Monsters, Inc. - Laugh Floor Previews Has Begun

[wannab@dis]

He/She isn't a typical guest

I'm sorry... but I just don't agree. When a park map says Cinderella Castle, I think most people will know it's tied to the movie.

Change the name on the map and it will still be known as a princess castle.... they may not know the name of the princess, but it will still be tied to the Disney fairy tales.

Try as you want, the idea that Disney should be less about characters is ludicrous at best. That's the roots of the park and is what made it the success that you see today. There's a reason the park with the most characters and character stories is also the most popular park in the world.

 

[dxwwf3]

When a park map says Cinderella Castle, I think most people will know it's tied to the movie.

Well of course. Nobody is denying that. But I think that most people do not really think of the film or the character when they think of the castle.

 

[dxwwf3]

The Disney parks were originally built using many stories, characters and shows from the Disney movies or television shows. Even the lands were created with a thought of the different shows / entertainment that would be used within them and also a marketing slant to tie the parks and media together. Overall, characters have been a huge part of the Disney park experience.

No doubt about it.

Just for kicks... take out all the shows or attractions that are character based at Magic Kingdom. What's left? Um, not a lot. The park would be about as exciting as watching painted lines dry in a parking lot.

And right there you proved a different point. They are coming awfully close to over saturating the park with nothing but animated character driven experiences. Just as the Get-The-Point Sisters taught us, it's all about moderation. Disney is much more than that.

 

[dxwwf3]

Where were you in the 50's when ALL of Disneyland was about the magic of the Disney experience. It included the characters and to a VERY large degree was all about the movies and television shows. The quintessential Disney included everything that you now lambaste.

And when did the park receive it's biggest growth after opening? When The Haunted Mansion and Pirates of the Caribbean opened.

They could have easily made these two attractions character based and if they were done with the same quality, they would have been just as successful, but they didn't over saturate and look what they have now. Two classics that are just as popular today as they were when they opened. The idea that everything in the MK should be animated character driven is ridiculous. Should there be more characters in the MK than the other parks? You bet. Is that ALL that should be in the park? No freaking way.

 

[wannab@dis]

And when did the park receive it's biggest growth after opening? When The Haunted Mansion and Pirates of the Caribbean opened.

They could have easily made these two attractions character based and if they were done with the same quality, they would have been just as successful, but they didn't over saturate and look what they have now. Two classics that are just as popular today as they were when they opened. The idea that everything in the MK should be animated character driven is ridiculous. Should there be more characters in the MK than the other parks? You bet. Is that ALL that should be in the park? No freaking way.

I never said it ALL was character driven, but according to some of the posts recently, there's nothing original and all character based. Look at M:S, Soarin, E:E, LMAX... there has been a LOT of original attractions added in the past few years, but that seems to be forgotten.

I'm all for a balance, but the balance requires character and movie based attractions. History has proven what happens if they're not present.

 

[dxwwf3]

I never said it ALL was character driven, but according to some of the posts recently, there's nothing original and all character based. Look at M:S, Soarin, E:E, LMAX... there has been a LOT of original attractions added in the past few years, but that seems to be forgotten.

Not true at all. I'm a huge fan of M:S, Soarin', and EE and many people around here are as well.

But how many of those attractions are in the Magic Kingdom? Epcot got a Nemo makeover which I was fine with. It fit the pavilion and seems to have been done well. Now I wouldn't want to see many more character based attractions in Epcot, but if they fit the theme, they are much, much easier to live with. And yet when was the last time the MK got something for adults or at least something not animated character driven?

Nobody has forgotten the original attractions that are all over the property, but I think many of us would like to see some of those added to the original park for balance's sake as well.

 

[wannab@dis]

Not true at all. I'm a huge fan of M:S, Soarin', and EE and many people around here are as well.

But how many of those attractions are in the Magic Kingdom? Epcot got a Nemo makeover which I was fine with. It fit the pavilion and seems to have been done well. Now I wouldn't want to see many more character based attractions in Epcot, but if they fit the theme, they are much, much easier to live with. And yet when was the last time the MK got something for adults?

Nobody has forgotten the original attractions that are all over the property, but I would like to see some of those added to the original park.

Does the MK *really* need a big E-ticket right now? Or does it need some filler attractions, C & D tickets?

