Monsters Inc Laugh Floor Concept Art

[S.E.A.]

:lol:

Ok... you took a jab, but didn't really provide an answer to the question posed. If instead of reading rumors here, someone sees it written as a "what might have been" would they be more apt to find the idea appealing? Same exact idea... just delivered as a past idea instead of a future rumor.

well that's a stupid question anyway, since it really depends on the attraction. You can't generalize all the "what might have beens" and the "what are's". You gotta look at it in a case to case basis.

With the Laugh Floor Comedy Club, the issue is more with its location rather than what it is.

 

[marni1971]

I never understood the preoccupation with "what might have been" ideas or attractions at Disney.

That`s fine. So why not keep it to yourself and let those who have one continue to? Or are you actually trying to understand, but just don`t get it?

To answer your question, I find rumours less appealing than `what might have been`. Rumours are often just that.

As you know, a lot of the complainers are those who see the majority of new developments as cheap, half baked, not as good as they could/should be, or coming up short when compared to WDIs benchmarks.

Some of the others in the non-complaining catagory can`t see the woods for the trees

 

[wannab@dis]

well that's a stupid question anyway, since it really depends on the attraction. You can't generalize all the "what might have beens" and the "what are's". You gotta look at it in a case to case basis.

With the Laugh Floor Comedy Club, the issue is more with its location rather than what it is.

I'll ignore the first part of your statement...

Actually... it can be generalized just simply by looking at the responses on this board as well as other locations. Rarely are "what might have been" items met with complaints, derision, etc... with the possible exception of the complaints that it wasn't completed.

However, not one rumor is posted without numerous complaints.

 

[wannab@dis]

That`s fine. So why not keep it to yourself and let those who have one contineue to?

Interesting response... also lacks the full quote of the original post.

 

[marni1971]

Interesting response... also lacks the full quote of the original post.

Indeed it did. I only quoted the part I replied to since you wern`t being taken out of context. I didn`t see the point since fellow readers only have to scroll back a few messeges. For those who want to read the complete orignal post, please scroll back to message #76. Or read on, as Wannab seems to have wanted;

1. most never went beyond the 'blue-sky' phase
2. we are not privy to the full details of why the project didn't move forward
3. more than likely, the few details that make it out for public consumption are not complete or are embellished.

Finally, it always makes me think of some kids on Christmas day. Instead of being happy with all the new presents they received, they are upset over the one thing they didn't get. *shrug*

1 - some didn`t - these are the ones the public hears the least about. A lot did - hence concept art and plans that are available for people with the preocupation you fail to understand to enjoy looking at and imagining `what if`.

2 - and that makes it worse? So what if it`s not known why a project didn`t get green lit? It dosn`t seem to make the concept any less interesting.

3 - again, so what?

Finally, it always makes me think. Period.

Have a magical day.

 

[wannab@dis]

Indeed it did. I only quoted the part I replied to since you wern`t being taken out of context. I didn`t see the point since fellow readers only have to scroll back a few messeges. For those who want to read the complete orignal post, please scroll back to message #76.

Maybe you could reply fully as I would like to read your take on the questions and assertions I have posed. No offense meant, but I would really like to understand the reasons for the conflicting reactions.

 

[marni1971]

Maybe you could reply fully as I would like to read your take on the questions and assertions I have posed. No offense meant, but I would really like to understand the reasons for the conflicting reactions.

Great :wave: You want to understand. And I want you to
Which replies shall I elaborate on? Or do you mean the thread over the last 10 or so replies?

 

[wannab@dis]

Indeed it did. I only quoted the part I replied to since you wern`t being taken out of context. I didn`t see the point since fellow readers only have to scroll back a few messeges. For those who want to read the complete orignal post, please scroll back to message #76. Or read on, as Wannab seems to have wanted;



1 - some didn`t - these are the ones the public hears the least about. A lot did - hence concept art and plans that are available for people with the preocupation you fail to understand to enjoy looking at and imagining `what if`.

