Another interesting analysis from Passport to Dreams blog:
http://passport2dreams.blogspot.ca/2012/09/lightning-in-bottle-storybook-circus.html
http://passport2dreams.blogspot.ca/2012/09/lightning-in-bottle-storybook-circus.html
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Review of Storybook Circus
- Thread starter Animaniac93-98
- Start date
Atomicmickey
Well-Known Member
Fantastic article. That's the way I like to think about the parks. She writes so well and insightfully. What a treat.
WDWFanDave
Well-Known Member
A long read, but entirely worth it, I thoroughly enjoyed the article.
Pixiedustmaker
Well-Known Member
Very wordy, and very much in praise of Storybook Circusland. Circusland is a great improvement over what preceded it, but if you look at BoG at FLE, Carsland, Disney has done better. MK fans are probably happy to see the eyesore removed, but Circusland still doesn't have any new rides. It's all just window dressing.
Not sure about the comparison between the old Dumbo wait time and the new one, 45 mins vs. 20 mins, seems Dumbo is about as popular given that ride capacity has been doubled.
She also referred to "Bear Country", (has been Critter Country now for a long time), as a similar micro-land. Given the amount of details in Critter Country, I don't think Circusland can hold a candle to it, Critter Country has Splash Mountain, Hungry Bear, and Pooh (albeit a cheap version), and stores.
Timothy_Q
Well-Known Member
That's why she compared it to Bear Country and not Critter Country. Because it used to have just one ride before they changed the name and added Splash
Pixiedustmaker
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I got that, but she talked about "Bear Country" in the present tense. Makes for awkward reading as naive readers would of course assume Bear Country still exists, from the blog post,
"Storybook Circus is what one could call a "microland" - an area of minor square footage with a unique theme often presented as a sort of side-attraction to a larger area, usually designed exclusively to anchor a major attraction - Caribbean Plaza is one example, and Bear Country, at Disneyland, can be seen as another. Storybook Circus houses a number of attractions aimed at children, none of which are really much better than "C ticket" level attractions - Dumbo, a kiddie coaster, a train station, and a water play area. What distinguishes these "C" tickets is that they are given "E" level treatment in Storybook Circus."
Not sure I agree at all with this arbitrary term, "microland" that she seems to have invented, and that "microlands" are designed as a "side-attraction to a larger area, usually designed exclusively to anchor a major attraction."
Yes, Bear Country was designed for CBJ, but remember that Bear Country abutted Frontierland, very similar theming here, and so I think a more appropriate term would be "sub-land."
The term "micro-land" implies a small land that thematically stands on its own yet is smaller in absolute size, yet Bear Country meshed with the visuals in Frontierland (which were visible from Bear Country), and similarly, Dumbo's Circusland makes sense as a sub-land, being sort of thematically similar to Fantasyland, in fact, Dumbo's Circusland is part of the "New Fantasyland", making the term sub-land more appropriate.
Also, I wouldn't denote Caribbean Plaza in Adventureland as a "micro-land", it is more certainly part of Adventureland, yet has its own characteristics in order to tell the story of the attraction. I wouldn't call Big Thunder a "micro-land" within Magic Kingdom, by this reasoning there would be tons of micro-lands.
spacemt354
Chili's
I think you are looking too much into this. Or you're just trying to find a way to criticize this very detailed and enjoyable article.
Either way. Micro-land, sub-land, it really doesn't matter since these are very subjectively defined terms which are basically referring to the same thing, a land within a land that revolves roughly around the same central theme.
Storybook Circus in Carolwood Park is entirely different than medival times and enchanted forest. The Caribbean isn't the same as Aloha Isle/Tiki Birds/Jungle Cruise.
Yet nevertheless, both areas fit into the overall theme of their respective lands. Dumbo the Flying Elephant, Casey Jr. etc all fit under the umbrella of Fantasy. Pirates of the Caribbean fits under the umbrella of Adventure. So they tie into their land's overall theme, each area just has a different perspective on that theme.
And to your point no. Not every area is a micro-land, or sub-land, or whatever you want to call it. I wouldn't consider Big Thunder a micro/sub land. But when an area has individual shops, restaurants and an attraction(s) all revolving around the same theme that is unique from the rest of the land, yet still holds true to the overall message of the land, that is when I designate it as a micro/sub land. And I think that is what the author was trying to do with the examples of Caribbean Plaza, Bear Country etc.
