Mickey and Minnie’s Runaway Railway SPOILER Thread

[Ponderer]

I know you've got a $50 gift card for Sunglass Hut that you just don't see yourself using - I've got one for the Disney Store that has $12.81 left! Wanna trade?

Even if you get something objectively more fun out of the deal (and I do believe that fun is a cornerstone of the Theme Park experience), if it's not an equal exchange then the balance is off.

If a ride need be replaced - and I would argue that the case for that in WDW is, like, SUPER minimal - its replacement should at least offer similar value to the guest experience, even if that value is different. Otherwise you should just update the existing attraction, one of the very great advantages of this medium over other forms of entertainment.

If they wanted us to set aside the "we could have had both" argument, then they should have done it for us.

Here's my controversial perspective: when I was a youngster, I grew up loving wax museums. I remember dreaming about the Hollywood Wax Museum and especially their Star Trek display. For some reason, there was nothing cooler to 5 year old me than looking at these themed statues.

And the first time I rode it in the 90s, I realized: GMR was a slightly enhanced Hollywood Wax Museum. And I was left cold.

The ride was sort of cool, but I never felt it was that special. I didn't get feel particularly dazzled by it and I should have been Ground Zero in terms of being fascinated by what it offered. I never felt like I was transported to "the world of the movies." Frankly, the best part of the ride - by far - was seeing the props and memorabilia at the end of it. I certainly never felt like I needed to ride it again and again.

Now, you tell me you're gonna have an attraction that finally celebrates Mickey - Mickey and his cartoons? That's going to finally try to tie into the anarchic spirit of that creation? SIGN ME UP. It's all about execution, of course, but in my opinion, this is a giant upgrade. You can celebrate the Generic Spirit of Movies in any number of places. There's a magnificent, massive Academy of Motion Pictures Museum opening this very year, a stone's throw from Anaheim. You can even see the ruby slippers.

This ride, OTOH, celebrates a crucial part of what makes Disney...Disney. It's not lugubrious, it's not inert, it tries to bring freaking Disney cartoons to life! That, to me, is a massive upgrade, a concept completely worthy of being the centerpiece of a Disney park, and it was easily worth losing GMR.

 

[Surferboy567]

Scene-by-Scene Breakdown of Mickey and Minnie's Runaway Railway

Walt Disney World news, photos, and reviews! We provide you with daily news from the Walt Disney World theme parks and beyond

blogmickey.com

For those who want a slightly more detailed take this gets the job done. It’s not a big change but offers details I haven’t seen such as the Mickey and Minnie animatronics are in the twister scene.

Still waiting on a super detailed breakdown...
No mention of theme song, or B Story

 

[Josh Hendy]

What is the schedule if any for the end of CM previews and beginning of soft opening or official opening?

In other words, when will we see the first POV videos online.

 

[Surferboy567]

What is the schedule if any for the end of CM previews and beginning of soft opening or official opening?

In other words, when will we see the first POV videos online.

Phones are being bagged...so probably March 3rd (if allowed during media previews) if they aren’t March 4.

 

[britain]

I know you've got a $50 gift card for Sunglass Hut that you just don't see yourself using - I've got one for the Disney Store that has $12.81 left! Wanna trade?

Even if you get something objectively more fun out of the deal (and I do believe that fun is a cornerstone of the Theme Park experience), if it's not an equal exchange then the balance is off.

If a ride need be replaced - and I would argue that the case for that in WDW is, like, SUPER minimal - its replacement should at least offer similar value to the guest experience, even if that value is different. Otherwise you should just update the existing attraction, one of the very great advantages of this medium over other forms of entertainment.

If they wanted us to set aside the "we could have had both" argument, then they should have done it for us.

I agree if they put in Mr Toad as the old C-ticket attraction it was. But if they made an E Mr. Toad, enlarging the scope and technical sophistication, and made it more appropriately themed for a centerpiece attraction in a Disney movie park... then you’ve got MMRR (hypothetically, haven’t been on it myself).

