Perspective: are we too hard on new attractions?

[Figments Friend]

That's a lot to think about, and very well-reasoned. I like your point about being a participant vs an observer of a book report. I think that carries a lot of weight (while acknowledging the initial confusion as to why you didn't see Snow White in the Snow White dark ride when it first opened.)

Newer ones I like and/or are immersive: I like the Nemo ride, probably more because I like the Nemo movie. But now that you mention it, it would be cool if you were either Nemo or "helping" Nemo find his Dad. You're right - old school vs. new in that regard. But I do think it was clever to have the real aquarium as the backdrop.

The Toy Story shooting gallery ride is pretty immersive. I always lose, but it's well done LOL.

Nemo and Mermaid are probably more geared towards children - wouldn't they expect to see the main characters in the ride?

I would disagree regarding 'Toy Story Midway Mania'.

While i find the queue and loading area to give the impression of trying to immerse you in the world of being the size of a toy fun decor, once on the actual Attraction, it's just like being in a large room with multiple big screen tvs running a Xbox gaming system.
Even though it is in 3D, this Attraction just does not 'wow' me and put me in a place i cannot experience at home.
It's basically a large scale video arcade.
Fun for a pass though once in a while, but i don't feel exhilarated, inspired, or particularly attracted to the idea of riding multiple times.
It's a 'once and done' for me per visit.

A Attraction like 'It's a Small World', 'The Enchanted Tiki Room', or 'The American Adventure' i want to experience 2, 3 or maybe even more times per visit and enjoy it every time.
And i'll do it again when i return in the future.
Those Attractions all showcase art, performance, musical appeal, and ingenious means of presenting their Shows.
One of them even has screens...although, movie screens.....but they are used in a excellent context within a already striking presentation that is nothing short of a engineering marvel.
You leave these Attractions feeling bettered by the overall experience of them.
I don't get that feeling from newer Attractions at all.

Even though i am a huge fan of Animatronics, even i can only take a couple of showings of 'Stitch's Great Escape'.
As impressive as that AA figure of Stitch is, given a choice i would rather see another showing of 'The American Adventure' or 'Country Bear Jamboree' to get my AA fix.

There is just something lacking in more modern efforts at WDW.
They lack depth...to put it plainly.

-

 

[rreading]

I find many of the simpler Fantasyland Attractions do a good job of 'placing you'.
'Peter Pan's Flight' was an example i used earlier, and it would probably not be considered a E-ticket, but it creates a wonderful 'place'.

'Voyage of The Little Mermaid' does attempt to take you under the sea...but it fails to deliver a compelling and enveloping experience in my opinion.
If the original concept presented by Tony Baxter had been built instead, it would have had a much better effect at creating that sensation of being underwater in a simple, yet cleverly effective way.
A shame that this version was not built.

I agree that for a screen-based Attraction, 'Soarin' delivers for what it is.
It is enjoyable and there are moments when you can pretend you are really flying over those scenic areas.

I think that you're at the crux of dissatisfaction over New Fantasyland: that there is an understanding that it could have been better and we haven't developed any nostalgia for the new rides.

Joe Rhode still has the first person perspective for his park, even if MK is becoming a show. Time will tell what happens to Epcot and DHS.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

I would disagree regarding 'Toy Story Midway Mania'.

While i find the queue and loading area to give the impression of trying to immerse you in the world of being the size of a toy fun decor, once on the actual Attraction, it's just like being in a large room with multiple big screen tvs running a Xbox gaming system.
Even though it is in 3D, this Attraction just does not 'wow' me and put me in a place i cannot experience at home.
It's basically a large scale video arcade.
Fun for a pass though once in a while, but i don't feel exhilarated, inspired, or particularly attracted to the idea of riding multiple times.
It's a 'once and done' for me per visit.

A Attraction like 'It's a Small World', 'The Enchanted Tiki Room', or 'The American Adventure' i want to experience 2, 3 or maybe even more times per visit and enjoy it every time.
And i'll do it again when i return in the future.
Those Attractions all showcase art, performance, musical appeal, and ingenious means of presenting their Shows.
One of them even has screens...although, movie screens.....but they are used in a excellent context within a already striking presentation that is nothing short of a engineering marvel.
You leave these Attractions feeling bettered by the overall experience of them.
I don't get that feeling from newer Attractions at all.

Even though i am a huge fan of Animatronics, even i can only take a couple of showings of 'Stitch's Great Escape'.
There is just something lacking in more modern efforts at WDW.
They lack depth...to put it plainly.

-

No, Toy Story is not exhilarating, but I feel like I'm inside of something. And it's something different than a spinner, etc.

