yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
For real!
See, Disney, this is "grass and dirt backyard" done well. Plausible, practical, intriguing, complex, well art-directed . . .
Toy Story Land lacks that level of committment.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
DHS New Roundup Rodeo BBQ sit-down restaurant coming to TSL
- Thread starter lentesta
- Start date
See, Disney, this is "grass and dirt backyard" done well. Plausible, practical, intriguing, complex, well art-directed . . .
Toy Story Land lacks that level of committment.
Because Toy Story Land was built primarily to shove the characters in your face. Any theming is just dressing.
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
Which is a real shame, because it doesn't even do that well. Why is Woody 20 feet tall, but also doing Meet and Greets 30 feet away at "our" scale?
It feels like someone arbitrarily decided that people should be "the size of Green Army Men" without considering the impact that would have throughout the design.
Club Cooloholic
Well-Known Member
The kid coaster at Unis Harry Potter is more immersive. Carsland is oddly not replicated even though it's sooo much better.
Absolutely, theme be damned as long as you can get a picture with Woody then go buy a Woody doll.
Fox&Hound
Well-Known Member
You have to give it some credit- SDD is a million times better than that sad slinky ride of the other Toy Story lands. Talk about uninspired.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Agreed. the style of the land is no better than other versions of TSL but the attraction roster is easily the best.
They really could have used one more ride or show tucked in (or at least an indoor M&G) to finish off the land especially given the size of the area allocated. But at least what they have there is decent quality.
Fox&Hound
Well-Known Member
Agree completely (we often do agree on many fronts). The land needed an Al's Toy Barn Store. Needed some dedicated meet and greet space. Needed some side alleys to explore. A B/C ticket spinner or something would have been a nice addition. Also, a signature drink or dessert would have been a nice touch.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
Honestly, I think the wild inconsistency of scale bothers me more than anything as it undercuts any effort to make it a believable themed environment. For some reason, those popsicle benches have bothered me ever since they used them in A Bug's Land as they look way too small compared to everything around them to actually be made out of popsicles. It seems someone finds that a 'fun' idea, but they would have been better to go with one of the many options that would have actually fit the scale of the land.
I get that they may have to find 'creative' ways to bend the rules for things like meet and greets, but at least they could try to be creative about it rather than just shrugging their shoulders and having the characters out in the land. In general, it seems like making the scale believable (not necessarily accurate, but believable) and solving the creative challenges that entails was all too hard and thus they just decided not to bother.
Last edited:
A child's toys are always out of scale. In the movies, compare army men with Woody.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
This is where it comes down to being believable rather than accurate, and might be where the popsicle stick benches bother me the most; there is no possible explanation for such tiny popsicles to exist!
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
It’s Minor…like mine train. An off the shelf vekoma thing that has an insane wait due to lack of options.
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
That's exactly the point - in the movies, the Army Men and Woody are out of scale with each other. But in Toy Story Land you're meant to be the size of an Army Man, and somehow you can still get a picture with Woody like this:
Wouldn't it have maybe made more sense to establish our scale at their level, rather than the Army Men who only kind of rarely make appearances?
Last edited:
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
Yes, toys come in different sizes. That's not the point. The point is that Woody's size in comparison to us, to other toys, to the grass, to the fence, to the footprints, to other Woodys... it all has to be consistent, and it all has to fit with what we know from the films. If you had a mini-Buzz statue in TSL and it was as big as Woody, that would be a failure. The toys don't shrink and grow to fit their environment.
I don't actually believe you don't understand this, by the way.
I understand it just like I understand the walk-around M&G character of Mickey Mouse isn't knee high.
I can't believe you don't understand that.
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
The difference is that the entire concept of the Magic Kingdom isn't "We've shrunk you to his size!" . . . but that's the entire concept of Toy Story Land.
We'd be saying less if that concept was executed well basically anywhere within the land, but it's so wildly inconsistent it's as if no genuine effort was made.
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
Huge amounts have been written about how much difficulty Disney's designers went to to make the scale of the parks FEEL right. It was a major focus, and it works brilliantly in the Magic Kingdom.
As Yensid points out, in TSL, where the ENTIRE THEME is linked to scale, they barely tried at all. At no point does the guest feel they have shrunk (an effect Honey I Shrunk did create). Instead, they feel like they are surrounded by cheap, lightly toy-themed carnival rides and giant statues that are literally copied from other Disney properties with absolutely no regard to the specific scale of TSL. It's an embarrassment.
And yes, in certain circumstances, as with Mickey M&G, any theme park relies on the willing suspension of disbelief. But the willing suspension of disbelief is earned, and it has a breaking point. It is absolutely not a license to construct any cheap garbage you want and then expect guests to accept it.
By the way, this is another fine example of your favorite defense of modern Disney - "Well, Disney parks were always awful."
Using the standards you use now... yes, they always were awful.
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
Just so we're clear... your contention is that TSL was constructed with all the care, artistry, and skill of Main Street USA, and the haters are just too biased to see it?
You know, it is possible to acknowledge that Disney has made mistakes without forfeiting the position that the parks are generally well run. I can think they're very poorly run while also thinking MMRR is a near masterpiece, SWL and RotR are very good additions (if somewhat overrated), the Star Tours redo was excellent, Rat is fun despite some issues, C&H is unfairly lambasted, AK is a truly fantastic park that hasn't taken many major missteps, etc.