 

[Magenta Panther]

If it were elsewhere maybe.

More from someone I trust; Great preshow and load. After which the ride was fun but an anticlimax. Would ride again though. The much touted 2.5D visuals were a letdown and seem to be more of a public relations stunt. I’ll let others discuss exactly what is done visually. Fun ride, but not as good or enjoyable as what it replaced.

Well, of course it's a shame this ride replaced GMR. I was against that from the start. This should have been built in the Animation Courtyard, at the very least, and the GMR should have been saved and plussed. But things are what they are, and at least this new Mickey ride is reportedly good. Hopefully it'll do Mickey justice anyway. The thing I'm most curious about are the Mickey and Minnie AAs. According to WDW Magic's review, they're "basic". So they don't move? Bummer.

 

[Surferboy567]

Well, of course it's a shame this ride replaced GMR. I was against that from the start. This should have been built in the Animation Courtyard, at the very least, and the GMR should have been saved and plussed. But things are what they are, and at least this new Mickey ride is reportedly good. Hopefully it'll do Mickey justice anyway. The thing I'm most curious about are the Mickey and Minnie AAs. According to WDW Magic's review, they're "basic". So they don't move? Bummer.

I agree with this, my exact stance on it.

As for the AA’s I’m thinking they are going to be like Seven Dwarfs...I’ve seen lots of conflicting reports on them.

 

[wdwmagic]

Yes the AA's are Seven Dwarfs like. Not advanced figures, but not old school basic either.

 

[Surferboy567]

Yes the AA's are Seven Dwarfs like. Not advanced figures, but not old school basic either.

Wanted to ask you specifically about another AA. I’ve heard the Daisy in the dance studio has movement is that accurate?

 

[Steph15251]

Yes the AA's are Seven Dwarfs like. Not advanced figures, but not old school basic either.

I am just happy ,they do have some AA’s and it is not just screens.I feel not all AA’s need to be advanced.

 

[wdwmagic]

Wanted to ask you specifically about another AA. I’ve heard the Daisy in the dance studio has movement is that accurate?

Yes head and arms, but nothing extensive.

 

[wdwmagic]

While we all love top tier AAs, the figures they have here do fit in with the look and style of the ride.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Here's my controversial perspective: when I was a youngster, I grew up loving wax museums. I remember dreaming about the Hollywood Wax Museum and especially their Star Trek display. For some reason, there was nothing cooler to 5 year old me than looking at these themed statues.

And the first time I rode it in the 90s, I realized: GMR was a slightly enhanced Hollywood Wax Museum. And I was left cold.

The ride was sort of cool, but I never felt it was that special. I didn't get feel particularly dazzled by it and I should have been Ground Zero in terms of being fascinated by what it offered. I never felt like I was transported to "the world of the movies." Frankly, the best part of the ride - by far - was seeing the props and memorabilia at the end of it. I certainly never felt like I needed to ride it again and again.

Now, you tell me you're gonna have an attraction that finally celebrates Mickey - Mickey and his cartoons? That's going to finally try to tie into the anarchic spirit of that creation? SIGN ME UP. It's all about execution, of course, but in my opinion, this is a giant upgrade. You can celebrate the Generic Spirit of Movies in any number of places. There's a magnificent, massive Academy of Motion Pictures Museum opening this very year, a stone's throw from Anaheim. You can even see the ruby slippers.

This ride, OTOH, celebrates a crucial part of what makes Disney...Disney. It's not lugubrious, it's not inert, it tries to bring freaking Disney cartoons to life! That, to me, is a massive upgrade, a concept completely worthy of being the centerpiece of a Disney park, and it was easily worth losing GMR.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, so here's mine...

By this logic, MMRR is a "slightly enhanced" movie theatre - which is even less interesting then a "slightly enhanced" wax museum. A description, by the way, which could be applied with equal validity to PotC, SSE, or any of the beloved, bygone EPCOT attractions.

