PHOTOS - New interactive Haunted Mansion queue opens for guest previews today

[puntagordabob]

Awesome stuff..... ))

 

[smk]

http://www.wdwmagic.com/Attractions...e-opens-for-guest-previews-this-afternoon.htm

Incredible job by WDI on this!

I can't wait to see it all in September!

 

[fyn]

Nothing the Ghost Host says in his spiel implies in any way that the ghosts inside the building have materialized before. Can you point to something?

Oh, I didn't mean to frighten you prematurely, hhmm. The real chills come later. Now, as they say "look alive", and we'll continue our little tour, and lets all stay together, please.

Foreshadowing. He knows what's going to happen. Best explanation, to me, is that this is because it happens to guests of the mansion regularly.

Do not pull down on the safety bar please, I will lower it for you. Heed this warning, the spirits will materialize only if you remain quietly seated, at all times. Oh yes, and no flash pictures please, we spirits are frightfully sensitive, to bright lights.

I mean, he kind of just says it right there, doesn't he?

If you should decide to join us, final arrangements, may be made at the end of the tour.

Certainly the idea is that guests tour the mansion regularly, so this partially supports the idea of "business as usual."

The happy haunts have recieved your sympathetic vibrations, and are beginning to materialize. They're assembling for a swinging wake, and they'll be expecting me. I'll see you all, a little later.

Nothing here suggests this is a surprise. And more, the host says the other haunts will be expecting him to join them, which is certainly indicative of a 'regular' occurance. I suppose you could argue that he's expected given how this has never happened before (and is thus a special occasion) - but that's more of a stretch.

As the moon climbs high over the oak tree
Spooks arrive for the midnight spree
Creepy creeps with eerie eyes
Start to shriek and harmonize
Grim grinning ghosts come out to socialize

Grim Grinning Ghosts, in almost every verse (like the one above) is telling you, the guest, how this happens all the time. The formula is [spooky thing happens] = [Ghosts come out to socialize]

I do respect the amount of analysis you've done, but most of what you cite isn't really compelling evidence. To get into more subjective matters, the tone of the Host's spiel, to me, is completely "business as usual." There's no surprise. If anything, it's specifically written that way as a counter to the surprises on the ride.

To be honest, I don't think all of the elements you talk about were even meant to tell a coherent story. It's always been a series of vignettes to me, which is why every single element doesn't have to make sense as part of a whole.

 

[redshoesrock]

You haven't explained the Caretaker's look of utter astonishment, not just fear. You haven't explained why he would go out there at night to do some task if this happens all the time and it frightens him so much his knees knock. You haven't explained why he's looking all around, lantern aloft, instead of getting the hell out of there. All of this makes sense if this has never happened before; none of it makes sense if it has.

Nothing the Ghost Host says in his spiel implies in any way that the ghosts inside the building have materialized before. Can you point to something?

Are you saying that when the ghosts go back behind the doors every day and start banging on them and yowling desperately, it's all play-acting on their part? And when the Ghost Host notes that they're having trouble getting through (in the original spiel), that's an act too, since they all know they'll be sprung in a few minutes, like they are every night? Alternate view: it's exactly what it looks like, and he's telling you the truth. Which view is more credible?

Here's two scenarios:

Number 1: "This is your lucky day. You have arrived at just the moment when the spell has finally been broken and the spooks can finally materialize for a big party. Your sympathetic vibrations did the trick!"

Number 2: "Here the ghosts are, coming out for a party, like they do all the time."

Which is more typical of classic Disney showmanship? (Hint: you round the corner just as the rhino traps the safari, you escape from the burning town just as it's about to collapse and explode).

Wow. That's so incredibly wrong. I am 1000% in disagreement. I've read your blog, your other posts in the Eddie Sotto thread, and for someone who is an expert on the Mansion...you're still wrong.

