Mickey and Minnie’s Runaway Railway - Disneyland

[MisterPenguin]

and there was no space to put it elsewhere without tearing out another ride?

There were plenty of places to put it. They didn't want to put it anywhere else. They wanted TGMR to go away because it was expensive, and it needed a huge capex outlay to update it (and it badly needed updating), and it wasn't all about Disney synergistic IP.

WDW didn't need a ride that was going to be continuously degrading, expensive to run, and as time passes by, increasingly uninteresting to newer generations.

Sometimes Disney wants to kill a ride and replace it with what they hope will be a bigger draw (Ellen's, Maelstrom). Sometimes they just want to kill a ride even when they have nothing to replace it (Stitch's Great Escape, Supestar Limo (4 years for the replacement to open).

 

[Californian Elitist]

There were plenty of places to put it. They didn't want to put it anywhere else. They wanted TGMR to go away because it was expensive, and it needed a huge capex outlay to update it (and it badly needed updating), and it wasn't all about Disney synergistic IP.

WDW didn't need a ride that was going to be continuously degrading, expensive to run, and as time passes by, increasingly uninteresting to newer generations.

Sometimes Disney wants to kill a ride and replace it with what they hope will be a bigger draw (Ellen's, Maelstrom). Sometimes they just want to kill a ride even when they have nothing to replace it (Stitch's Great Escape, Supestar Limo (4 years for the replacement to open).

Okay.

 

[PiratesMansion]

I agree there will likely be a bigger snap back to normal than most people are currently thinking. I think the most interesting long term implications which will stem from this pandemic are related to teleworking.

It really could go either way.

On one hand, there is a transparent desire for many people to, understandably, go out and do things.

On the other, there are a lot of people who have been put out of work and that have been (and may continue to be) struggling financially because of all of this. These people may go out and do things, but might settle for more affordable options than a Disney park for the time being. There are also people who aren't sure if it's in their best interest to go out until things have improved, whether in their perception or in reality. As an asthmatic, I'm not really sure it's in my best interest to run to any of these places any time soon. And there are a number of people with other pre-existing medical conditions said to be at increased risk of contracting Covid.

This is a crisis that is really unlike anything we've seen in our lifetimes, and the longer it endures, the harder it will be to say for sure how or when everything will bounce back. Not that it's truly comparable, but 9/11 was a one-day event and it took YEARS for travel and leisure to bounce back from that. How will that look when most places have been impacted for a minimum of two months? While we won't know for sure until we're on the other side of it, it seems logical that it could take a long time for everything to get back where it was before.

 

[BasiltheBatLord]

It really could go either way.

On one hand, there is a transparent desire for many people to, understandably, go out and do things.

On the other, there are a lot of people who have been put out of work and that have been (and may continue to be) struggling financially because of all of this. These people may go out and do things, but might settle for more affordable options than a Disney park for the time being. There are also people who aren't sure if it's in their best interest to go out until things have improved, whether in their perception or in reality. As an asthmatic, I'm not really sure it's in my best interest to run to any of these places any time soon. And there are a number of people with other pre-existing medical conditions said to be at increased risk of contracting Covid.

This is a crisis that is really unlike anything we've seen in our lifetimes, and the longer it endures, the harder it will be to say for sure how or when everything will bounce back. Not that it's truly comparable, but 9/11 was a one-day event and it took YEARS for travel and leisure to bounce back from that. How will that look when most places have been impacted for a minimum of two months? While we won't know for sure until we're on the other side of it, it seems logical that it could take a long time for everything to get back where it was before.

I'm speaking more about permanent changes to human behavior and society.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

There's plenty of room in DHS to add rides. Indiana Jones, the animation area and soundstages that are showing old stage shows that have been there for 30 years. It's a shame they have left all that stuff. It's one reason why DHS isn't a repeat visit park. I have no interest in seeing these 30 year old stage shows. They could turn that place into a ride park rather than a show park.

 

[MarvelCharacterNerd]

There's plenty of room in DHS to add rides. Indiana Jones, the animation area and soundstages that are showing old stage shows that have been there for 30 years. It's a shame they have left all that stuff. It's one reason why DHS isn't a repeat visit park. I have no interest in seeing these 30 year old stage shows. They could turn that place into a ride park rather than a show park.

On the other hand, I happen to really enjoy all those 'old stage shows' at DHS and they are the ONLY reason I go to that park. And I go to some of the shows more than once in a day. The shows there are some of my favorite experiences in all of WDW. I have no interest in any of the rides at DHS but I wouldn't ask for them to be removed in favor of more shows (although I would personally enjoy the park even more in that case!).