You seem to be falling into the same trap as current Disney management by assuming that "more Disney" means the constant use of a very narrow range of IPs rather then the construction of rides demonstrating a consistent level of imagination, innovation, and ambition. I think adding a ride based on the classic cartoons is a good idea, but the fact that Walt and his team (or Eisner and his) never thought it was necessary and Disneyland or WDW is a pretty good indication that their understanding of making something Disney was quite different. Honestly, I never wandered Disney World in the early 90s and thought, "Wow, this just isn't Disney enough."

Also, the "anarchic spirit" of Disney cartoons? Of all the words I'd use to describe classic Disney cartoons, "anarchic" isn't one of them. WB toons were "anarchic" - they celebrated figures like Daffy or Bugs undermining authority, upsetting the status quo, intentionally messing with other characters and, sometimes, with the very rules of filmmaking. With the exception of his very, very earliest appearances, Mickey did nothing like this. And Goofy and Donald, even at their most chaotic and slapstick, tended to be victims of circumstances rather then instigators. This is another little problem with the ride and the current Mickey toons (which I do enjoy) - they don't really seem to have the same attitude as the golden age color Disney shorts did.

 

[Ponderer]

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, so here's mine...

By this logic, MMRR is a "slightly enhanced" movie theatre - which is even less interesting then a "slightly enhanced" wax museum. A description, by the way, which could be applied with equal validity to PotC, SSE, or any of the beloved, bygone EPCOT attractions.

You seem to be falling into the same trap as current Disney management by assuming that "more Disney" means the constant use of a very narrow range of IPs rather then the construction of rides demonstrating a consistent level of imagination, innovation, and ambition. I think adding a ride based on the classic cartoons is a good idea, but the fact that Walt and his team (or Eisner and his) never thought it was necessary and Disneyland or WDW is a pretty good indication that their understanding of making something Disney was quite different. Honestly, I never wandered Disney World in the early 90s and thought, "Wow, this just isn't Disney enough."

Also, the "anarchic spirit" of Disney cartoons? Of all the words I'd use to describe classic Disney cartoons, "anarchic" isn't one of them. WB toons were "anarchic" - they celebrated figures like Daffy or Bugs undermining authority, upsetting the status quo, intentionally messing with other characters and, sometimes, with the very rules of filmmaking. With the exception of his very, very earliest appearances, Mickey did nothing like this. And Goofy and Donald, even at their most chaotic and slapstick, tended to be victims of circumstances rather then instigators. This is another little problem with the ride and the current Mickey toons (which I do enjoy) - they don't really seem to have the same attitude as the golden age color Disney shorts did.

I think you're confusing the space with the purpose. What we're talking about is execution and what they're trying to achieve. MMRR is trying to make you feel like a participant in a cartoon.

While the comparison to the original EPCOT attractions is valid, I'd argue the biggest difference is the EPCOT shows had more of a focused theme, and I just feel like GMR was more of a gussied-up diorama that didn't bring you into the subject emotionally. (Except for the Alien/Nostromo part, which kind of shows to me the immersive experience the ride could've been. That part is so good that I completely understand why they wanted to basically carve it out and put it in Tomorrowland as the original idea for Alien Encounters.)

The biggest general flaw with GMR is that if you had no relationship with the films originally, it's not going to move you - thus the frequent calls before it closed to update the ride. And that's a problem - if they had designed the ride to really bring you *into* scenes, the movie selection really wouldn't have mattered. Incidentally, these are the some of the same problems I have with the Na'vi River Journey too. A lot of the other dark rides work great because of sheer force of narrative and/or original execution and vision.

And no, it's not at all about narrow range of IPs - it's about finally having a deep, fun celebration of THE centerpiece of Disney history - and in a way that uses tech to simulate being INSIDE the animation as part of Mickey's world. I wouldn't have wanted a Mickey ride that just had Mickey for the sake of his presence. The lack of a Mickey-themed attraction didn't HURT the parks. But this, to me, feels like the right execution at the right time and it's a giant plus that it could happen.