To begin, as you state in the Eddie Sotto thread, the objections to the new queue come down to:

The criticism of the new queue out there comes in three flavors: aesthetic objections (too cartoony, Toon-Townish, dopey, garish), objections based on show flow (big noisy ghost-fest before you even get in the door of the place, ruins the soft creepy build-up), and logical incongruity with the HM world (this is MY thing). I agree with almost all of the objections in the first two categories, but those squawks are being made by plenty of people, and the perpetrators can shrug a lot of it off as a matter of taste (however dishonestly). But the logical errors go right to the nub.

Objection 1 (aesthetics) - this argument can never be won, as aesthetics always come down to personal taste. It's an argument that started way back when Marc Davis and Claude Coats asked the question, "Should the Haunted Mansion be more scary or more funny?", and they found themselves on different sides. I've encountered people who run the gamut with the Mansion from "meh, tame" to "zOMG!!11!! Scary!!" So it's very difficult, and I would say nearly impossible, to pinpoint it down. It's much like what Judge Potter Stewart said about the threshold test for ography, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["ography"]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it." In this instance with the queue, frankly, I don't see it.

Objection 2 (show flow ruined) - This is simply a rehash of Objection 1 couched in different terms; instead of "aesthetics" and "too cartoony" it's now "show flow" and "ruins the soft creepy build-up". Myself, I feel that experiencing the Haunted Mansion in the cold light of day "ruins the soft creepy build-up", but guests have been doing it in Cali since 1969 and Florida since 1971 with nary a complaint.

Objection 3 (logical contradictions) - These, however, can be discussed as correct or incorrect. To begin, as you state in the Eddie Sotto thread:

As I have said elsewhere, you can make a pretty water-tight case that your experience in the HM is supposed to be taken as something unique, something that hasn't happened before today. The ghosts who materialize at the HM have never done that before, at least not here.

Nothing the Ghost Host says in his spiel implies in any way that the ghosts inside the building have materialized before. Can you point to something?

Yes. I can. Twice.

1. Liberty Square Riverboat - Near the end of your trip around the Rivers of America, Sam Clemens comments via the recorded spiel when the Mansion is in sight: You see that brick mansion over yonder there in the woods? I’ve heard folks hereabouts say it’s haunted. They say it was built on sacred Indian burial ground and it’s filled with spirits..." (emphasis mine). Now Sam goes on to say that he thinks maybe the people seeing spirits are full of "spirits" (read: alcohol), but of course, that's the joke inside the joke. Sam may think the people seeing the ghosts are just drunks, but we (the guests) know better. We already know it's haunted. And how, prey tell, do we, the guests, know this? Because of reason number two.

2. It's called "The Haunted Mansion" - This reason alone is so blatantly obvious and reduces a good portion of your argument to moot that the only explanation I could think of was in scrounging through minutia you failed to step back and see what was looming right in-front of you.

From dictionary.com - "haunted": inhabited or frequented by ghosts (example: a haunted castle)

It's not called "The Creepy Mansion", or "The Eerie Mansion", or "The Scary Mansion". All those adjectives are ambiguous enough to not come right out and say what you'll experience. A more Disney example is the Twilight Zone Tower of Terror, which gives you an idea of what you'll see without actually letting you know. Not so with The Haunted Mansion. Anything haunted has ghosts, period. If you look at your day guide (or the sign at the entrance of the queue) and go to something called The Haunted Mansion, you will expect to see ghosts. These two reasons are clear-cut proof that ghosts have been seen and materialized at the Mansion before; otherwise, how would Sam Clemens have heard the Mansion is haunted? And if it wasn't haunted, or ghosts have never been seen there, why then is it called The Haunted Mansion? Moving on:

Are you saying that when the ghosts go back behind the doors every day and start banging on them and yowling desperately, it's all play-acting on their part?

Yes, I am. Isn't it obvious why? No? Think. What are ghosts supposed to do when the living come to where they haunt? They scare them. That's what ghosts do; they scare people. The ghosts recognize your presence in the Mansion, but since they have not yet materialized and felt your "sympathetic vibrations" (a phrase I feel has been misinterpreted over the years), they are doing what they can to scare you. Because, as the Ghost Host tells us, that's what ghosts do: "practicing their terror with ghoulish delight."