There's room for catering to everyone's taste. Plus it - don't minus it!

 

[PiratesMansion]

On the other hand, I happen to really enjoy all those 'old stage shows' at DHS and they are the ONLY reason I go to that park. And I go to some of the shows more than once in a day. The shows there are some of my favorite experiences in all of WDW. I have no interest in any of the rides at DHS but I wouldn't ask for them to be removed in favor of more shows (although I would personally enjoy the park even more in that case!).

There's room for catering to everyone's taste. Plus it - don't minus it!

The problem is not that there are stage shows.

The problem is that some of those shows have played without updates for longer than I've been alive. Most others aren't much better and are only a few years younger than me.

Every other Disney resort on the planet does more and better than that. Heck, Tokyo routinely pulls out fabulous, state of the art shows after five years or so. By contrast, the slate of shows WDW currently runs, in that park especially, is an embarrassment for what is selling itself as the biggest and best theme park resort in the world.

You as a paying guest should be entitled to, and should expect, more than the bare minimum. You're paying the highest prices in the world for a show slate long past its prime. It's not like Disney's only made box office failures since 1991.

 

[MarvelCharacterNerd]

The problem is not that there are stage shows.

The problem is that some of those shows have played without updates for longer than I've been alive. Most others aren't much better and are only a few years younger than me.

Every other Disney resort on the planet does more and better than that. Heck, Tokyo routinely pulls out fabulous, state of the art shows after five years or so. By contrast, the slate of shows WDW currently runs, in that park especially, is an embarrassment for what is selling itself as the biggest and best theme park resort in the world.

You as a paying guest should be entitled to, and should expect, more than the bare minimum. You're paying the highest prices in the world for a show slate long past its prime. It's not like Disney's only made box office failures since 1991.

And eventually when shows (other than Indy, which I think is a real star of a show in particular and should stay for ages longer) are replaced, I would hope they would be replaced with something bigger and better.

However on a practical level...

Given a recent US parks entertainment track record (at least from the DL side) of:

Aladdin at DCA > Frozen at DCA
Soundsational > Magic Happens
Mickey & the Magical Map > the theater being dark the majority of the week

and don't even get me started on WDW doing things like:

Off Kilter > lumberjacks with sharp objects

I will take the long in the tooth shows every day of the week if the replacements are not going to be that something bigger and actually better (IMO).

I don't need to sacrifice Indy and Beauty and the Beast which I still find absolutely charming and entertaining for Onward, the Stage Spectacular or Frozen II: The Next Best Thing or for The Mulanicoaster and Artemis Fowl's Faerie Tale Spin. That's a net loss for me if it happens and then I would have no reason to go to DHS whatsoever.

So, while not arguing that it would be wonderful if every show at WDW was at least FotLK (gold standard) quality, I'll continue to defend the current other shows which I enjoy until there is an option for something actually better and not lesser.

And I'll continue to be a small voice to argue overall that removing shows to add rides is a decision that not *everyone* is on board with.

Just pointing out that one person's trash (long in the tooth but still entertaining shows) is another person's treasure.

 

[mlayton144]

I think there are good points but people need to understand that if you are a week at WDW , I know we don’t just rely on rides to entertain us - shows, dining, resorts , water parks, minigolf, nighttime spectaculars, shopping, and nice strolls through nice scenery are all part of the experience. It’s a different animal than Anaheim

 

[Disneylover152]

The Little Mermaid show at Hollywood Studios is an insult to every form of entertainment.

 

[PiratesMansion]

I think there are good points but people need to understand that if you are a week at WDW , I know we don’t just rely on rides to entertain us - shows, dining, resorts , water parks, minigolf, nighttime spectaculars, shopping, and nice strolls through nice scenery are all part of the experience. It’s a different animal than Anaheim

And no one is questioning that. Just the defending of ancient, decrepit entertainment. Personally, I'd rather have nothing than embarrassing, outdated entertainment, but I could very well be in the minority on that.

The choice of no entertainment vs outdated entertainment is only a choice because of modern Disney's idiocies. There should be entertainment-there was only one person who said replace the shows with more rides (though we all agree the park could use more of those). But frankly WDW guests deserve better than stale goods.

