Mission:Space update (confirmed)

[Casper Gutman]

I don't think I've ever been a pixie dust defender of TWDC in any way, but they are moving in the right direction. CAPEX spending has almost grown to pre 9/11 levels, 1 large expansion just finished and 2 more are on the way, and things are moving in the right direction. That does not by any means let them off the hook for a decade of mismanagement, but when you hit rock bottom the only place to go is up.

Yes, but one of those expansions is Toy Story Land, which is pretty close to being subtraction by addition. And as exciting as SWL and Pandora are (and as much as I am wildly anticipating SWL) they both also reflect that certain confused or wrong-headed ideas about the parks are still deeply ingrained at every level of Disney management.

 

[DisneyWall-E]

As I recall, Dinoland was supposed to remind us of an old-fashioned Carnival, but I think you're right that it comes off as tacky and garish instead. Swing and miss. Meanwhile, the smaller kids seem to like it. Yeah, the theming is a soar thumb.

The problem with Dinoland as I came to understand it is that they put in a cheap carnival because of budget cuts and then came up with a lame back story to "make it fit".
And as always all IMHO.

 

[Daveeeeed]

As I recall, Dinoland was supposed to remind us of an old-fashioned Carnival, but I think you're right that it comes off as tacky and garish instead. Swing and miss. Meanwhile, the smaller kids seem to like it. Yeah, the theming is a soar thumb.

Yet let's take a step back and realize how quickly AK was thrown together. At least WDW was opening a new park every decade, on average, back then. No new park has been built in 20 years, and I think Disney is so wrapt up in making things as polished and perfect as possible that nothing happens quickly anymore other than refits. New Frozen theme for Maelstrom, 3 obnoxious birds in Mexico, new film for Soarin'. Pandora is taking how long to get going? DL was built from scratch in half that time. I would have to believe that Dinoland was the victim of less consideration and thought than any of us would like. As an idea, it doesn't really work. As a finished product, it doesn't blend. Yeah, the kids like it, but they could have liked it just as much if they had thought the attraction through a bit better. Obviously far more thought was put into the Tree of Life and Kilmanjaro. Dinoland at the time seems to have been a small kid filler after thought.

Thus, I think I agree with you.

DinoRama was in fact an afterthought for capacity.

I laugh at the trolls that like it more than the safaris. Not kidding you... Some people do!

 

[peter11435]

Dinoland was in fact an afterthought for capacity.

I laugh at the trolls that like it more than the safaris. Not kidding you... Some people do!

Dinorama was an afterthought for capacity... Not Dinoland itself

 

[monothingie]

Yes, but one of those expansions is Toy Story Land, which is pretty close to being subtraction by addition. And as exciting as SWL and Pandora are (and as much as I am wildly anticipating SWL) they both also reflect that certain confused or wrong-headed ideas about the parks are still deeply ingrained at every level of Disney management.

I am all for the addition of IP if it is done properly to fit the theme. The concept of there being any connection to the idea and theming of DHS being a "studio" park has been gone ever since they cut the MGM moniker out of the name. I'm guessing at some point the park name will be rebooted to match what they have added.

DAK is a little bit more complex, I'm not a fan of the AVATAR incorporation in that I feel the AVATAR franchise is a one trick pony. (Even though the original movie was huge, I don't think it has the franchise potential that Star Wars does) If the second and third and forth and fifth movies bomb well.... That being said, there has always been a component of DAK to deal with fantasy (Dragon in the logo, etc) So if done well, and it certainly looks like its the case, then it would make a good addition to the park. I mean, Avatar coupled with ROL have made DAK a full day park, which is a real plus. (The park is fantastic at night BTW)

 

[UpAllNight]

Disney will have learned their lesson with Avatar. I reckon they're pretty embarrassed about it all, but hindsight is a wonderful thing. Doesn't obviously mean the area won't be possibly the greatest theme park area ever created...I'm sure they'd rather be advertising their own franchise though and not drawing reactions of "wow...Avatar...really?"

 

[Casper Gutman]

Dinoland was in fact an afterthought for capacity.

I laugh at the trolls that like it more than the safaris. Not kidding you... Some people do!

