Professortango1
Well-Known Member
You should really say IMO. Mission BO is a hot mess of an attraction.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Paradise Pier Becoming Pixar Pier
- Thread starter iHeartDisneylandCats
- Start date
You should really say IMO. Mission BO is a hot mess of an attraction.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
Did you not see Aladdin? Its pretty darn close to many professional shows I've seen. Sure, the book isn't as complex because its based on a Disney cartoon and its an hour, but in terms of production value, design, and pacing the show was nearly flawless. I enjoyed it a lot more than the actual Broadway version of Aladdin. And much better than Disney's The Little Mermaid on Broadway.
Disneylover152
Well-Known Member
I saw Frozen, never saw Aladdin (but I have watched it online).
The entire Aladdin show makes me cringe and its not good compared to the Broadway production. Sure you can enjoy it more, but that doesn't mean its better. The costumes, the sets, the new song, everything about it is just okay. Aladdin's sets at DCA was 2D cardboard cut outs. My high school makes better sets. Nothing wowing like Broadway, where everything is spectacular.
vs.
Neither one is bad, but you can obviously tell that one is far worse than the other.
JohnyKaz2078
Well-Known Member
1) Tower of Terror is perfect everywhere it is or, in the case of DCA, it was. It was a fantastic ride that combined thrill with awesome story-telling and it's one of the best rides disney ever made. Mission Breakout is definitely inferior but nevertheless, it's a good ride despite it's peculiar location. And definitely not a set of screens.
2) You are talking from the perspective of someone who makes regular visits to DL and DCA. That's not the case though with 90% of guests that visit WDW. Most either come from the east or central US while others come from aboard like Canada and Latin America. And Disney is capitalizing on this.
3) TSM was quite extraordinary when it opened back in 2008.
4) So was Soarin. Many other theme parks copied Disney after that. The latest case is with Volentarium in Europa Park that takes you through a tour across Europe. The music is still good though but Peter Pan's Flight is a completely different case and they aren't comparable.
5) Incredicoaster is neither good nor bad. But Disney could have re-themed something else with this money (Goofy's Sky School is in a much more desperate need of replacement)
6) Grizzly River Run is good. Much better than Kali River Rapids. The animatronics would make it even better.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
They weren't cardboard, they were pretty standard theatrical flats with professional painting. If your high school can pull off sets that quality, then I'm very surprised. The Broadway version has higher tech pieces with trackless technology, but they lack the style and fun of the DCA version. The Broadway version also suffers from a bloated script. In the end, the Broadway version was a huge disappointment to me and I much preferred the design and direction of the DCA version. Also, if you do theatre, you should understand that a personal camcorder recording of a stage production isn't a proper representation of the look/energy of the live production. Aladdin at DCA was a fantastic production, and seeing it on youtube doesn't give you an adequate representation of it.
RescueTheDay
Well-Known Member
I’d agree. Watching Aladdin on Broadway after being a fan of the DCA was a huge letdown. Story felt overly bloated during the second act. Just didn’t have the heart that the shorter DCA version packed.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
1. Mission BO is certainly a set of screens. There's two floors and one is only a screen without any real framing set pieces like Universal does and the other is a 5 second look at a hallway to see a small electric explosion represented on a screen. There's no real mixing of mediums or integration.
2. I went to WDW 2 years ago after not being to Disneyland or DCA in about 3-5 years. Even still, I only visited DHS for TOT and TGMR. We have Midway Mania and its okay, but their version didn't even have Mr Potato Head. I don't like Star Tours 2.0. RNR is a decent coaster, but I'd much rather ride USO's The Mummy if I'm looking for an enclosed coaster through blacklight archways.
3. Midway Mania was enjoyable, but I wouldn't call it extraordinary. Most people balked at initial videos and news of how bare the attraction was without any show scenes or AA's. Luckily, the ride is engaging on a cell phone game level, but I don't think anyone was really blown away by the attraction, it was just fun.
4. Not a fan of Soarin'. Soarin' perfectly represents DCA 1.0 to me. A great idea that was stripped down to bare bones. The sensation is wonderful, the cutting of the film, the exposed ride system, and the bland queue is not Disney quality. Luckily, like Midway Mania, the sensation is enjoyable enough to overlook the many flaws and minimal nature to the attraction.