LithiumBill
Well-Known Member
That was an amazing read. Thanks!
Pixiedustmaker
Well-Known Member
I went back and read the article (I could only make it half-way through the first time), and there are some interesting points and photos. But I do take issue with some of the conclusions/assertions from a fact-checking point of view, such as:
"And Michael Eisner - the man who re-christened a Song of the South-themed log flume "Splash Mountain" because his first major success as Disney CEO was the 1984 comedy Splash - Eisner made sure that the style of the area closely matched that seen in another box office hit:"
Splash Mountain was originally going to be the "Zip-a-dee-doo-dah river run", (among other names), and Eisner wanted the Mermaid from Splash to be put in the ride, Imagineers said "no", but the name Splash Mountain sort of stuck. I wouldn't say that Eisner, "re-christened" the ride to Splash Mountain, the name just sort of stuck, though obviously there are no references to the film that originally inspired this name.
And then later,
"It probably seems like I'm being very down on Roger Rabbit, and I'm not. The film is wonderful, and it's grown into a real classic. But replicating the style of the "Toontown" sequence into an entire area which only the Disney characters inhabit was a real mistake. That style was only ever devised to make a universe where Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny - two characters who starred in very different films from very different studios - live in the same place and seem credible. The style of Who Framed Roger Rabbit is not that of Disney animation. It wasn't even released as a Disney film, but under the "Touchstone" banner invented by Ron Miller in the early 80s."
The Touchstone label was used by Disney to release films, like Splash, which were more edgy, and Disney didn't want parents taking their kids to a Disney film, and then seeing partial nudity or something like that, hence the Touchstone label. Nonetheless, Roger Rabbit was a Disney film in that Disney made it. I liked Roger Rabbit, but I am not a big fan of Disneyland's Toon town, though I realize that if WDI got $500 million, they could do a phenomenal job making a Toon Town in the style of Roger Rabbit, IMHO.
And then,
"This firmly established the unofficial rule that theme park playgrounds can only be themed to areas where you're really small, because kids like to feel even smaller than they are, or something. Disney is reluctant to let this idea go, recycling it most recently in the lackluster Toy Story Playland."
This isn't true as stuff in Dumbo's interactive queue isn't made to be oversized to make kids feel small, and I don't think is true for the former Pooh's play area. Its a generalization based on play areas, but I seriously doubt Disney has any such unofficial rule." In fact, Walt Disney wanted reduced scale second, and third, stories on Main Street so that the guests feel bigger, and hence Main Street feels cozies, even the windows are dropped down to a low height so that kids can look inside the shops.
And,
"Mickey's Toontown is your baseline, that's what to expect. Twenty years of theme park history across all of the major industry players have conditioned us to associate areas of the park for children with distorted fiberglass architecture, limited texture, balloony scenic elements, and a less than attentive regard for fine detail. It is very much to the credit of Storybook Circus that it whole heartedly rejects all of these things. I think this is very much responsible for the initial surge of very enthusiastic reviews this area has received, although that initial wave was reviewing only a tiny sliver of what the area will eventually become."
I'm not a super big fan of Disneyland's Toontown, but I do think they put in some good details, AND if they had the proper budget, they could do an even better job. Circusland looks better than the old Mickey's Birthday land because of nice landscaping, more expensive architectural details, and a gussied up Dumbo. I don't think that the imagineers "rejected" the style, per se, of Toontown, but that they went back to the Circusland idea because they were told to keep the "County Bounty" store as it was outselling everything but the Emporium, plus I don't view Toontown as the baseline as Disney had done so many different parks and lands.
And,
"On a strictly aesthetic level, besides that interestingly meta groove it hits, the Circus is an unqualified success because it has an astonishing and beautiful array of textures. The stone walls, the weathered bricks, faded woods, and leafy foliage speak to an attentive eye towards the more lasting grace notes of the existing park, and could not be further from Toontown Fair."
Toontown Fair was built cheaply, and was meant to be temporary. Disney finally decided to plop down some bricks and mortar, and add some details. While I was in no way a fan of Toontown Fair, I think that the problem was that it was built cheaply. WDI could do a smash up job of recreating "Duckberg", or a plussed Toon town, only they decided to put their money elsewhere.