If the shows must stick around, the least they could do is update the darn things. You want BATB to stick around? Fine-do something different with it. Update the effects. Rewrite the script. Restage it to resemble the Broadway show. Anything other than just playing the same exact show from 1991 the exact same way it's run for 29 years. It just hurts my brain that anyone could possibly be defending that. As it exists right now, it's not even that good of a show!

As for the different natures of DLR, WDW, and their fans, I do agree that some people who frequent DLR more than WDW are overly ride centric. However, the argument could also be made that WDW fans HAVE to look for other things to enjoy because there's so little attraction capacity for the crowds, not helped by Disney's own value-engineering capacity tricks and strategies. And frankly a lot of the resort features WDW regulars like to tout are nice, but are not the reason most people go. Just like in California, people ultimately go for the parks, and at the end of the day the extra stuff is just gravy.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

I see no reason why they couldn't have updated the IJ show. It's the same thing I saw when the park first opened. There are two other movies to draw inspiration from. Spoiler: the guy getting punched by the girl is a fake extra. A shocker!

 

[mlayton144]

And no one is questioning that. Just the defending of ancient, decrepit entertainment. Personally, I'd rather have nothing than embarrassing, outdated entertainment, but I could very well be in the minority on that.

The choice of no entertainment vs outdated entertainment is only a choice because of modern Disney's idiocies. There should be entertainment-there was only one person who said replace the shows with more rides (though we all agree the park could use more of those). But frankly WDW guests deserve better than stale goods.

If the shows must stick around, the least they could do is update the darn things. You want BATB to stick around? Fine-do something different with it. Update the effects. Rewrite the script. Restage it to resemble the Broadway show. Anything other than just playing the same exact show from 1991 the exact same way it's run for 29 years. It just hurts my brain that anyone could possibly be defending that. As it exists right now, it's not even that good of a show!

As for the different natures of DLR, WDW, and their fans, I do agree that some people who frequent DLR more than WDW are overly ride centric. However, the argument could also be made that WDW fans HAVE to look for other things to enjoy because there's so little attraction capacity for the crowds, not helped by Disney's own value-engineering capacity tricks and strategies. And frankly a lot of the resort features WDW regulars like to tout are nice, but are not the reason most people go. Just like in California, people ultimately go for the parks, and at the end of the day the extra stuff is just gravy.

I hear you and I for one would never watch BatB or little mermaid , but many many people go year and year after year and find tons of enjoyment in those 30-40 square miles to keep coming back every year (they could just as easily fly an extra 3-4 hours to Anaheim for the same or less cost. Personally, My go to shows aren’t all live - hall of presidents , American adventure , carousel of progress ( nostalgia) , world showcase performers, lion King, animal exhibits at AK, etc are all top notch. It’s just a different kind of vacation. Glad we have both in the USA

 

[Rich Brownn]

The ride that was replaced was starting to cost too much to run and the cost of a complete upgrade was pretty much the cost of a brand new attraction. And a brand new attraction brings in more guests. And... IP! Granted, people liked TGMR, but, the business decision to replace it wasn't capricious. A replacement was needed: More of the same history of movies, or, a Mickey Mouse ride.



That area is starting to get too close to the fireworks.

Also, that area of Fantasyland is up one story over the utilidors. The ground level of that wooded area is the same level of the utilidors, and if you drive up to the park from that direction, you'll see the backside of Fantasyland one story above you. Expanding like that would be really expensive.

Also, for WDW, MK already has too many rides at the expense of the other parks. People are overcrowding into MK. WDW has just as many rides as DLR, just spread over four parks instead of two. Problem is MK has about 27 rides, while the other three have about 9 each. Before MK gets more rides, the other three parks need them more. A zoo, a world showcase, and stage shows can't compete with differential of 15 rides with the MK.

I understand at one point there was talk of expansion behind the small world/manion building with a themed walkway leading back there (where the current fire/exit lane is)

 

[Californian Elitist]

Personally, I’m not interested in the other things offered at WDW, things outside of the theme parks.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

But they have Planet Hollywood and bowling!

 

[1HAPPYGHOSTHOST]

But they have Planet Hollywood and bowling!

Do they really still have a actual operating Planet Hollywood??

 

[SuddenStorm]

I wonder if I would love POTC as much as I do if I rode for the first time as an adult in 2020.

I think you would.

For me personally, I never cared for the Haunted Mansion growing up. It wasn't even an attraction I really cared about. It wasn't until after high school that it really clicked for me and now I think it's one of top 2 attractions ever done.