And when the Ghost Host notes that they're having trouble getting through (in the original spiel), that's an act too, since they all know they'll be sprung in a few minutes, like they are every night? Alternate view: it's exactly what it looks like, and he's telling you the truth. Which view is more credible?

The thing to remember with the Ghost Host is his tone of voice and how he turns a phrase, so to speak. Everything he says is either sarcastic or couched in doublespeak. The part you're speaking of is The Corridor of Doors where the Ghost Host says:

*All our ghosts have been dying to meet you. This one [the coffin in the conservatory] can hardly contain himself. Unfortunately, they all seem to be having trouble getting through.*

I could point out that since that part of the spiel has been taken out, it isn't relevant anymore but it has been part of the ride for many a year prior. In this part, the Ghost Host is being sarcastic; why would a ghost have trouble passing through a door, or any object for that matter? Ghosts are incorporeal by nature; they can easily pass through doors as they can pass through your Doom Buggy to sit with you at the end. The point of it all is, as I've said before, to scare you. Ghosts right on the edge of bursting out of the door to do...who knows? Unspeakable terror?

The Ghost Host (in a bit of monologue that used to be used at DL), expresses a touch of uncertainty about whether Leota can fix the current problem ("Perhaps Madame Leota can establish contact..."), which would make little sense if they went through this every other night. And it's more Disney that way: You lucky person, you just happen to be here to witness a unique event, and maybe even help trigger it with your "sympathetic vibrations."

I don't "completely" agree with that assessment. The Ghost Host's line:

*Perhaps Madame Leota can establish contact. She has a remarkable head for materializing the disembodied.*

is, as everything he says, couched in both sarcasm and doublespeak. The Ghost Host knows very well that Madame Leota can use your "sympathetic vibrations"; he's merely playing around with you. A more extreme example of this kind of talk would be the interactions between Hannibal Lecter and Clarice Starling. In this example, Lecter is the Ghost Host; all-knowing, slightly amused by our presence (Clarice), helpful, but always teetering on the edge of scary or dangerous. As far as the "sympathetic vibrations", if you notice, that is when the Mansion seemingly flips from more eerie and scary to more fun and free-wheeling. My interpretation: it's because your vibrations are "sympathetic", i.e. - it's like saying to the ghosts, "Hey, we're all cool here." The ghosts sense it and decide to stop trying to scare you and "let their hair down" so you can see what "really" goes on at the Mansion.

You haven't explained the Caretaker's look of utter astonishment, not just fear. You haven't explained why he would go out there at night to do some task if this happens all the time and it frightens him so much his knees knock. You haven't explained why he's looking all around, lantern aloft, instead of getting the hell out of there. All of this makes sense if this has never happened before; none of it makes sense if it has.

Here's two scenarios:

Number 1: "This is your lucky day. You have arrived at just the moment when the spell has finally been broken and the spooks can finally materialize for a big party. Your sympathetic vibrations did the trick!"

Number 2: "Here the ghosts are, coming out for a party, like they do all the time."

I put those two different quotes together to make my point: you're assuming an "all or nothing" scenario in which either everything you see on the ride happens every night, or absolutely nothing has ever happen until you showed up. The correct answer is -

Number 3: "Some small creepy things have been noticed at the mansion; people have even seen a ghost or two but (like most hauntings) it's nothing on a grand, huge scale. The ghosts, however, after feeling the sympathetic vibrations of their most recent visitors, decide to throw a huge party ("swinging wake") with their sympathetic "living" friends in tow. The caretaker has never seen anything happen like this -on that scale before- which accounts for his reaction.

The key to all that is "on that scale before". Others may have gone into the Mansion, gotten scared by the ghosts, and got the hell out of dodge. You (the guests) with your sympathetic vibrations are different, so the ghosts have decided to relax and have a party. The caretaker, who has probably seen a few quiet, creepy things, is looking in as you put it, utter astonishment [and] fear because he's never seen anything like this on such a huge scale before.