With all the mistakes Disney has made in the last two decades at WDW, I find it odd how much malice is leveled at Dinoland. Beyond simply enjoying the invocation of cheesy roadside attractions (an aesthetic I enjoy), I look at it a couple ways. The storyline - of a spot that has moved from genuine scientific discovery to corporate edutainment to pure, crass, lowest-common-denominator commercialization is a cute bit of satire and can even be read as a wink at the way Disney has tried to popularize (and sometimes vulgarize) science at Epcot and elsewhere. In addition, Africa and Asia at AK are intended to offer a more "realistic" (realistic for a theme park land, of course) depictions of their inspiration, with mismatched chairs, architectural imperfections, ads, and even copyright-violating off-model paintings of Mickey - why shouldn't the park's most purely American area feature the same kind of colorful "realism," with cracked blacktop and tacky giant dino sculptures?

I don't love the area, but I think it gets a bad rap.

 

[Kman101]

I 100% agree that they need they park hours etc released 180 days before. We're heading there in May & they have just released the hours for while we're there and it completely messes up our plans with regards to ADR's and in turn which parks we want to be in on which days. Personally I still think 180 days is too far out to be making dining reservations but if you don't do it you're limited to what you can have which is such a shame! * rant over* I STILL LOVE YOU DISNEY WORLD!

I have to say I found quite a bit of open availability in a lot of restaurants day of when I was there this last week. I don't know that it HAS to be that way anymore but it's become a vicious cycle ... I didn't check every single restaurant of course but I was surprised to be able to see availability for some of them. I was just looking for 1/2 people so larger availability might still be an issue and require extensive planning and booking far out. If everyone didn't do that, and then did it day of, there'd probably be plenty of open availability

But they are terrible about releasing hours, etc. when they do force you to plan so far in advance.

 

[Casper Gutman]

I am all for the addition of IP if it is done properly to fit the theme. The concept of there being any connection to the idea and theming of DHS being a "studio" park has been gone ever since they cut the MGM moniker out of the name. I'm guessing at some point the park name will be rebooted to match what they have added.

DAK is a little bit more complex, I'm not a fan of the AVATAR incorporation in that I feel the AVATAR franchise is a one trick pony. (Even though the original movie was huge, I don't think it has the franchise potential that Star Wars does) If the second and third and forth and fifth movies bomb well.... That being said, there has always been a component of DAK to deal with fantasy (Dragon in the logo, etc) So if done well, and it certainly looks like its the case, then it would make a good addition to the park. I mean, Avatar coupled with ROL have made DAK a full day park, which is a real plus. (The park is fantastic at night BTW)

I actually think Pandora and SWL work just fine thematically, and the IP-focus is simply a fact of life of the modern entertainment industry and isn't going anywhere. The thinking I was waving my fists about is the fact that the three lands have all experienced dramatic cuts, are being installed without a coherent thought about the future (taking the cheaper spot for SW that makes it harder to expand), and don't (in the case of the MGM rides) expand capacity to a sufficient extent. Even though SWL looks really cool, there is still a sense that Disney management is doing the very minimum they think they can get away with - and in a park as troubled as MGM, it's not going to be enough.

 

[Goofyernmost]

In a time of upheaval and instability across the globe, the new update for Mission Space will act as a soothing balm. All riders will board with a free handful of green vegetables, and, with the centrifuges spinning at never before seen rates of speed, everyone will be able to visualize whirled peas.

Or even better they could pretend that the guests are assorted vegetables and that the ride vehicle is a giant salad spinner which ends with everyone getting coated with Ranch Dressing.

 

[Ralphlaw]

Dinoland was in fact an afterthought for capacity.

I laugh at the trolls that like it more than the safaris. Not kidding you... Some people do!

Sad. Very sad. But let's get back to Mission Space, which was a very well planned, tested, and abundantly researched and marketed multi-multi-multi million dollar attraction. What went wrong, and why is it good but not great? Why don't we anticipate it like Soarin' and Test Track? Why is our vacation still pretty good even if we don't ride it? My list, for what it's worth:

1. My first Mission space thought is one of standing around doing nothing. Wait in line to get called up. Wait in the pre-ride area on your number. Wait on your number again before you enter the capsule. All the while listening to Gary Sinese warn us about everything. Standing still grows old, and that's my first thought about the attraction.

2. There's no humor.

3. The "thrill" isn't really there. Even the orange line isn't dramatic, being more gradual and nauseating than thrilling.

4. It's the same story over and over, which used to work, but doesn't anymore since Star Tours mixed it up.

5. There's no hands-on stuff or personalized stuff in the queuing area ala Test Track.

6. It's not competitive ala Buzz Lightyear and Toy Story Mania.

7. It's claustrophobic, and we all spend far too much time staring at small video screens these days.

8. Once you know the ending, the thrill is gone. Citizen Cane is great the first time, before you know the Rosebud answer. Not so much the second time.

