Perspective: are we too hard on new attractions?

[lazyboy97o]

Do those increases account not only for inflation, but significantly greater state and federal health and safety guidelines, greater scrutiny by the legal department today, plus a top-heavy infrastructure at Imagineering that undoubtedly is less efficient than it was 50 years ago? I doubt it. You simply can't compare the development environment of 50 years ago to the development environment of today.

The bloat within Walt Disney Imagineering isn't a default that must be forgiven. When it comes to Walt Disney World the codes are created specifically for Walt Disney World and code officials do nothing but work with Walt Disney World; that should be an enormous advantage.

 

[1023]

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.

-

Who wouldn't want to walk up to a Country Bear and give him a hug? In the real world hugging a bear is foolish. The fun, anthropomorphic bear AA connects with you. He addresses you. He brings you into his world and away from your own. The connection can be had because he physically exists in front of you. He looks at you. (By the way, the realism of an AAs eyes are the of the most important facial feature for connection)

The re-tread of Mission to Mars that was created by imagineers originally was vastly superior to the original attraction. It combines monaural sound with physical effects that created a frightening immersive experience. The AE was wonderful marriage of innovative new tech and old tech. You were connected to the attraction because of all it's elements.

Then came the STENCH remodel. The AA does little to improve the experience and most of the show effects are hit and miss. It is not an immersive experience. It is annoying. You are not connected to this attraction in anyway.

Will some of the newer attractions build "nostalgia" for guests many years from now, who knows. I do know that the difference in attractions that connect with you and attractions that do not, isn't difficult to realize when you experience them.

*1023*

 

[RoadTrip]

The bloat within Walt Disney Imagineering isn't a default that must be forgiven. When it comes to Walt Disney World the codes are created specifically for Walt Disney World and code officials do nothing but work with Walt Disney World; that should be an enormous advantage.

Good point. Something could be done about the bloat, and probably should be.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Who wouldn't want to walk up to a Country Bear and give him a hug? In the real world hugging a bear is foolish. The fun, anthropomorphic bear AA connects with you. He addresses you. He brings you into his world and away from your own. The connection can be had because he physically exists in front of you. He looks at you. (By the way, the realism of an AAs eyes are the of the most important facial feature for connection)

The re-tread of Mission to Mars that was created by imagineers originally was vastly superior to the original attraction. It combines monaural sound with physical effects that created a frightening immersive experience. The AE was wonderful marriage of innovative new tech and old tech. You were connected to the attraction because of all it's elements.

Then came the STENCH remodel. The AA does little to improve the experience and most of the show effects are hit and miss. It is not an immersive experience. It is annoying. You are not connected to this attraction in anyway.

Will some of the newer attractions build "nostalgia" for guests many years from now, who knows. I do know that the difference in attractions that connect with you and attractions that do not, isn't difficult to realize when you experience them.

*1023*

I get a little claustrophobic in that one. I agree the scary alien version was better, although never a favorite. The stitch version we did once only once.

Do you think they know by now that it's not so great?

They make movies they think will be great that bomb. (Oh, Tomorrowland - such a promising beginning LOL.) A lot of things might sound great at the drawing board – and it's very easy sometimes to come to a conclusion that wins over a small room full of people, but does not translate in a wide roll out. I wonder if they're thinking of what else they can do with that tube – retrofit another ride – or do away with it altogether.

Btw as much as I am not a fan of country anything, I love country bear jamboree! I have never missed it on one trip. "There's blood on the saddle… " my fave lol

 

[Figments Friend]

Who wouldn't want to walk up to a Country Bear and give him a hug? In the real world hugging a bear is foolish. The fun, anthropomorphic bear AA connects with you. He addresses you. He brings you into his world and away from your own. The connection can be had because he physically exists in front of you. He looks at you. (By the way, the realism of an AAs eyes are the of the most important facial feature for connection)

The re-tread of Mission to Mars that was created by imagineers originally was vastly superior to the original attraction. It combines monaural sound with physical effects that created a frightening immersive experience. The AE was wonderful marriage of innovative new tech and old tech. You were connected to the attraction because of all it's elements.

Then came the STENCH remodel. The AA does little to improve the experience and most of the show effects are hit and miss. It is not an immersive experience. It is annoying. You are not connected to this attraction in anyway.

Will some of the newer attractions build "nostalgia" for guests many years from now, who knows. I do know that the difference in attractions that connect with you and attractions that do not, isn't difficult to realize when you experience them.

*1023*

Indeed, and well laid out in layman's terms.
I was touching on that 'connection' earlier, but i like your examples used for AA based experiences.

