UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
I've actually watched your Horizons video before (more than once, even) and somehow either never paid attention to that part or had forgotten it.
Thanks!
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Mickey and Minnie's Runaway Railway confirmed
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
I've actually watched your Horizons video before (more than once, even) and somehow either never paid attention to that part or had forgotten it.
Thanks!
DisneyfanMA
Well-Known Member
yes, so I was pretty much spot on. Not sure you understood my post.
Your demands were met in record time!
DisneyfanMA
Well-Known Member
Nah, still not getting it. My point was never that MK needed much more, it was that Hollywood Studios does, as well as the other 2 parks. They are several rides away each from “meeting my demands”. And it’s not realistic to expect them to ever get more that an additional couple of rides at best based on all these decades of history. Not sure how else to get you to understand.
The Grand Inquisitor
Well-Known Member
I agree it should have been placed where Launch Bay is. Then Disney could have updated Great Movie Ride with new scenes and movies. But I still miss The Great Movie Ride but Mickey and Minnie's Runaway Railway is a very worthy successor in my opinion.
MadTeacup
Well-Known Member
Not sure about specifics, but the ride was NOT ready on time by my understanding. I was led to believe that the whole reason why MMRR was built in the GMR show building was so that it could be ready before Galaxy's Edge opened (and Galaxy's Edge was delayed as well.)
Technically, didn't GE open early in HS (except ROTR, which opened on-time)? But yes, I thought the original plan for MMRR was to be open before GE to help capacity of the expected GE crowds.
mccgavin
Well-Known Member
From what I heard the main reason was that the attraction needed a new fleet of vehicles to replace the old ones, and Disney wasn't willing to pay that. They were more willing to invest in a new attraction that may draw in more crowds and overall be cheaper to operate than make a large investment in refurbishing and/or revitalizing GMR.
RobWDW1971
Well-Known Member
That rings true. Personally, I am all about the quality of the replacement - if it is a great attraction, I do not mind 30+ year old attractions, who have had a tremendous run closing. I just wish WDI had a better track record of actually making things that are better, more creative, and more inspiring than what they replace.
I personally have no issue closing Carousel of Progress, Lincoln at Disneyland, Tiki Room, even Small World - have loved them all since they opened, but nothing is sacred - just replace them with something equally as amazing for 2020.
mccgavin
Well-Known Member
That's fair, but what is better or what is worse can be pretty subjective at times. I knew a lot of this forum leans towards preferring more classic attractions as opposed to their modern replacements, but in a lot of cases that is at least up for debate.
It's also important to consider that we as Disney Parks fans on the Internet are in the vast minority of people who visit these parks, and our opinions don't always line up with the general public's.
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
I don't know, I think some things are and should be sacred.
Do we want to see The Haunted Mansion replaced with an objectively better experience (a high bar, but lets assume they would clear it), or should the great new thing just be build in addition? What legitimate, compelling reason is there to replace something that classic, especially in WDW with its "blessing of size"?
What if Disney went to replace Cinderella Castle, even with something objectively better? Doesn't Cinderella Castle, for better or worse, hold the spirit of Walt Disney World in its image? Isn't it sacred?
Your mileage may vary on whether The Great Movie Ride exists in the pantheon with these examples, but I do think some things are sacred and that some things should be.
To me, and to others, The Great Movie Ride held the spirit of its park within it. I've always heard the reason it was closing was because it was more expensive to run than Disney liked - between the Animatronics, fire effects, and Live Cast Member involvement, the bills added up and they wanted something cheaper to run (which Runaway Railway is). Can you imagine a version of The Great Movie Ride that was reworked to remove the fire, minimize CM involvement, spruce everything up and replace 3 or 4 scenes in the name of keeping all of the good things about it? Sounds about as reasonable as offering Spaceship Earth its fourth major rework in under 40 years.
Runaway Railway, though fun, doesn't feel sacred to me. It's not a strong enough show to feel like "an instant classic" as some have suggested. I almost wonder if it'll last as long as The Great Movie Ride did. Artistically I think it shouldn't. It should see a serious update before lasting that long. Though that's maybe a silly thing to say about a ride that isn't even a month old, but its bones aren't nearly as strong as the ride it replaced.
RobWDW1971
Well-Known Member
Even though it's been open for just a couple of weeks, I can pretty confidently say Runaway Railway will not be considered "sacred" someday. However, I would agree the castles are iconic and sacred as icons of the park - especially when you look at what they are doing to Hong Kong - perfect example of change that is NOT better. Yikes.
I would also say Epcot's "ball" is iconic and sacred, but I'm open to a new, great attraction inside it (again, confidence is very low they can deliver on that idea).
But that list of truly sacred icons and attractions in the park to me is very small - from the 11 years Walt ran Disneyland and his plans for the future (which is all we have to go by) he wanted the park to be new, fresh, exciting, and tell the next story with his next great set of tools. The original Tomorrowland barely lasted 10 years before he tore it down and started over.
As I've said in other threads, I think Walt would be horrified if he came back and found out the Carousel of Progress that he debuted in 1964 as a symbol of modern technology and storytelling was still being run in 2020 - it's exactly the opposite of what the show stands for - progress. (And this is from someone who LOVED it from the day it debuted at Disneyland)
To quote Pippin, "Everything has its season, everything has its time...."
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
I tend to agree about the Carousel of Progress. I have my love for it, but the show that's being run today is shameful. But I'd also say it deserves an update way before it deserves being ripped out, especially because I do agree that I lack confidence in their ability to do better. There's more potential in an update of COP than there is in starting from scratch on the building's plot. Does that make it sacred? Maybe in some way - in the same way that The Haunted Mansion is sacred but isn't above occasional updates. Or Spaceship Earth. The value of improving on the concept already at play is greater than the value of starting over.
I'd argue that, by that definition, The Great Movie Ride should have been considered sacred. There's nothing they do in Runaway Railway (can I mention that I almost always spell it Runway first? That'd be a very different attraction) that HAD to be done in the GMR showbuilding - it would have been easy enough to build a new warehouse off the Animation Courtyard. Just taken a little more money and a little more time. The irony isn't lost on me that Runaway Railway went into the GMR building to help it open before Galaxy's Edge . . . and then ended up opening way after anyway. What a shame. I get that they felt the park needs rides and needs them now, but killing a ride to achieve that - and one on a scale and scope that is so rarely equalled today - is not only counter-intuitive, but a detriment to the guest experience.
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
I love the Carousel of Progress -- it's the only thing I feel like I HAVE to do on any given trip to the Magic Kingdom (although I'm sure that's partially because I don't know if it will still be there whenever I come back). But there's no way they will ever spend the money to continually update it, and only updating the final scene while leaving the current 1900s, 1920s, and 1940s scenes intact doesn't really make sense because of the gigantic time jump involved.
I think they should return the final scene to the 1960s the way it was when it was originally built. Then it should be moved out of Tomorrowland to some other location (a new building on Main Street, maybe?) and allowed to run as a Walt Disney tribute/museum piece.
I think they should return the final scene to the 1960s the way it was when it was originally built. Then it should be moved out of Tomorrowland to some other location (a new building on Main Street, maybe?) and allowed to run as a Walt Disney tribute/museum piece.
RobWDW1971
Well-Known Member
Disney Family Museum in San Francisco?
RotR was late. GE was on time in Orlando. MMRR should have opened just before GE.
I guess from the original timeline of "fall 2019" that is true, but I was thinking more of once they started to promote "late fall" for the land. It seemed like most assumed that the whole thing would open in December, but then surprisingly we had an Aug open date for the land minus ROTR. Obviously that would probably line up with the original timeline you are referencing.