The real question is... what's the staying power of Rise of the Resistance? Smuggler's Run has already suffered a universal yawn within the industry, and was quickly overshadowed by Rise. But how long will Rise last? Will kids in 20 years have the same affection for Rise that decades of Disneyland fans have for Mansion and Pirates?

 

[PiratesMansion]

Personally, I’m not interested in the other things offered at WDW, things outside of the theme parks.

I hope that I don't seem like I'm backpedaling here, but while not everything there is worthwhile, and I do think the whole "clearly it's better because it's a huge resort blah blah blah" is overblown, it really is the stuff outside the parks that sets WDW apart from the others.

There's so much there: exploring the hotels, going to the water parks (which are extremely underrated in terms of theming and design, and perhaps the most pure thematically in the United States), watching the hokey but charming Electrical Water Pageant that still soldiers on unaltered from the 70s, eating at a beautifully themed or wonderfully atmospheric restaurant tucked away in a hotel (DLR has some of this, but WDW definitely has more of them), things like the Hoop de Doo Revue dinner show and the Cirque shows. Disney Springs is away from the parks but is many times the shopping and dining hub that Downtown Disney is in quantity and quality. The mini golf courses are fun diversions. Taking the monorail around the monorail loop and exploring. Hiring a boat and going out on the lake.

All of that is part of the WDW experience. That is often why when WDW people come to DLR for the first time they spend a lot of time talking about the shortcomings of DLR as a resort, because that so defines what WDW is. Because honestly there's very little reason to go to DLR if you're not going to the parks. By contrast, while it's not how most people do it, you could conceivably go to WDW for a week, never set foot in one of the main theme parks, and still have a wonderful trip that was packed with activities. The shortcomings of the parks stick out less because there's so much going on there, and the parks are only a part of it.

Of course, time, money, and interest are finite, but WDW really is its own beast and needs to be approached differently from the other resorts around the world. If you or anyone else accustomed to DLR went to WDW and treated it like you treat DLR, your vacation would be a failure, and of course the opposite is true as well. Each resort has its own strengths, and should you go your trip should be tailored to embrace those strengths.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I hope that I don't seem like I'm backpedaling here, but while not everything there is worthwhile, and I do think the whole "clearly it's better because it's a huge resort blah blah blah" is overblown, it really is the stuff outside the parks that sets WDW apart from the others.

There's so much there: exploring the hotels, going to the water parks (which are extremely underrated in terms of theming and design, and perhaps the most pure thematically in the United States), watching the hokey but charming Electrical Water Pageant that still soldiers on unaltered from the 70s, eating at a beautifully themed or wonderfully atmospheric restaurant tucked away in a hotel (DLR has some of this, but WDW definitely has more of them), things like the Hoop de Doo Revue dinner show and the Cirque shows. Disney Springs is away from the parks but is many times the shopping and dining hub that Downtown Disney is in quantity and quality. The mini golf courses are fun diversions. Taking the monorail around the monorail loop and exploring. Hiring a boat and going out on the lake.

All of that is part of the WDW experience. That is often why when WDW people come to DLR for the first time they spend a lot of time talking about the shortcomings of DLR as a resort, because that so defines what WDW is. Because honestly there's very little reason to go to DLR if you're not going to the parks. By contrast, while it's not how most people do it, you could conceivably go to WDW for a week, never set foot in one of the main theme parks, and still have a wonderful trip that was packed with activities. The shortcomings of the parks stick out less because there's so much going on there, and the parks are only a part of it.

Of course, time, money, and interest are finite, but WDW really is its own beast and needs to be approached differently from the other resorts around the world. If you or anyone else accustomed to DLR went to WDW and treated it like you treat DLR, your vacation would be a failure, and of course the opposite is true as well. Each resort has its own strengths, and should you go your trip should be tailored to embrace those strengths.

I think the word “failure” is too strong. People should tailor their vacations the way they want, in my opinion. It’s not a failure then because the trip is designed the way the traveler wants.

The thought of going to Florida to just spend two weeks at WDW without ever leaving does not sound fun to me. One week is pushing it, but I’d allow myself at least two days for each park, maybe. Eating at a nice restaurant or seeing a dinner show, sure. Taking the monorail, sure. But I’m not going to force myself to do something I don’t want to do, you know? If it does not interest me, why do it?

If I travel to Florida, I’d use some time to explore other nearby areas/parts of the state because that sounds far more interesting to me than traveling all the way from the opposite side of the country just to only go to WDW. I get what you’re saying though.