The logical contradictions introduced by this queue just go on and on. How is it that ghosts that have not never yet materialized at the Mansion (organ banshees) are commemorated in stone on old crypts? The graveyard band is made up of musicians from different times and places (18th c. bandsmen uniforms on some, medieval garb on others), they've gathered here to the HM, and now for the first time they've materialized. They've never played together before now, but the new queue crypt alludes to the band in carvings on the side depicting their instruments. Huh? How could that happen? And the instruments are realistic on one side of the crypt, and Museum-of-the-Weirdy on the other side. Er, why? And how did three hitchhikers (one of whom is a prisoner with ball-and-frickin'-chain) suddenly become family members and residents of this New England mansion, buried in the family plot? Why are the tombstones of Francis Xavier and Grandpa Marc displayed like signs, as if they had no bodies buried in front of them? How did all the singing busts become family members, buried in this same family plot? Why are there permanent busts out here in broad daylight in the style of interior mansion artwork only as that artwork will later be distorted by ghosts inside the mansion so as to disorient you once you're trapped inside? "Or is it your imagination?" is now a meaningless question, since we can see right here that such distortions are not imaginary. (I'm talking about the bust of the guy with the snake all over him, plainly in the style of George with the hatchet in his head at the bottom of the widow stretchroom portrait. I argue this particular point here.)

All of that is predicated on your assumption that no one has ever seen any ghosts there before and ghosts have never appeared -at all-, both of which I have shown to be incorrect, which really makes much of what you say in the above paragraph moot. Everything else in it (tombstones displayed like signs, instruments look normal on one side/weird on the other, etc) goes all the way back to Objection One (aesthetics), which as I've stated earlier is mere personal opinion and can't be quantified in a right/wrong way.

My own opinion: the new additions to the queue are great and add a nice new element to an already outstanding attraction. Calling it "criminal vandalism" and the "worst moment in their 42 year history" is sour grapes. You're entitled to your opinion, but understand it's sour grapes.

 

[FigmentJedi]

Well, I'm impressed right now...

 

[jakeman]

Well, I'm impressed right now...

By the queue or the previous post? :lookaroun

 

[Krack]

2. It's called "The Haunted Mansion" - This reason alone is so blatantly obvious and reduces a good portion of your argument to moot that the only explanation I could think of was in scrounging through minutia you failed to step back and see what was looming right in-front of you.

I'm not sure I agree with the "This is the first time ghosts have ever materialized notion" (in fact, I don't, even though he states a compelling case), but since you were being so snide to HBGB I don't mind pointing out how wrong this "blatantly obvious" point is. Have you looked at your avatar lately?

According to your logic, the name of the attraction meant that aliens had routinely been encountered by X-S foul-ups. But how could that be? These previous encounters are never mentioned and nobody in the show ever behaves as though this is a more-than-once occurrence.

The name of the attraction does not always factor into the internal logical consistency of the show.

 

[jakeman]

I'm not sure I agree with the "This is the first time ghosts have ever materialized notion" (in fact, I don't, even though he states a compelling case), but since you were being so snide to HBGB I don't mind pointing out how wrong this "blatantly obvious" point is. Have you looked at your avatar lately?

According to your logic, the name of the attraction meant that aliens had routinely been encountered by X-S foul-ups. But how could that be? These previous encounters are never mentioned and nobody in the show ever behaves as though this is a more-than-once occurrence.

The name of the attraction does not always factor into the internal logical consistency of the show.

His logic is still sound with the Alien Encounter example.

If I recall, I encountered an alien in the pre-show.

 

[imagineer boy]

I'm not a fan of the new queue, but even I'm starting to think the ride is being a little too overanalyzed. :lol:

But asthetics and tension build up really are important to the HM. Because the rides are like movies, they need proper build up. Look at Jaws, its very eerie and spooky at the beginning because you don't see the shark. The new queue is simply too much too soon, like showing the shark at the begining of the movie which reduces tension and build up.