2 - and that makes it worse? So what if it`s not known why a project didn`t get green lit? It dosn`t seem to make the concept any less interesting.

3 - again, so what?

Finally, it always makes me think. Period.

Have a magical day.

Hey... thanks for the edit!

I guess your response still leads me to wonder why there are conflicting reactions to what may have been and what may become. From a pure historical view, I understand they make interesting reading, but from a current event view, it's confusing to see old ideas revered and new ideas scorned.

Thanks for replying and maybe you'll reply to this one.

Oh, I'm hoping to have a magical day... or what's left of it! :wave:

 

[S.E.A.]

Actually... it can be generalized just simply by looking at the responses on this board as well as other locations. Rarely are "what might have been" items met with complaints, derision, etc... with the possible exception of the complaints that it wasn't completed.

However, not one rumor is posted without numerous complaints.

you're ignoring the fact that only the agreeable "what might have beens" are brought up over and over again, and the less agreeable ones are not even talked about.

 

[wannab@dis]

you're ignoring the fact that only the agreeable "what might have beens" are brought up over and over again, and the less agreeable ones are not even talked about.

Good point... but I've yet to see a less agreeable example come up and I actually try to take notice of them to gauge the response for the reasons I've mentioned. Plus, they are interesting reads... just the reactions are a little confusing as I've said.

 

[marni1971]

Ha! Only 34 minutes of today left here - enjoy what you have left of it. You`re sure to get more out of it than I am. I`m rambling more than normal. Can you tell I`m tired? :lol:

I *guess* there are people who see todays attractions to be not as grand as those of the past, or not as A+ each time as they think they used to be. Quoting an oft-used example, for example, Imagination. How the first was a grand, classic attraction in the traditional Disney sense, and the floow ups wern`t. The rest is out of the scope of the OP I guess, but it`s been mentioned a hundered times.

Then we have the original ideas of an even longer ride, on two floors, with another large turntable as a finale and a direct exit into the Imageworks. Great! More ride! More effects! More AAs! Alas, it wasn`t to be, it would have been nice, but what we got was also nice.

Then you have version 2. Poor AAs. Cheap sets. Ride shortened by 40%. Loose story. A feeling of being cheated.

Version 3. Better. Still too short, still not appreciated as much as the first - in it`s hey day or otherwise depending on your opinion.

Now say we have more rumours of a version 4. Excitement. Will it be as good as version one was in the eyes of those who loved version one? Could it be better? It could be if it was 40% longer. Had great sets. Lots of music. Lots of AAs.

I think of an analogy very close to my home (literally) - you have a public transport system. It`s light rail. It`s very good, but only covers 3 of the 6 routes shown on the map. The other 3 are `coming in the future`. You wait and wait. Then finally, the other 3 routes are announced. But they are only 25% the length the map promised. The other 75% could have been built, could have been great, but won`t now be built.

And at the end of the day, there are people who see past ideas from a past time as far superior to ideas of today. You and I have both said it - todays climate is a world of business. Of money. Of shareholders. Of people less inclined to build huge, expensive E Tickets every other year. It used to happen, but for the reasons I mention dosn`t - can`t - happen anymore. And because of that they see todays attractions as a mere shadow of what they could have been, or what could have been built instead in that space, that show building, that plot of land. As they were 10, 15, 20 years ago.

17 minutes left of today now. My magic`s going to be in sleeping like a log. I hope this made sense?

Quick addition, regarding concepts never built that arn`t liked. Off the top of my head; thank god E.P.C.O.T. wasn`t built. Imagine a whole, real, city looking like Tomorrowland circa 1986. We tried something similar in the UK in the 70`s. They were called deck access estates. Flats in the sky. Neighborhoods of the future. Not exactly E.P.C.O.T. I grant, but a similar example of a brand new way of living. They have all been pulled down now.

 

[The Mom]

So, another discussion is turned into a debate which is turned into an argument.

 

[Damien666]

^ Yup, I totally agree with you on that, Mom.

Now here is my view on the concept art.