The park has no problems with pulling in the crowds and in fact gets very crowded even during the slow times of the year. It doesn't really need to pull in more crowds, but needs to spread them out. That's done better by adding / updating some of the C & D ticket attractions and shows.

 

[dxwwf3]

Does the MK *really* need a big E-ticket right now? Or does it need some filler attractions, C & D tickets?

The park has no problems with pulling in the crowds and in fact gets very crowded even during the slow times of the year. It doesn't really need to pull in more crowds, but needs to spread them out. That's done better by adding / updating some of the C & D ticket attractions and shows.

I don't know if it NEEDS an E-ticket, but it sure wouldn't hurt considering it has been so long since the park has received one.

And even if the park got some C and/or D tickets (which would be fine), there's no reason whatsoever that all of those attractions have to be animated character based. That's the argument. If you HAVE to replace the Carousel of Progress, it doesn't have to be bumper cars or a kid's playground. If the Hall of Presidents just has to go, don't replace it with "Colonial Stitch and the Galactic Revolution".

 

[Tim G]

I was thinking about something like NEMO Towers myself... :lookaroun...


Seriously... but with management as it is now, we'll probably get something like you mentioned... or even worse...

And slowly but surely the Pixar invasion sneaks forward... :lookaroun

 

[dxwwf3]

Seriously... but with management as it is now, we'll probably get something like you mentioned... or even worse...

I can't imagine anything worse than "Colonial Stitch" :lol:

 

[nibblesandbits]

I can't imagine anything worse than "Colonial Stitch" :lol:

trust me...me neither! :lol:

 

[nibblesandbits]

While I'm not a fan of him... Jim Hill is 100% correct when it comes to some of the Disney fanboys. They will always find something to complain about.

Wow...never thought I'd agree with Jim Hill...but this article is right on the money. Most people on these boards will moan and complain without giving things a chance. They'll beat them into the ground...complaining what a horrible idea things the Disney company comes up with. That complaint then gets in the brains of people who read these boards...then when they view the attraction...they are ultimately disappointed because they already have that cynacism built into their psyche. Even if they believe they are going into it optimistically or even without prejudice...they aren't in reality.

If people stop complaining and actually take the attractions being built not so seriously as was the point of the Jim Hill article...they might actually enjoy them! Who'da thunk it?

 

[Epcot82Guy]

First off, I am not suggesting that WDW is going in a "different" direction. It is, in a way, going to the original DL foundation. However, that was not the start of WDW. That was not even the way Disney was when I started going. It is a change of direction. I really don't see how you all can absolutely slam the WWWD approach and then try to claim this. I am very willing to concede that the WWWD argument isn't really applicable, but I think that goes across the board. These are approaches; the order of them really doesn't matter unless one wants to claim the APPROACH is better and not its historical placement.

Wow...never thought I'd agree with Jim Hill...but this article is right on the money. Most people on these boards will moan and complain without giving things a chance. They'll beat them into the ground...complaining what a horrible idea things the Disney company comes up with. That complaint then gets in the brains of people who read these boards...then when they view the attraction...they are ultimately disappointed because they already have that cynacism built into their psyche. Even if they believe they are going into it optimistically or even without prejudice...they aren't in reality.

If people stop complaining and actually take the attractions being built not so seriously as was the point of the Jim Hill article...they might actually enjoy them! Who'da thunk it?

This poses an interesting point. The key is that many people do look at the attraction... and that's it. The cohesive theme added an element that made Disney to many people. It wasn't always perfect. But it FELT right for some reason. The problem is that many of these new additions feel like marketing exploitations. It seems to say, "How can we get X character into the park" instead of "We have this attraction that fits into X location." That may be far from the truth, but it does come off that way. Add in the required gift shop and budget cuts, and the outcome can fail to drum up excitement. The Parks feel different now. Much different. The presence of these signs and attractions has changed MK and Epcot especially. It's not taking things too seriously; it's the loss of what made these things special and entertaining. Is that a negative thesis or an overrun fanboy? Sure. Call it what you like. I call it a loss for a core group of loyal customers whose replacements refuse to try and decipher ways to appease both sides.

