish Disney would reconsider building Fire Mountain - that looked like it could be awesome.

 

[Sped2424]

Well, you do, of course, realize that guest reactions to attractions vary greatly. Just because one family loves it, doesn't mean that the ride is a hit! Look at Superstar Limo in DCA, some people loved that . . . but they were in the minority.

I've probably ridden Mermaid eight times or so since it opened. It's not on my must see list, and I only ride it to force our five year to experience the attraction because we figure she must get something out of it, though she is a super big Ariel fan, at DLR she asks for other rides, such as Jungle Cruise, Pirates, Small World, HMH by name . . . and doesn't really care for the ride.

I don't really care if I ride Mermaid or not as I don't have a "good time" on the attraction. Maybe I can't get over the cheap final scenes or the cheap/cheesy exterior (IMHO), but everybody's got their opinion.

Nothing is cheap or easy on the exteriors for the ride over at DCA and do you honestly know how much it actually cost to build the ride in the first place? Not so cheap as you might think The animatronics alone are expensive to run and like I said the ride is beautiful and I think people forget it for what it is, It is a dark ride capturing the essence of what dark rides used to be a Disney. It takes you through the entire story with animatronics and makes you see the highlights of the film. Now its one thing to claim you dont like it but another to claim its poorly done and cheap. The ride itself has a bunch of attention to detail from the clam shells to the potions in Ursula tentacles everything is wonderfully themed and overall very detailed. I mean the room where they do the kiss the girl scene is wonderful with the fireflies lighting up the scenery I think you expecting to be taken into the ocean frankly Disney cant do that unless you're on a cruise ship.

 

[TP2000]

Here is how you "miss" Mermaid...

My goodness.

How on earth do you think Pirates of the Caribbean carries 40,000 people per day, and hundreds of millions of visitors since 1967? It's just a tiny, little sign on a generic bridge at Disneyland as the entrance to the grandest and most popular (by ridership) ride in Walt Disney's history.

I understand that you aren't a fan of Mermaid the ride. It's not in my personal Top 10 either. But I think it's fairly obvious that it's a ride and that it's about The Little Mermaid. And everyone who wants to go on it, does, especially because it's unburdened by Fastpass at DCA and boasts a short wait on even busy days. It's not like they're hiding the thing, or people might honestly think it's a huge shop called The Little Mermaid. You can even see the Omnimover clamshells gliding by the big glass windows as you walk by.

 

[Cosmic Commando]

Here is how you "miss" Mermaid.

1. The people going from left to right across the screen have just walked by the long side of the building, which doesn't say Mermaid save for a King Triton statue way up high, and at the point in the picture, they're looking at the Carsland area to the right, or in the general direction of the photographer which is Paradise Lagoon/that boardwalk entrance to Paradise Pier.

You can even see the Omnimover clamshells gliding by the big glass windows as you walk by.

QFT. If you are walking by that long side of the building, the load area is right inside and you can see the clam shells moving inside. If you somehow made it down the "performance corridor" and didn't wonder what that giant rotunda was for, the clammobiles in the window would be a pretty good clue.

 

[flynnibus]

Reitherman did that because the preceding Disney film, "Sleeping Beauty", had been a costly failure, so it was necessary to do "Dalmatians" on as tight a budget as possible. Reportedly, Walt liked that "Dalmatians" was a financial success, but he disliked the film itself, primarily because of the Xerox process and some of the (to him) cutting-of-corners. He wanted to make beautiful animated films, not cheap ones

By that time.. it was Walt who was putting the screws to animation. Making them do with less and less. Animation wasn't his pet project anymore (DL had taken that slot) and the cost cutting moves were due to smaller and smaller budgets. That carried on through the dark times. All of the films of that period suffered and why they are considered by most to be more the lull in Disney (with the studios as a whole by the late 60s and through the 70s). They were coasting.. trying to repeat the same.. and had failed to track their audience because of it.

By the 60s... Walt was cheap on animation.. and it showed. Shorts were no longer economical.. they had live action.. and they had DL. Feature Animation wasn't getting unlimited time and resources anymore.