Ratatouille Ride at EPCOT?

[The Empress Lilly]

The heads of all the anti-frozen in Norway people are spinning.

Happy to oblige! =D

There are no cartoon rat chefs in France. There are, however, 1500 years of agricultural and culinary traditions that lie at the heart of what much of an entire country self-identifies as an essential element of her culture.

RAT and WS France both celebrate that, both serve a very Disneyfied version of the real thing, each one fantastic, but they no more go together than a cartoon Pocahontas as a third narrator on the American Adventure would, even if both the AA and the Pocahontas movie are about American history.

 

[JillC LI]

I wish! It was one of the greatest rides ever when we got to ride it last summer in Paris!

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Happy to oblige! =D

There are no cartoon rat chefs in France. There are, however, 1500 years of agricultural and culinary traditions that lie at the heart of what much of an entire country self-identifies as an essential element of her culture.

RAT and WS France both celebrate that, both serve a very Disneyfied version of the real thing, each one fantastic, but they no more go together than a cartoon Pocahontas as a third narrator on the American Adventure would, even if both the AA and the Pocahontas movie are about American history.

Pocahontas would work for me if they were at least including her time in history. That's actually not a bad idea. I don't remember specifically what they cover.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Pocahontas would work for me if they were at least including her time in history. That's actually not a bad idea. I don't remember specifically what they cover.

Swell idea!

Did you know that originally the AA was supposed to feature three hosts? One for each century of American history. So rather than Pocahontas, I think they should go with a 20th century character - Woody! Besides, it will draw the kids!

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Swell idea!

Did you know that originally the AA was supposed to feature three hosts? One for each century of American history. So rather than Pocahontas, I think they should go with a 20th century character - Woody! Besides, it will draw the kids!

I know you're being sarcastic, but Pocahontas is a real historical figure; Woody is not.

I have no problem bringing in elements from related Disney films to Epcot World Showcase.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I know you're being sarcastic, but Pocahontas is a real historical figure; Woody is not.

I have no problem bringing in elements from related Disney films to Epcot World Showcase.

The Disney film is pretty much a complete work of fiction.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I know you're being sarcastic, but Pocahontas is a real historical figure; Woody is not.

I have no problem bringing in elements from related Disney films to Epcot World Showcase.

I wouldn't mind a non-cartoon Pocahontas, as a historical figure. Why, if the AA were to be build today, odds are Native Americans and women might be represented with one of the two/three speaker roles.

 

[Heffalump333]

If those some of you that don't like this idea where else would you put this ride at WDW because that ride is really AWSOME!

 

[lazyboy97o]

If those some of you that don't like this idea where else would you put this ride at WDW because that ride is really AWSOME!

Walt Disney World doesn't need a poor copy of a ride that is only a few miles away.

 

[Heffalump333]

Walt Disney World doesn't need a poor copy of a ride that is only a few miles away.

What do you mean?

 

[The Empress Lilly]

If those some of you that don't like this idea where else would you put this ride at WDW because that ride is really AWSOME!

I think Ratatouille in Disneyland Paris has a significance it would lack in the US parks, where RAT is but a decade old movie.

However, the ride system is fun, the screens look great, the ride experience is slighty too tame for my liking but still most enjoyable. Why not use it for another ride in WDW? Any movie would do. Or even an original setting.

 

[lazyboy97o]

What do you mean?

It's Disney finally getting around to trying something in the vein of The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man.

 

[Goofyernmost]

It's Disney finally getting around to trying something in the vein of The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man.

That's an old argument that has never made any sense. The story is different and if you say that it isn't Disney to duplicate ride vehicles, well, that ship sailed many years ago. It is one of the few things that is actually a Disney way of doing things.

I, unfortunately, tried in vain, to see RAT three times when I was in Paris. All three times I was within sight of the load area when the ride broke down and we were all directed out of the building. However, that said it seems like some people feel that it is a piece of cake to just up and visit the other parks like Paris, Disneyland or Japan. It isn't the norm for people to be able to do that much travel nor do many of them have a desire. Many of these things not only should be shared, they truly need to be. Otherwise we are just talking about preventing people from having experiences based on economic or many other problems that prevent that type of travel.

 

[dizda]

It's Disney finally getting around to trying something in the vein of The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man.

The big difference is that Disney will spend two to three times more for a similar ride experience than Uni. How Disney can spend so much on a single ride baffles me.

 

[Goofyernmost]

The big difference is that Disney will spend two to three times more for a similar ride experience than Uni. How Disney can spend so much on a single ride baffles me.

Although I don't deny that what you said is true, I don't really understand who is so inside both organizations that they really know how much Uni or Disney pays for an attraction. Accounting can be very creative. Whether or not that is true really depends on how they account for things. Numbers are pretty easy to spread around especially when there is no reliable way to verify anything at least for those of us whose only real connection to either one is a discussion site.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Although I don't deny that what you said is true, I don't really understand who is so inside both organizations that they really know how much Uni or Disney pays for an attraction. Accounting can be very creative. Whether or not that is true really depends on how they account for things. Numbers are pretty easy to spread around especially when there is no reliable way to verify anything at least for those of us whose only real connection to either one is a discussion site.

They aren't insulated little kingdoms. The same people often work between and with Disney and Universal.

 

[Goofyernmost]

They aren't insulated little kingdoms. The same people often work between and with Disney and Universal.

I'm sure that is true. The real test is how many of them have direct access to what Disney spends for anything. Those that let out information like that will soon be on the outside looking in. It's not all that simple. My opinion is that just about every number that isn't publicly announced by Disney (and even some of them) cannot be trusted for accuracy and many are just pulled out of their butts. Numbers that cannot be verified can very easily rounded upward when it serves public relations purposes. It's about as dependable as the weather.

 

[dizda]

Although I don't deny that what you said is true, I don't really understand who is so inside both organizations that they really know how much Uni or Disney pays for an attraction. Accounting can be very creative. Whether or not that is true really depends on how they account for things. Numbers are pretty easy to spread around especially when there is no reliable way to verify anything at least for those of us whose only real connection to either one is a discussion site.

I do not doubt that part of the difference is because of some creative accounting. However, with publicly listed companies, there are limits to how creative one can be. Even taking reported costs with a grain of salt, it seem to cost Disney much more to build similar rides. I just wish I knew why.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'm sure that is true. The real test is how many of them have direct access to what Disney spends for anything. Those that let out information like that will soon be on the outside looking in. It's not all that simple. My opinion is that just about every number that isn't publicly announced by Disney (and even some of them) cannot be trusted for accuracy and many are just pulled out of their butts. Numbers that cannot be verified can very easily rounded upward when it serves public relations purposes. It's about as dependable as the weather.

Nobody can keep a project on budget without knowing the budget. Plenty of people talk to colleagues, move between the two and even work for both.

I do not doubt that part of the difference is because of some creative accounting. However, with publicly listed companies, there are limits to how creative one can be. Even taking reported costs with a grain of salt, it seem to cost Disney much more to build similar rides. I just wish I knew why.

A lot of it comes down to a bloated and poor decision making structure combined with insisting on often times wasteful levels of detail.

 

[Matt_Black]

The Disney film is pretty much a complete work of fiction.

Well, they drew heavily from John Smith's autobiography, which isn't exactly what I'd call a sterling picture of accuracy.