Of course Disney shorts weren't as meta or completely nuts as what WB did. But the early ones of the late 20s and early 30s? Those are *absolutely* more wild than what came later when you got Mickey-as-hero with the cuddly, redesigned face, the Mickey and the Beanstalk era. Early Mickey was a somewhat mischievous rapscallion who got into crazy, illogical hijinx. The situation is where the anarchy lay, not the characters, generally, and that's the spirit of the new shorts and this ride. I mean, when I hear about this ride, I totally think of shorts like Plane Crazy and such. It's a very specific kind of energy and I *love* that.

(We could have a whole discussion about how early Mickey was someone who jumped into adventures and was jumped right in when reality broke, how 40s-50s-era Mickey seemed kind of terrified when situations spiraled out of control, and how Sorcerer's Apprentice is where those two concepts fused, but I think that's a discussion for a different time. )

 

[Animaniac93-98]

The biggest general flaw with GMR is that if you had no relationship with the films originally, it's not going to move you

Which is why they specifically chose movies like Wizard of Oz, Casablanca, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Singin' in the Rain, Mary Poppins and Alien. All famous movies. Even Tarzan is famous, even if you haven't seen any of the 1930s movies.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Let's not forget Mickey Mouse was in The Great Movie Ride too. As a projection on a screen.

Look how far we've come in 30 years!

 

[Disney Analyst]

Which is why they specifically chose movies like Wizard of Oz, Casablanca, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Singin' in the Rain, Mary Poppins and Alien. All famous movies. Even Tarzan is famous, even if you haven't seen any of the 1930s movies.

just as an example... the only movies I have any nostalgia for in that list was Oz, Raiders, and Mary Poppins. The rest of the ride did nothing for me.

I think that was generally the issue and downfall of GMR. It’s kind of the Tomorrowland problem.

 

[Ponderer]

Which is why they specifically chose movies like Wizard of Oz, Casablanca, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Singin' in the Rain, Mary Poppins and Alien. All famous movies. Even Tarzan is famous, even if you haven't seen any of the 1930s movies.

Again, here's the thing: the ride banked that you bring in your own memories to give the ride some meaning, instead of creating a new experience BASED on those films, that enhances those films. If you haven't seen those films, or you're only mildly familiar, you don't even have that as an anchor.

(And I state again, with the exception of the knockout Alien sequence, which was pretty darn immersive whatever your level of familiarity with the film.)

 

[Animaniac93-98]

just as an example... the only movies I have any nostalgia for in that list was Oz, Raiders, and Mary Poppins. The rest of the ride did nothing for me.

I think that was generally the issue and downfall of GMR. It’s kind of the Tomorrowland problem.

Everyone has their own favourite movies, but highlighting them was not the main point of the GMR.

It was a showcase for a variety of genres and decades to illustrate the breadth of American movie history. CineMagique in Paris took the concept further by including French cinema too.

Most 5 year olds even in 1989 would not have been familiar with the movies featured in the ride, but like parents watching their favourites with their children, the Great Movie ride gave them an education on Hollywood's past.

Building rides based on the latest blockbusters is what Universal did, and we know how dated those became in some cases. The actual list of titles Disney chose for the ride held up very well for the most part.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Everyone has their own favourite movies, but highlighting them was not the main point of the GMR.

It was a showcase for a variety of genres and decades to illustrate the breadth of American movie history. CineMagique in Paris took the concept further by including French cinema too.

Most 5 year olds even in 1989 would not have been familiar with the movies featured in the ride, but like parents watching their favourites with their children, the Great Movie ride gave them an education on Hollywood's past.

Building rides based on the latest blockbusters is what Universal did, and we know how dated those became in some cases. The actual list of titles Disney chose for the ride held up very well for the most part.

I think it held up well for Disney fans with nostalgia for the ride, but I can’t imagine new guests were that enthused.

Id assume they had enough feedback and survey results from casual guests/to first timers to feel justified in axeing it for that reason.