 

[Master Yoda]

I'm not a fan of the new queue, but even I'm starting to think the ride is being a little too overanalyzed. :lol:

But asthetics and tension build up really are important to the HM. Because the rides are like movies, they need proper build up. Look at Jaws, its very eerie and spooky at the beginning because you don't see the shark. The new queue is simply too much too soon, like showing the shark at the begining of the movie which reduces tension and build up.

That is pretty much par for the course at any extreme level of fandom.

 

[Pioneer Hall]

I'm not sure I agree with the "This is the first time ghosts have ever materialized notion" (in fact, I don't, even though he states a compelling case), but since you were being so snide to HBGB I don't mind pointing out how wrong this "blatantly obvious" point is. Have you looked at your avatar lately?

According to your logic, the name of the attraction meant that aliens had routinely been encountered by X-S foul-ups. But how could that be? These previous encounters are never mentioned and nobody in the show ever behaves as though this is a more-than-once occurrence.

The name of the attraction does not always factor into the internal logical consistency of the show.

The title of the ride made sense before the mishap with the alien happens. Remember that one lucky volunteer in the audience was supposed to meet with an "alien" by being transported to XS headquarters. It just happened that when Chairman Clench decided to change things around that everyone got to encounter and alien...and this one was a bit more dangerous than the XS Tech employees.

 

[Krack]

His logic is still sound with the Alien Encounter example.

If I recall, I encountered an alien in the pre-show.

I disagree. "Hey, you're about to see an alien" was never an integral part of the pre-show. The alien in the pre-show (Skippy), is treated as a regular-occurrence in the internal consistency of the AI attraction's "world". Skippy is an afterthought. Based on the behavior of the SIR (robot host) and the technology portrayed, you don't even know that Skippy is an "alien" - it's clearly the future, for all we know, Skippy's species may now be indigenous to Earth. Regardless, the lead-up to the main show does not treat "seeing an alien" as something important, integral or central to your reason for being there at the X-S building.

The title of the ride made sense before the mishap with the alien happens. Remember that one lucky volunteer in the audience was supposed to meet with an "alien" by being transported to XS headquarters. It just happened that when Chairman Clench decided to change things around that everyone got to encounter and alien...and this one was a bit more dangerous than the XS Tech employees.

I could be wrong, but I don't remember any mention of aliens or "going to see an alien" by anyone in the attraction until the women asks "Since when does Clench have wings???"

EDIT: I just watched a video of the ride on Youtube, as far as I can tell, I'm right. As an aside, and not wanting to threadjack, the audience reaction was awesome; it's hard to believe they would rip out something with that kind of reaction rather than just better inform the guests not to bring their young children inside.

 

[TestTrack]

Wow a lot of people here care WAY too much for their own good ...

As for me, these are fun little things that tie into the ride. HM to me has always succeeded more on being funny with its dark humor rather than scary. These little things out front just add to that.

My only concerns is what was somewhat shown in the first video:

1. Too much hands on...will it stand the test of time...I hope so. I am impressed that the pull-strings on toy story mania haven't broke more(or perhaps I haven't heard of them breaking).

2. You can see this at the books moving in and out. Too many kids holding up the line flow. Dad's having to try to move them all along. I picture irresponsible parents letting there kids hang way back in the line instead of moving forward.

 

[Pioneer Hall]

I disagree. "Hey, you're about to see an alien" was never an integral part of the pre-show. The alien in the pre-show (Skippy), is treated as a regular-occurrence in the internal consistency of the AI attraction's "world". Skippy is an afterthought. Based on the behavior of the SIR (robot host) and the technology portrayed, you don't even know that Skippy is an "alien" - it's clearly the future, for all we know, Skippy's species may now be indigenous to Earth. Regardless, the lead-up to the main show does not treat "seeing an alien" as something important, integral or central to your reason for being there at the X-S building.