9. I hate to push the IPs, but Star Tours works in large part because the vast majority of guests love Star Wars, especially the music.

10.Yes, people died on Mission Space. That does cast a pall over it even if it may not have been Disney's "fault".

Problems identified. Now to fix it.

1. Keep us moving.
2. Add humor.
3. Add faster, more jolting movements.
4. Change it up. Go to different planets, asteroids, etc . . .
5. Liven up the queuing area with hands on stuff to do.
6. Somehow, give us points for soft landings, or other accomplishments.
7. Add side and upper screens which look like windows to alleviate the claustrophobia.
8. Change up the scenarios, and perhaps even the endings to those scenarios. We're going to Jupiter, but which moon will we land on?
9. Don't add an IP, but get some really great and distinctive music. I can't hum the Mission Space theme, but Soarin's I can.
10. A face lift, and the passage of time, will help us forget about the poor souls who died.

I hope this helps.

 

[Chef Mickey]

Uhm, that's the case nearly everything Disney builds.

Capacity is around 1400 which is low for a major attraction. In fact it's one of the lowest capacity "big budget" rides that Disney's ever done. However, it was also one of the most expensive attractions Disney's done and asking them to add another 2 or 4 platforms when designing the ride doesn't seem feasible. It's all largely moot since the ride isn't overly popular anyway.

You're not wrong, but the ride is not popular anymore for a major fixable reason and several other small reasons that can be addressed. The ride would be more popular if they gave a crap about it and maybe they do now. The mission of today is so outdated, it is almost embarrassing but the ride system is very cool.

1) They need to make the missions variable.
2) They need a more interesting pre show...it's too long and almost becomes a beating to get through once you've seen it a few times (repetitive). This is unfortunate on other attractions like Test Track.
3) It needs somewhat better dialogue and script.

It's unfortunate some people get sick on it, but it's probably the most unique experience I've gotten from a theme park.

 

[Casper Gutman]

You're not wrong, but the ride is not popular anymore for a major fixable reason and several other small reasons that can be addressed. The ride would be more popular if they gave a crap about it and maybe they do now. The mission of today is so outdated, it is almost embarrassing but the ride system is very cool.

1) They need to make the missions variable.
2) They need a more interesting pre show...it's too long and almost becomes a beating to get through once you've seen it a few times (repetitive). This is unfortunate on other attractions like Test Track.
3) It needs somewhat better dialogue and script.

It's unfortunate some people get sick on it, but it's probably the most unique experience I've gotten from a theme park.

Surprising no one, I disagree that it's fixable. It's always going to be uncomfortable for a lot of people - showing folks one thing while telling their inner ear something else is an unpleasant combination. Even more, the ride experience will always be sitting in a tiny box looking at a small screen. There's no sense of scope, no variety. The ride has a lot of issues that can be fixed - lousy (non-existent?) story, bad pre-show, horribly outdated graphics, disappointing post-show - but the fundamental flaws of the attraction just cannot be corrected.

 

[TalkingHead]

Sad. Very sad. But let's get back to Mission Space, which was a very well planned, tested, and abundantly researched and marketed multi-multi-multi million dollar attraction. What went wrong, and why is it good but not great? Why don't we anticipate it like Soarin' and Test Track? Why is our vacation still pretty good even if we don't ride it? My list, for what it's worth:

1. My first Mission space thought is one of standing around doing nothing. Wait in line to get called up. Wait in the pre-ride area on your number. Wait on your number again before you enter the capsule. All the while listening to Gary Sinese warn us about everything. Standing still grows old, and that's my first thought about the attraction.

2. There's no humor.

3. The "thrill" isn't really there. Even the orange line isn't dramatic, being more gradual and nauseating than thrilling.

4. It's the same story over and over, which used to work, but doesn't anymore since Star Tours mixed it up.

5. There's no hands-on stuff or personalized stuff in the queuing area ala Test Track.

6. It's not competitive ala Buzz Lightyear and Toy Story Mania.

7. It's claustrophobic, and we all spend far too much time staring at small video screens these days.

8. Once you know the ending, the thrill is gone. Citizen Cane is great the first time, before you know the Rosebud answer. Not so much the second time.

9. I hate to push the IPs, but Star Tours works in large part because the vast majority of guests love Star Wars, especially the music.