I find the old animatronics are my faves as well - COP, Small World, Pirates, Country Bears, etc. - and of course Haunted Mansion and Jungle Cruise. This is exactly what I've seen Universal ads make fun of, yet the last time I was there (once, about 10 years ago) pretty much all the rides had that same "something missing" as some of the newer Disney rides. (I have yet to see Harry Potter and would really like to at some point. Still annoyed that WDW didn't get that.)

Tiki Room I have always been bored with, in the different iterations I've seen, one as bad as the next. Can't explain it. Bored. We don't do it anymore.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

I think that you're at the crux of dissatisfaction over New Fantasyland: that there is an understanding that it could have been better and we haven't developed any nostalgia for the new rides.

Joe Rhode still has the first person perspective for his park, even if MK is becoming a show. Time will tell what happens to Epcot and DHS.

And this goes right back to my original point - the "understanding that it could have been better" and why so many people think that. I guess the answer is obvious in some respects.

I remember our first visit after new fantasyland opened - our favorite thing was dinner at BOG. Everything else was "meh" or for little kids (stories with Belle.) VOTLM was "whatever." For 7DMT we had to go for early morning EMH to get on with less than an hour wait, which makes the reward less of one in itself. (And the whole interactive area, I kept thinking, "germs!" LOL with everybody touching everything, one after another.)

Maybe in a few years when the lines have died down and there are new kids on the block, I'll enjoy them more in context. But right now, I don't wait long for even my favorite rides - I'll just wait til night time when everyone else is on the parade route and do our favorite routine - all of those animatronic rides when it's dark out and empty with no wait. Have to do that once every trip. You can get them all in within a half hour lol.

I suspect the more I go on 7DMT (after the lines come back down to earth) the more I will appreciate the updated animatronics with rear-projected faces and so forth. That slow portion is the best part, to me.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Thanks to all for participating, I'm enjoying this one, and nobody is being nasty LOL. (no jinx!)

 

[Figments Friend]

I think that you're at the crux of dissatisfaction over New Fantasyland: that there is an understanding that it could have been better and we haven't developed any nostalgia for the new rides.

Joe Rhode still has the first person perspective for his park, even if MK is becoming a show. Time will tell what happens to Epcot and DHS.

I'm not thinking about any general area in particular...just thinking of Attractions off the top of my head that fell short of expectations i had grown accustom to by the previous caliber of Attraction experiences Disney had created.
New Fantasyland at WDW is a nice addition, and looks lovely. It does it's job, which is to add capacity, and adds in some appealing eye candy.
Attractions are beautiful to look at from the outside, but are slightly lacking on the inside in my option.
Guests however welcome the additions.

If there is any bitterness i have towards any area of WDW in particular it would most certainly be the current state of Epcot.
So many grand Attractions that used to be there that fit well into the discussion we are having here about Classic Attractions and Newer Additions.
The loss of the Original 'Journey Into Imagination' in particular is a real sore spot for me.

Let's use that Attraction as an example for the current discussion of the quality differences between the Classics and the recent editions.

The Original , opened in 1983, was a glorious imaginative journey that took you to places you had never been with two appealing original characters.
The experience inspired and empowered you in such a way that when you reached the unload station, you couldn't wait to use your 'sparks of inspiration' upstairs in the Image Works.

The current version , opened in 2002, is a mediocre mess that is neither imaginative nor a real journey to anywhere but a laboratory.
It does not really inspire you in any way, and the two 'characters' have little appeal and are in some cases annoying.
When you reach the unload station, there is little motivation to get your 'sparks of inspiration' firing..and after traversing a long empty corridor you come upon a primarily empty space with a few screen-based activities and a small gift shop.

A stark contrast to what was.
Something much more imaginative could replace the current version.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I am going to be pedantic since this keeps being repeated. Voyage of the Little Mermaid is the show at Disney's Hollywood Studios. Under the Sea: Journey of the Little Mermaid is the ride at the Magic Kingdom.

 

[Figments Friend]

And this goes right back to my original point - the "understanding that it could have been better" and why so many people think that. I guess the answer is obvious in some respects.

I remember our first visit after new fantasyland opened - our favorite thing was dinner at BOG. Everything else was "meh" or for little kids (stories with Belle.) VOTLM was "whatever." For 7DMT we had to go for early morning EMH to get on with less than an hour wait, which makes the reward less of one in itself. (And the whole interactive area, I kept thinking, "germs!" LOL with everybody touching everything, one after another.)

Ah...your favorite thing was dinner at 'Be Our Guest' in that area of the Park.
The other offerings in the area you found lacking.