Keep in mind anything I say are my views or opinions, I will accept yours if you let me accept mine. For example while I think MGM's ToT kills DCA's, TDS's is better then both in theming and storytelling.

With the attraction itself I'm not too keen on it, that and the concept art makes it look better for MGM. Will it be good? Who knows, we just have to wait and see it when it opens.

Could be good, could be a SGE.

 

[wannab@dis]

Ha! Only 34 minutes of today left here - enjoy what you have left of it. You`re sure to get more out of it than I am. I`m rambling more than normal. Can you tell I`m tired? :lol:

snipped purely to save space....

Ok... so for you (and probably others) it appears the reaction to the "what may have been" ideas may be due to the fact they were created during a period when some felt WDI was doing better work. I understand that notion but have always thought it was more a reaction to the genre of work instead of the quality of work.

Times change and the parks must change to stay relevent with the current guests. From what I've seen over the past few years, there's very little to complain about from WDI. The Land makeover was awesome, The Seas appears to be another hit, EE is great, PhilHarmagic, even the cloned Soarin was done very well. Quite honestly, the only recent attraction that seems to have mixed (not sure if it's actually skewed to bad with average guests) reactions is SGE.

Thanks for taking the time to reply and I hope you got some sleep. Tired or not... it was a good post.

 

[dxwwf3]

Times change and the parks must change to stay relevent with the current guests. From what I've seen over the past few years, there's very little to complain about from WDI. The Land makeover was awesome, The Seas appears to be another hit, EE is great, PhilHarmagic, even the cloned Soarin was done very well.

I agree wholeheartedly. The past few years have been very positive. Don't forget the update to POTC as well.

Quite honestly, the only recent attraction that seems to have mixed (not sure if it's actually skewed to bad with average guests) reactions is SGE.

I'd say "mixed" would be kind. Nobody bats a thousand and Disney is no exception.

 

[wdwishes2005]

Hm... I thought this thread was locked....

 

[The Mom]

It's unlocked, as long as you guys stop bickering. BEHAVE!

Other people are trying to enjoy themselves.

 

[marni1971]

Hey - it is unlocked again. Thanks Mom!

Wannanb; one last thing - I agree, we have seen some great things of late. But I can`t help feel they could have been even greater. Kind of going the whole way instead of pulling up slightly short. Quick example; Mission:space. As we know, Journeys in Space was to have been a much larger experience. The Centrifuge was to have been purely the preshow to get us to the main show. I can only guess it`s due to the reasons I stated earlier. It`s these other plans that are of interest to a great many people - myself included, as you know. Don`t ask why - I don`t know. But there again a lot of the world likes Cricket and I don`t understand why. I just leave them to it. I`d it has a lot more to do with (Disney) quality than genre.

I got some sleep, thanks. Not enough, mind :snore:

 

[CaptainMichael]

But there again a lot of the world likes Cricket and I don`t understand why.

I like crickets, they're good for catching Perch:lookaroun


(and yes, I know that Cricket is a sport!)

 

[JLW11Hi]

I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this yet, but...

...I'm not quite sure if you would catogorize this image as "concept art". I would call it "promotional art". Just a teaser created to advertize the attraction to the masses without giving too much away but still getting the basic idea across. I would say the same thing about the Finding Nemo show "concept art" that was released not too long ago.

When I think of concept art, I think of those more elegant pieces of art that people like Marc Davis and Claude Coats made to inspire the imagineers when designing the Haunted Mansion, or something. Like something you would see in one of the many Disney/Imagineering coffeetable books they sell in the parks with all the great paintings and designs made by Imagineering's artists. I just wonder if people are expecting the artwork we see here to be a little more painterly and inspiring and not so...photoshoped. I am sure there is art like this that they use to get ideas and inspire the team working on the project, I am just guessing that they chose to use a more "finalized" image of the show to show what the attraction will really be like.

I guess I shouldn't disntinguish concept and promotional that much though. I mean, Herb Ryman painted a now famous layout of Disneyland that Walt used to sell the idea to the bankers back in the day. That piece of promotional art could also be considered quite elegant and inspiring.