I'm a huge fan of Animatronics, and have worked in the animation field with puppeteered creations and Animatronics in the past.
The art of giving a figure a believable and entertaining performance is a fine art and a great challenge, whether it be programming a mechanized figure or a hand manipulated puppet.
I loved doing that work...and still do.
You are creating a connection with your audience through a figure that within the context of the Show can be 'alive' for them.
Most people have no idea how complex a process it is to create that performance. So many things to consider.
It really is a fine art, much like graphic art or Traditional Animation provides.

I've always enjoyed the Stage based AA presentations, but today it is considered 'old school'.
I would love to see a new type of Stage based AA Show but with today's budget roller coaster and general attitude towards such presentations i don't see it happening anytime soon.
The perspective within the Company seems to be that today's Guests want 'thrills'.

Sometimes i think they forget that a 'thrill' can also mean having a completely enveloping experience in a themed environment.
That alone can be a 'thrill' for some of us.
The misconception that only fast thrill rides or coaster Attractions are what is 'wanted' is partially misplaced in some respects.
I don't think most people would associate 'Pirates of The Caribbean' with the 'thrill ride' category...but it is one of the TOP Disney Attractions ever created.
It is right up there with 'The Haunted Mansion' and neither of them are 'thrill rides' in today's context of the word.
But why are they do successful..?
It is because they are incredibly themed Attractions that take you to a place you could not otherwise go...and you have a amazing experience in that place.
The eye candy, settings and scenes, the sense of being completely enveloped in that environment takes your breath away and creates a magical, memorable, and UNIQUE experience.
Almost 50 years later, and to this date still nothing has topped those two in overall scope, execution of Show, and appeal with Guests.
This is why the 'World of Harry Potter' themed areas over at Universal has been such a big hit over at Universal Orlando.....and Cars Land over on the West Coast at DCA.
Guests eat this stuff up.

Let's hope Disney invests more in such heavily themed additions that have substance and offer more then just physical thrills.
I might be old school , but i like to have some cerebral thrills to.
I guess that's why i loved EPCOT Center so much...and those Attractions of yore that used to be there.
They left you in awe...they inspired you...they took you to places you could not otherwise go.
And you remembered them long after you had left the Park.
How many of today's more recent additions can claim that...?




Oh...and i agree, hugging a Country Bear is a must !

 

[ABigBrassBand]

After I initially rode VoTLA I was thinking the thing regarding story--how much do rides actually tell a story, and is a good narrative a part of the ride? I wish they had tied up the story of VoTLA better, but then I thought about Splash Mountain and how little sense that story makes. Sure, it's based on the animated part from its movie, but even then they edit the story significantly (I assume to remove the "tar-baby" portion) and in the end you have Br'er Rabbit thrown into the briar patch but then living there towards the end, implying that he had lived there all along?

What that ride has going for itself is the sheer amount of detail and ride quality regardless of story, but it definitely got me thinking about what we actually expect.

 

[Figments Friend]

After I initially rode VoTLA I was thinking the thing regarding story--how much do rides actually tell a story, and is a good narrative a part of the ride? I wish they had tied up the story of VoTLA better, but then I thought about Splash Mountain and how little sense that story makes. Sure, it's based on the animated part from its movie, but even then they edit the story significantly (I assume to remove the "tar-baby" portion) and in the end you have Br'er Rabbit thrown into the briar patch but then living there towards the end, implying that he had lived there all along?

What that ride has going for itself is the sheer amount of detail and ride quality regardless of story, but it definitely got me thinking about what we actually expect.

'Splash Mountain' does take some creative license with it's original source material as far as it's 'story' goes.
The 'tar baby' references were substituted with bee hives being used to catch Br'er Rabbit with their sticky honey instead of tar.
All versions of the Attraction feature a scene of Br'er Fox using bee hives in this way, typically before or after the 'laughin' place' scene.

The scenes go by you so quickly ( especially in Disneyland's Original ) that it can be difficult to get a sense of what the story is without prior knowledge.
It took some time before it dawned on me there was a actual tale involved, and that came primarily from the musical accompaniment.
Now when I ride, it is clear as day what the story is having been able to better familiarize myself with the Attraction scenes.