I would be willing to bet that perhaps the reason you enjoyed 'Be Our Guest' best was because it was a immersive experience?
The way it is presented, YOU are a Guest of the Beast dining in his Castle.
The environment is elegantly themed, and when approaching the entrance you can start to believe you are really at that place.
It succeeds in 'setting the scene' and 'taking you into that world'.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

I am going to be pedantic since this keeps being repeated. Voyage of the Little Mermaid is the show at Disney's Hollywood Studios. Under the Sea: Journey of the Little Mermaid is the ride at the Magic Kingdom.

So noted!

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Ah...your favorite thing was dinner at 'Be Our Guest' in that area of the Park.
The other offerings in the area you found lacking.

I would be willing to bet that perhaps the reason you enjoyed 'Be Our Guest' best was because it was a immersive experience?
The way it is presented, YOU are a Guest of the Beast dining in his Castle.
The environment is elegantly themed, and when approaching the entrance you can start to believe you are really at that place.
It succeeds in 'setting the scene' and 'taking you into that world'.

Yes, all, and - the food was very good, and - alcohol. LOL.

 

[RoadTrip]

I think I am pretty open to new attractions. I am not a very complicated person... I just like what I like, and I don't always know why. I don't search for any connection to what it is I am really looking for. In the end they are theme parks and I just want to have fun. My favorite attractions in each park are a hodge-podge of old and new. If you can find a unifying factor in them you are a better person than I. My top three in each park are:

MK
Peter Pan
Carousel of Progress
TTA ( People Mover)

Epcot
Spaceship Earth
Soarin'
Mission Space

DHS
Tower of Terror
Toy Story MM
Great Movie Ride

Animal Kingdom
Kilimanjaro Safaris
Expedition Everest
The Oasis

Go figure.

 

[JoeRohdesEarring]

There is a lot of very postmodern thinking that is clearly present in current attractions design. The attitude is that it is fake, and that people know it is fake. The result in more tongue-in-cheek and the attention is misplaced on things of little consequence. Details (those items that an expert would recognize as appropriate to a setting) have now been incessantly replaced with self references, ignoring why the original references first came into existence.

I would hazard to guess that Disney attractions started getting meta with MuppetVision 3D. That this was the first time I can think of when the guests were specifically reminded that they were indeed at a theme park and experiencing a constructed reality. The fire truck with Disney license plates, the mentions of the audience being tourists, Waldorf and Statler talking about being bolted to seats. They weren't really pretending you were at Muppet Labs, they joke about it being a film that you are watching. After that, other attractions started to do the same.

The only current use of this construct in the Magic Kingdom (the park most removed from the real world where they try hardest to refrain from breaking illusion) that I can think of is in Stitch's Great Escape where Stitch gets out into the park and eats a chili dog from a vendor. Enchanted Tiki Room: Under New Management previously did the same when Iago mentioned going to the Hall of Presidents. At Epcot in O Canada Martin Short mentions having a Fastpass for Soarin'. I'm sure there are other examples but it's late and I'm tired.

Fortunately this has not become the norm, and most attractions stick to try trying to bring guests into an encapsulating world free of conflicting theme or sensory input for a short time. It's so hard to pull this off and I would argue that Disney can still do it better than anyone else.

 

[WondersOfLife]

No. No we're not too hard on new attractions. In fact, the "harder" we are on new attractions, the harder Disney will probably try with other new attractions.

 

[Stevie Amsterdam]

Now compare those decades with what we have seen since then.....
Attractions opened in the 2000s.
Think of a few that might pop into your head.

Ask yourself :
Do ANY of them truly make you feel like you are experiencing something unique and enveloping you in another time and place?
Do ANY of them pull you out of the reality of today and suddenly place you in a exciting, imaginative setting that you want to explore?
Do ANY of them leave you feeling fulfilled on some level ( whether by inspirational or emotional level, thrill level, etc. ) once pulling into the unloading station..?
Put today's Attractions to the test and see how they measure up.
Many fall quite short of those categories.

Very good questions! Besides the attractions that are already mentioned earlier, I can wholeheartedly answer all three questions with 'yes' regarding Tower of Terror and Mission: Space. Outside the US (since we're discussing Disney, right) I'd say Ratatouile in Paris does the same job for me as well. Same counts for Grizzly Mountain Runaway Mine Cars and Mystic Manor in Hong Kong, although honestly those are inspired on BTM and HM which clearly predate the 2000's.