5. I'd call Incredicoaster bad. Not terrible, but it took a 7/10 attraction and knocked it down to 4/10 for me. The static figures, poor looking "scenes" and lack of imagination turned a fun relaxing coaster into a badly done darkride on a coaster track.
6. Everything is better than Kali River Rapids. That is probably the worst rafting attraction I've been on. GRR isn't terrible, it's just not "Disney." It's nicely decorated, but there's no magic to it.
Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
PiratesMansion
Well-Known Member
Aladdin was a great show, and I saw it each time I visited, but it was time for it to be switched out. It was tired. DLR isn't broadway and no show is good enough to stay indefinitely. I haven't seen the Frozen musical yet, but I absolutely support its right to be there. That was one element of DCA that was begging to be changed and I'm happy they followed through.
TROR
Well-Known Member
Aladdin was at DCA longer than Tower of Terror was.
Disneylover152
Well-Known Member
I understand that YouTube videos don't count. I actually wouldn't be making this point unless I saw it, but I did see DCL's Aladdin, and while they are not identical, they sure are VERY VERY similar.
I'm not saying that you can't like Aladdin, and I'm not trying to convince you that Aladdin on broadway is better. I'm just saying that compared anything at the Hyperion to Broadway shows is not right because they are nothing alike. Broadway shows are giant productions with jaw dropping sets, elaborate costumes, and amazing choreography and staging.
Broadway sets are elaborate, and detailed. There sets always wow the audience. The theatrical flats in Hyperion Shows don't do that for me. I was not even close to wowed during Frozen. The actors in Frozen the Musical, while talented, aren't even close to Broadway actors.
The production is not bad, I did enjoy Frozen and Aladdin on DCL, all I'm saying is its nothing close to Broadway quality. If DCL Aladdin or Frozen at the Hyperion was placed on Broadway all you would hear from critics and audiences is how cheap it is and how unworthy it is of being on Broadway. That's what happened with Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. The Broadway sets used theatrical flats and it bombed for the reason of the sets, as well as other minor reasons like story choices.
Compare this:
to this:
Neither is necessarily bad, it's just obvious to know what the higher quality one is.
I'm not saying that you can't like Aladdin, and I'm not trying to convince you that Aladdin on broadway is better. I'm just saying that compared anything at the Hyperion to Broadway shows is not right because they are nothing alike. Broadway shows are giant productions with jaw dropping sets, elaborate costumes, and amazing choreography and staging.
Broadway sets are elaborate, and detailed. There sets always wow the audience. The theatrical flats in Hyperion Shows don't do that for me. I was not even close to wowed during Frozen. The actors in Frozen the Musical, while talented, aren't even close to Broadway actors.
The production is not bad, I did enjoy Frozen and Aladdin on DCL, all I'm saying is its nothing close to Broadway quality. If DCL Aladdin or Frozen at the Hyperion was placed on Broadway all you would hear from critics and audiences is how cheap it is and how unworthy it is of being on Broadway. That's what happened with Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. The Broadway sets used theatrical flats and it bombed for the reason of the sets, as well as other minor reasons like story choices.
Compare this:
to this:
Neither is necessarily bad, it's just obvious to know what the higher quality one is.
TROR
Well-Known Member
Will I get hate for saying I think it's stupid that they cast actors who aren't even a similar race for the character they're playing? Really takes me out of the show and reminds me of real world race politics, something I don't want to think about a Disney stage musical.
Disneylover152
Well-Known Member
Nope. And I got to be honest, I think he had an interesting interpretation of Kristoff, one that I think works better.
RescueTheDay
Well-Known Member
I understand that YouTube videos don't count. I actually wouldn't be making this point unless I saw it, but I did see DCL's Aladdin, and while they are not identical, they sure are VERY VERY similar.
I'm not saying that you can't like Aladdin, and I'm not trying to convince you that Aladdin on broadway is better. I'm just saying that compared anything at the Hyperion to Broadway shows is not right because they are nothing alike. Broadway shows are giant productions with jaw dropping sets, elaborate costumes, and amazing choreography and staging.
Broadway sets are elaborate, and detailed. There sets always wow the audience. The theatrical flats in Hyperion Shows don't do that for me. I was not even close to wowed during Frozen. The actors in Frozen the Musical, while talented, aren't even close to Broadway actors.