I could be wrong, but I don't remember any mention of aliens or "going to see an alien" by anyone in the attraction until the women asks "Since when does Clench have wings???"

EDIT: I just watched a video of the ride on Youtube, as far as I can tell, I'm right. As an aside, and not wanting to threadjack, the audience reaction was awesome; it's hard to believe they would rip out something with that kind of reaction rather than just better inform the guests not to bring their young children inside.

I could be wrong, but once you are ending the second preshow SIR tells you that "Soon one of you will be making that journey" since one person was to be selected to be teleported. When we are seated and the restraints are lowered, they "scan" the audience to find the one lucky person who is supposed to be teleported to XS and meet those aliens (alien does not have to refer to just the moster we end up meeting). Once the person is picked though, Clench decides that he is stopping the plan and will transport himself instead hence causing a different kind of alien encounter instead of the one that was originally planned.

 

[lazyboy97o]

As to the point regarding the Alien Encounter, the full name was The ExtraTERRORestrial Alien Encounter. The event of the dangerous alien being teleported into the room is not planned within the story and not supposed to be viewed as a recurring event. Also, all of the events still build on the idea that this is a first time event. It is X-S Tech's first foray into the Earth market and this is the start of their demonstrations at the Tomorrowland Interplanetary Convention Center. It is the first day of a planned recurring event, but something goes horribly wrong.

 

[Pioneer Hall]

As to the point regarding the Alien Encounter, the full name was The ExtraTERRORestrial Alien Encounter. The event of the dangerous alien being teleported into the room is not planned within the story and not supposed to be viewed as a recurring event. Also, all of the events still build on the idea that this is a first time event. It is X-S Tech's first foray into the Earth market and this is the start of their demonstrations at the Tomorrowland Interplanetary Convention Center. It is the first day of a planned recurring event, but something goes horribly wrong.

Right, I definitely don't argue the point that it was supposed to be happening for the first time. I think we are all thinking a little too much in this thread now :ROFLOL:

 

[jakeman]

I'm going to stop by guest relations next time I'm at Disney and complain there is no actual small world in It's a Small World.

Also on my list of things to complain about:

There is also no thunder in Thunder Mountain.

Hall of Presidents doesn't really have a hall either; it's a theater.

How can we call it the World Showcase? It only has 11 countries.

It can't be Animal Kingdom. There is no monarch!

I honestly had responded above in jest, because I didn't think we could further split this hair, but it has been done...(I'm not even sure what smiley would work here)

 

[Master Yoda]

I'm going to stop by guest relations next time I'm at Disney and complain there is no actual small world in It's a Small World.

Also on my list of things to complain about:

There is also no thunder in Thunder Mountain.

Hall of Presidents doesn't really have a hall either; it's a theater.

How can we call it the World Showcase? It only has 11 countries.

It can't be Animal Kingdom. There is no monarch!

I honestly had responded above in jest, because I didn't think we could further split this hair, but it has been done...(I'm not even sure what smiley would work here)

That hair is at about 5 angstroms so we have plenty more splits to go.

 

[Krack]

I honestly had responded above in jest, because I didn't think we could further split this hair, but it has been done...(I'm not even sure what smiley would work here)

"People on a WDW Forum take WDW related matters seriously. News at 11!!!"

The theme parks built their popularity on the backs of their attention to detail. It doesn't bother me when people say "Hold on a second, you're not paying attention to your own story." - some people are like that. One person might go to a movie sequel and say "Whoa, great movie!" Another may go to the same movie and say "Meh, there was good action, but several things didn't make sense, and a few others completely contradicted what was in first movie."

To me, there's no reason why Disney can't make new additions logically consistent with previous little details (pleasing the second group of movie goers) and still be interesting and exciting (pleasing the first group).

 

[jakeman]

"People on a WDW Forum take WDW related matters too seriously. News at 11!!!"

Fixed that for you.