The Attraction story, for those who may not be aware -
Br'er Rabbit grows bored with his life living in his home in the briar patch and decides to leave for more exciting adventures.
He is warned not to venture off, but the temptation of more exciting adventures around the bend are too tempting.
He runs into trouble in the form of Br'er Fox and Br'er Bear, who after several shown attempts finally capture him.
As the fox is thinking about how best to cook him, Br'er Rabbit tricks him into throwing him into the briar patch by pretending he is very frightened of the idea.
Br'er Fox falls for it, and flings him down into it ( represented by the final plunge ) and the rabbit escapes unscathed.
A grand celebration welcomes Br'er Rabbit back home to the briar patch ( showboat finale ) and he vows to never leave home again.

WDW's version does a better job of telling the above story by laying out the scenes and expanding on certain elements, making it easier to understand and 'read' more clearly while floating by at a quick pace in your log.
I adore the Disneyland Original, but it is more chllanging to enjoy the Attraction scenes as you speed by them far more quickly.
Regardless, the Attraction is a winner due to having all the desireable aspects one would expect in a high end, headlining Attraction.

Back then, Attractions delivered.
Today, it seems very hit or miss.

 

[Brer Panther]

One thing I like about the Florida version is that it gives Brer Fox more to do. In the California version, you see him once after the singing geese and then he dissappears until after the Laughing Place.

 

[ABigBrassBand]

*text*

Well, yes, I'm familiar with the artistic license they took when adapting the story for the ride, but that wasn't exactly what I was saying. Sure, the parts of the story are there, but--just like *UtS--there is holes in some places (what is the "laughin' place"? why would Brer Rabbit go there if he wasn't tied up, like in the movie? there's no explanation and it serves little purpose in the story other than aesthetic effects with an implication of the moral of the story, "don't get too carefree"? maybe?).

I wasn't questioning if the attraction was well-done or not, because it clearly is, I was just questioning the type of storytelling we're typically used to, and to point out that there are similar holes in other attractions to *UtS.

 

[Billq]

I believe Disney is putting too much emphasis on the attraction mode of transportation instead of the destination. They should focus more on the actual story than how you get into the attraction. The original concept was to put guests into the story and make them believe they are part of it, but lately the focus seems to be with amusement style vehicles. Disney is nothing like an amusement park. As with 7dmt I liked it but was still disappointed, I wanted to experience more of the story, and it had practically no story to It, the focus is completely on the ride vehicle. Disney isn't in the amusement business it is supposed to be about the story, that's why I go to Disney instead of Six Flags.

 

[Billq]

I believe Disney has no competition in Fla to worry about, Universal studios IS an amusement park focusing totally on the rides and Sea World focuses on wildlife. Disney just focus on your stories and people will come. People come to Fla for Disney not Orlando's other amusement's

 

[lazyboy97o]

I believe Disney has no competition in Fla to worry about, Universal studios IS an amusement park focusing totally on the rides and Sea World focuses on wildlife. Disney just focus on your stories and people will come. People come to Fla for Disney not Orlando's other amusement's

Your assessment is completely wrong.

 

[blueboxdoctor]

The mine ride is just kind of boring. Sure, the actually ride is well made and the mine part is neat, but it's too short and the ride seems to lack any charm. Yes, the old Snow White ride was about as low budget as you could get, but it had charm to it, but overall I'm not in a rage that it is gone nor do I hate the new mine coaster.

For a different example, I don't like what they did with the updated Test Track but not because it's basically Tron now. They put in new touch screens to make your cars, which is decent enough, but the software feels very old (like a decade old) with poor, low res cars built and no real way to see if you won or what the benefits are to each build (I would have liked maybe in line for there to be videos or visuals going through why we may want a hybrid (and be bored out of our minds driving) compared to a sports car or whatever else. But my main issue is how poorly the software was designed for that main gimmick they added.

Stuff like that just feels underwhelming, like they could have done better but stopped. I think it's important to be critical, if not companies would start to get comfortable and slow down on progressing their product(s).

 

[UpAllNight]

I don't think people are harsh I just think there's a justified expectation that Disney will be pioneers in their field. I like coming off a ride thinking 'only Disney could have done that'....unfortunately at WDW the new attractions haven't delivered that feeling. Yet Disney are still capable of this; I've watched videos of Disneyland Forever and I'm blown away, Radiator Springs looks astonishing, Shanghai Disney looks phenomenal....Avatar will be an immersive place but let's hope the attractions live up to expectations.

Case in point, why was the Avatar boat ride listed as a C-ticket on the plans?? Why settle for a C when the potentilla is there for a brilliant E? It's just a general feeling of, well we have 1 E in the land already so a C will do. Allegedly the plans have changed somewhat, but I'm doubtful the boat will be an E...why not? It's hardly as if we have been spoiled by E tickets this decade.