Having said that, I think a lot of these trends are changing. However, it has come after a time that has produced huge skepticism. And, just as a reponse to this, these changes and concerns well pre-dated my start with these boards. In fact, it started when I was a CPer at 2002 and spoke with guests. The number of times I spoke with guests and they volunteered stories about what they missed, how blatant the gift shops were, etc. was concerning. It didn't start from seeds of doubt planted by fanboys. It started with their customers to whom I could relate.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

Sorry for the double post. Thought I would try and take this debate in a more constructive direction.

I would pose (to anyone) the following questions:

1. Would you be as excited about this attraction if it had just been the Laugh Floor Comedy Club? Let's assume that these would be original aliens, monsters, etc. in the same show. No mention of MI. Why or why not?

2. Would you have been as excited if it had been just the Laugh Floor Comedy Club but that it featured Monsters Inc, but not in the title or even the desciption?

 

[DisneyMusician2]

I'm excited about ANY new attraction that is going in. I keep an open mind, and really experience the attraction for what it is. People tend to get a little too critical about NEW things and the theming and where everything belongs. Just enjoy the magic and look around for the looks on the kids faces when they leave. At least new attractions mean that there is cash going into the park, which all of the Disney fanatics appreciate greatly. Remember that one day, the kids going around the park now will be lamenting the loss of The Seas with Nemo just like we lament the end of the old JII or Horizons. It all has to do with your defining Disney experience. Just an opinion.

 

[DisneyMusician2]

Sorry for the double post. Thought I would try and take this debate in a more constructive direction.

I would pose (to anyone) the following questions:

1. Would you be as excited about this attraction if it had just been the Laugh Floor Comedy Club? Let's assume that these would be original aliens, monsters, etc. in the same show. No mention of MI. Why or why not?

2. Would you have been as excited if it had been just the Laugh Floor Comedy Club but that it featured Monsters Inc, but not in the title or even the desciption?

Honestly, it doesn't matter to me how the new stuff comes about. It is a NEW experience with cutting-edge technology. The fact that it has MI in it helps kids connect, but it shouldn't matter for the adults out there. And the title really doesn't matter to me so much. If you called it "The Energy Adventure" or "Ellen's Energy Adventure" it is still clear from the description what is going on in there. I'm anxious to see the new show, though. Hopefully I can get back soon.

 

[Shaman]

I'm excited about ANY new attraction that is going in. I keep an open mind, and really experience the attraction for what it is. People tend to get a little too critical about NEW things and the theming and where everything belongs. Just enjoy the magic and look around for the looks on the kids faces when they leave. At least new attractions mean that there is cash going into the park, which all of the Disney fanatics appreciate greatly. Remember that one day, the kids going around the park now will be lamenting the loss of The Seas with Nemo just like we lament the end of the old JII or Horizons. It all has to do with your defining Disney experience. Just an opinion.

Excellent points! I agree.
Disney targets the younger crowds because it makes kids and parents happy. The kids will grow up one day and recall how great Disney vacations were and take THEIR kids too...so in many ways Disney is looking ahead. In my opinion Laugh Floor is infact an attraction the whole family could enjoy.

 

[wannab@dis]

Excellent points! I agree.
Disney targets the younger crowds because it makes kids and parents happy. The kids will grow up one day and recall how great Disney vacations were and take THEIR kids too...so in many ways Disney is looking ahead. In my opinion Laugh Floor is infact an attraction the whole family could enjoy.

These points have been made over and over before. They are excellent points, but they are usually ignored by the ones that lament the loss of their favorite attraction. They just don't seem to want to look for a new favorite or discover the magic in new and exciting places. I think it really goes back to what each person sees as important... the future of Disney or their short-term personal experiences. That really denotes the difference of opinions on these types of subjects.

I want Disney to still be successful and enjoyable when my grandchildren walk through the gates for the first time. Seeing my little one amazed by magic of Disney on our last trip was more magical to me than any of my previous trips.

Interesting notion along these lines... she loved the Living Seas and the reasons -- looking for Nemo in the small tanks and watching Turtle Talk. Before the trip, Finding Nemo (the movie) just didn't interest her... since then, she wants to watch it over and over.

 

[Shaman]

I think many people's opinions will change when they have littles one they can bring to WDW and that can enjoy these so-called "weak" attractions.

I try to keep an open mind; I mean Disney must know what they're doing after all...at least they must know more than most of us. The current trends are promising...so I don't understand where all doubts and complaints come from...

 

[DisneyMusician2]

Always try to see these things through a child's eyes! Some of us have forgotten how to do that...