10.Yes, people died on Mission Space. That does cast a pall over it even if it may not have been Disney's "fault".

Problems identified. Now to fix it.

1. Keep us moving.
2. Add humor.
3. Add faster, more jolting movements.
4. Change it up. Go to different planets, asteroids, etc . . .
5. Liven up the queuing area with hands on stuff to do.
6. Somehow, give us points for soft landings, or other accomplishments.
7. Add side and upper screens which look like windows to alleviate the claustrophobia.
8. Change up the scenarios, and perhaps even the endings to those scenarios. We're going to Jupiter, but which moon will we land on?
9. Don't add an IP, but get some really great and distinctive music. I can't hum the Mission Space theme, but Soarin's I can.
10. A face lift, and the passage of time, will help us forget about the poor souls who died.

I hope this helps.

Odd list. Most attractions involve standing around. Few attractions involve competition. And it loses its thrill after the first ride? I mean, you can say that and maybe it's true, but the Citizen Kane example doesn't help your case (IMO!)

 

[flyerjab]

With all the mistakes Disney has made in the last two decades at WDW, I find it odd how much malice is leveled at Dinoland. Beyond simply enjoying the invocation of cheesy roadside attractions (an aesthetic I enjoy), I look at it a couple ways. The storyline - of a spot that has moved from genuine scientific discovery to corporate edutainment to pure, crass, lowest-common-denominator commercialization is a cute bit of satire and can even be read as a wink at the way Disney has tried to popularize (and sometimes vulgarize) science at Epcot and elsewhere. In addition, Africa and Asia at AK are intended to offer a more "realistic" (realistic for a theme park land, of course) depictions of their inspiration, with mismatched chairs, architectural imperfections, ads, and even copyright-violating off-model paintings of Mickey - why shouldn't the park's most purely American area feature the same kind of colorful "realism," with cracked blacktop and tacky giant dino sculptures?

I don't love the area, but I think it gets a bad rap.

I sort of agree here. For me it is admittedly my least favorite section of the park. But it does have three rides, midway games, arguably one of the best kid's play areas, and we Restaurantasaurus for something different. And the one thing I love about that QS is the length that the Imagineers went to give it a backstory. there is even a section of the restaurant that is made from the scientists original trailer that they first worked out of. Its is this uniquely themed section of that QS, kind of like the diving bell table at Jock Lindsey's.

 

[Tom Morrow]

To back up the "standing around" point, I have never enjoyed having to stand through two separate pre-show videos to ride either. I like the ride well enough but this alone is enough to stop me from riding, even with the often walk-on wait time. For the same reason, I rarely ride The Simpsons Ride. However, it is probably the easiest and most efficient way to pre-stage 40 guests around a circular room, or in the case of The Simpsons Ride, into all the individual little boarding rooms.

 

[Casper Gutman]

To back up the "standing around" point, I have never enjoyed having to stand through two separate pre-show videos to ride either. I like the ride well enough but this alone is enough to stop me from riding, even with the often walk-on wait time. For the same reason, I rarely ride The Simpsons Ride. However, it is probably the easiest and most efficient way to pre-stage 40 guests around a circular room, or in the case of The Simpsons Ride, into all the individual little boarding rooms.

The "pre-show parade" was a huge problem at Uni - pretty much all of their rides suffered from it. It's also a problem that Uni has almost completely fixed (with a few exceptions like Simpsons and the official "worst attraction in Orlando", Poseidon's Fury)

 

[Daveeeeed]

Dinorama was an afterthought for capacity... Not Dinoland itself

That's what I meant. I'll edit it for clarity sake.

 

[larryz]

... (with a few exceptions like Simpsons and the official "worst attraction in Orlando", Poseidon's Fury)

What??? You don't like "the toilet bowl ride"???

 

[Goofyernmost]

Odd list. Most attractions involve standing around. Few attractions involve competition. And it loses its thrill after the first ride? I mean, you can say that and maybe it's true, but the Citizen Kane example doesn't help your case (IMO!)

Actually, he/she injected solutions that define what WDW has turned into over the last two decades. Prioritize no waiting, give me something to do in the queue because I am incapable of entertaining myself, make a crash landing on Mars a funny thing instead of a drama and so on. (whatever we do, do not make it so it scares the kiddies) Now you know why Disney does what it does now, that's what the current public thinks they want. The changing scenes only take into account the frequent visitor that rides repeatedly year after year. Most of WDW's guests are first timers and would not benefit from multiple scenes at all.