The production is not bad, I did enjoy Frozen and Aladdin on DCL, all I'm saying is its nothing close to Broadway quality. If DCL Aladdin or Frozen at the Hyperion was placed on Broadway all you would hear from critics and audiences is how cheap it is and how unworthy it is of being on Broadway. That's what happened with Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. The Broadway sets used theatrical flats and it bombed for the reason of the sets, as well as other minor reasons like story choices.
Compare this:
to this:
Neither is necessarily bad, it's just obvious to know what the higher quality one is.
All i can say is that many shows throughout Broadways history have used simple sets. Heck most these days won’t many anyone’s jaw drop. Everything you’re speaking of is like the frosting. It adds to it, but can still be great without. It’s all about the material and performance. Aladdin even hit quite a few of your high marks as well.
Kram Sacul
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
Just pretend that everyone was adopted.
GiveMeTheMusic
Well-Known Member
If seeing people of other races in theatrical roles that may be traditionally white makes you think of real world race politics, then you have an issue. I'm not trying to put you on the defensive here or flaming you, just letting you know this is an opportunity for personal growth and the topic is worthy of introspection. It's worth thinking about why it makes you uncomfortable.
TROR
Well-Known Member
Mostly it has to do with inaccuracies. If I see an African American actor cast as a white character, that doesn't make any. Why would Elsa be white but her birth sister be black? I mean, I know that can happen in real life, I'm not stupid, but it tends not to happen in a royal family in 19th century Norway when both parents are white. I'll even say I don't like that they use wigs in the show. Maybe it's just because of how bad the wigs are, but I'd much rather see actresses with naturally light blonde and red hair. I don't mind like a streak being a clip on or something, that's understandable, but there are plenty of naturally redheaded women who are incredibly talented and could play Anna incredibly well. But instead they'll choose a racial minority. Why? It just takes you out of the story. Instead I'm thinking about the real world race relations going on in this country while I'm at Disneyland. I don't want that. I don't want to be watching some Frozen musical and be thinking about how Disney would be called a racist if they casted a white woman for Jasmine but casting a black man for Hans is ok. That's also a problem with the new auction scene. Besides being a terrible scene, I have to think about the idiotic pushback against a piece of Disney history by so-called progressives. I even thought it was weird there was a lady in a wheel chair in Aladdin.
But the inaccurate casting throughout is just one of the many problems with the show. There's also the fact there's only like three sets in the entire thing, I think. The three doors, a staircase, and icicles coming out of the ground. Everything else is just on a big dumb screen. I'm fine with minimalist sets. That's an artistic decision and I can understand it. But don't fill in the rest with screens. It ruins it. And I don't want to skip over the costumes. They're so bland. There's barely even a difference from their meet n greet costumes, if any at all. The fact Olaf is a puppet and not a man in a costume is shocking. The show's not quite Beauty and the Beast at DHS level but it's pretty low. The show's also too long and doesn't cut enough of the movie out. Aladdin did a really good job at cutting out parts of the movie as well as inserting its own things. Frozen is basically just the movie. Honestly, they probably should've cut Olaf entirely but whatever. He sells plush so that'll never happen. But none of it, none of it, upsets me as much as what they did to the exterior of the building: nothing. They did not fix the outside of the building, the one thing that desperately needed to be fixed. They had concept art and models for a new Hyperion theater with its own lobby. It would've been great. But instead they used that budget on a giant stupid screen and changing the shape of the stage. I would dislike Frozen the Musical 10x less if they left the interior alone and fixed the exterior. If they fixed the exterior there'd also be less of the stupid "Hollywood Land has always sucked so Mission Breakout is good" because fixing the exterior would've showed they had some care for the land coming.
They really blew it with that Frozen musical. I predicted it would happen after seeing Frozen in 2013 and I was excited when it was announced. Aladdin, while a great show (I saw it in person about a week after Robin Williams passed away), had been there from Jan 16th 2003 to Jan 10th 2016. I said it before, but that's longer than Tower of Terror was there (from May 5th 2004 to Jan 3rd 2017) which is ridiculous both ways. But that's a long time for a show. It was definitely time for a change and Frozen was a big thing, it was a good movie, so it all made sense. But really should've been Tangled but they probably would've messed that up too.
Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
I enjoy seeing a Black Anna, a Black Hans, an Asian Anna, and so on. Frozen still sucks, but the racial diversity is great.
I doubt 19th century Norwegian families included children with snow powers that seemingly come from nowhere and talking snowmen.
I doubt 19th century Norwegian families included children with snow powers that seemingly come from nowhere and talking snowmen.