I very much like @Figments Friend view on being an observer or participant

 

[Tony the Tigger]

I would hazard to guess that Disney attractions started getting meta with MuppetVision 3D. That this was the first time I can think of when the guests were specifically reminded that they were indeed at a theme park and experiencing a constructed reality. The fire truck with Disney license plates, the mentions of the audience being tourists, Waldorf and Statler talking about being bolted to seats. They weren't really pretending you were at Muppet Labs, they joke about it being a film that you are watching. After that, other attractions started to do the same.

The only current use of this construct in the Magic Kingdom (the park most removed from the real world where they try hardest to refrain from breaking illusion) that I can think of is in Stitch's Great Escape where Stitch gets out into the park and eats a chili dog from a vendor. Enchanted Tiki Room: Under New Management previously did the same when Iago mentioned going to the Hall of Presidents. At Epcot in O Canada Martin Short mentions having a Fastpass for Soarin'. I'm sure there are other examples but it's late and I'm tired.

Fortunately this has not become the norm, and most attractions stick to try trying to bring guests into an encapsulating world free of conflicting theme or sensory input for a short time. It's so hard to pull this off and I would argue that Disney can still do it better than anyone else.

See now, I have no objection to that and typically quite enjoy it. A bit of "breaking the fourth wall" as they would say on TV has always tickled me. "Boy Meets World" did that every once in a while. They'd say things like, "but that only happens on TV, and this is real." Or, "why would they move a show to Friday night? They are killing it!" ( after the show got moved to Friday night LOL.)

I enjoy that – I see it as letting the audience in on the joke and not taking itself quite so seriously.

Yes, by all means acknowledge that we are in a themepark, because we are.

However I see how it can get tiresome if overused.

 

[JIMINYCR]

We are too hard on attractions and I think sometimes rightly so. We want Disney and expect Disney to give us things that are better than anyone else has. We have the image of the Imagineers of being able to give us the ultimate experience that no one else can. Also theres the build up we are given prior to any project being completed. Theres so much hype and speculation about whats to come ( a new fantastic experience ) that we get too enthralled with the hopes of an out of this world attraction. We see some of the things "other parks" are putting out there and we are waiting for Disney to WOW us with something just as trilling or better. When that fails, we feel like weve been let down, blame the bean counters and point fingers.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

We are too hard on attractions and I think sometimes rightly so. We want Disney and expect Disney to give us things that are better than anyone else has. We have the image of the Imagineers of being able to give us the ultimate experience that no one else can. Also theres the build up we are given prior to any project being completed. Theres so much hype and speculation about whats to come ( a new fantastic experience ) that we get too enthralled with the hopes of an out of this world attraction. We see some of the things "other parks" are putting out there and we are waiting for Disney to WOW us with something just as trilling or better. When that fails, we feel like weve been let down, blame the bean counters and point fingers.

Agreed.

So if the snow white dark ride came out today… Fail?

 

[JIMINYCR]

Agreed.

So if the snow white dark ride came out today… Fail?

Not if its done right. They have the talent and resources to do it right, its wether they risk doing it right.
But probably a fail only because Disney doesnt want to give us something thats too scary or too "dark" because then they will get guests whining that little Suzy wet her pants and had nightmares... but then complain that Uni has the better thrill rides.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I would hazard to guess that Disney attractions started getting meta with MuppetVision 3D. That this was the first time I can think of when the guests were specifically reminded that they were indeed at a theme park and experiencing a constructed reality. The fire truck with Disney license plates, the mentions of the audience being tourists, Waldorf and Statler talking about being bolted to seats. They weren't really pretending you were at Muppet Labs, they joke about it being a film that you are watching. After that, other attractions started to do the same.

The only current use of this construct in the Magic Kingdom (the park most removed from the real world where they try hardest to refrain from breaking illusion) that I can think of is in Stitch's Great Escape where Stitch gets out into the park and eats a chili dog from a vendor. Enchanted Tiki Room: Under New Management previously did the same when Iago mentioned going to the Hall of Presidents. At Epcot in O Canada Martin Short mentions having a Fastpass for Soarin'. I'm sure there are other examples but it's late and I'm tired.

Fortunately this has not become the norm, and most attractions stick to try trying to bring guests into an encapsulating world free of conflicting theme or sensory input for a short time. It's so hard to pull this off and I would argue that Disney can still do it better than anyone else.

I'm not really talking about a deliberate breaking the fourth wall, but a mindset were it is not just ignore but sort of laughed at.

 

[SyracuseDisneyFan]

I haven't been on 7DMT, but I have been on the new Little Mermaid ride and Toy Story Midway Mania. I had fun on the Little Mermaid ride and Toy Story Midway Mania's so much fun.