And,
"What we see in the history of Dumbo is a slow push in the direction of being a "real" ride, a fully thematically integrated ride, and now it seems as through WDI has pushed the ride concept of Dumbo to its limits. I cannot think of a single thing that could have been done to the new attraction, that has not been done, to snazz it up without changing the ride's essential format of being a hub-and-spoke over a concrete pit."
The Dumbo that was built in FLE lacks some of the flourishes seen in the concept art, and adults don't get much out of Dumbo's queue. What could be done to plus this ride? You can also think up additions, such as:
1. Water canons that narrowly miss the riders.
2. A machine that shoots (and later vacums up) confetti that is shot up around the Dumbo's during the ride.
3. Bubbles.
4. An interactive game to play while riding Dumbo.
5. Animatronic crows on telephone wires that talk to guests in line, on the ride.
6. A more animated Timothy the Mouse that talks to guests.
That is what I thought up in a couple minutes . . . imagine what Imagineers could come up with? No, not even a simple spinner like Dumbo is ever truly "finished" to perfection.
spacemt354
Chili's
Well, I certainly stand by my point that I believe you are overanalyzing this article way too much. I think you proved me right. And although everyone can have their own view, a lot of the things you mentioned are kinda frivolous accusations that I don't really want to get into because it would derail the thread.
And I quoted the last part with the list of improvements to Dumbo because, no offense intended, it sorta made me laugh.
I personally like Dumbo because it's calm, relaxing, and offers very nice panoramic views of the MK.
But now with your version, as I am trying to enjoy my calm ride with a view, I got animatronic crows talking in my ear, confetti blasting at me, bubbles blowing, all while trying to play an interactive game, avoiding shots from water canons, and spinning in a circle.
I mean talk about a sensory overload. I think the current Storybook Circus Dumbo is great the way it is.
threeyoda
Active Member
Must you criticize everything?
I enjoyed the article. Thanks for posting. I was (and still am) a big critic of Storybook Circus. The land simply could have been used for things a million times better and things that the MK is desperately in need of.
That said, if we're stuck with the Storybook Circus theme, Imagineering has absolutely done an amazing job with it. The area has a class and charm that I really don't believe can be found anywhere else at WDW. I can only imagine how nice the area will be once the small park is completed in the middle and the tents are open. The area has a relaxed atmosphere that I hope is retained once the new areas open. It's bizarre, but I actually look forward to relaxing on the park benches once the little park is completed.
And the attention to detail is amazing. You can feel it as soon as you step off the train. I think I'm actually more excited and curious to see this area when it's completed than the rest of the FLE. Don't get me wrong, I still wish the land would have been put to better use, but at least what we're getting is Imagineering at the top of its game and absolutely top notch (for what it is).
That said, if we're stuck with the Storybook Circus theme, Imagineering has absolutely done an amazing job with it. The area has a class and charm that I really don't believe can be found anywhere else at WDW. I can only imagine how nice the area will be once the small park is completed in the middle and the tents are open. The area has a relaxed atmosphere that I hope is retained once the new areas open. It's bizarre, but I actually look forward to relaxing on the park benches once the little park is completed.
And the attention to detail is amazing. You can feel it as soon as you step off the train. I think I'm actually more excited and curious to see this area when it's completed than the rest of the FLE. Don't get me wrong, I still wish the land would have been put to better use, but at least what we're getting is Imagineering at the top of its game and absolutely top notch (for what it is).
Pixiedustmaker
Well-Known Member
The article has some nice pictures and info, and I didn't mean to "over analyze" it, but I don't agree with a lot of the conclusions the author made. It's an interesting article, but its half opinion and half fact.
Look at the following again,
"This firmly established the unofficial rule that theme park playgrounds can only be themed to areas where you're really small, because kids like to feel even smaller than they are, or something. Disney is reluctant to let this idea go, recycling it most recently in the lackluster Toy Story Playland."
?????? There are plenty of plagrounds in MK, Pooh, Dumbo, that don't use the oversized props because they wouldn't make sense! Disney doesn't want kids to feel even smaller than they are! No such unofficial rule is "firmly established" at WDI . . . this is just the author intuiting something which may, or may not, be true. In this case it is clearly the later.
Pixiedustmaker
Well-Known Member
This wasn't a purely factual article by a long shot, the author made a lot of conclusions about why Toontown is a failure (is it?), and why Circusland is a super big sucess, (is it?). I mean, I don't see a lot of single adults/families with teenagers spending a lot of time in Circusland, and while Great Goofini has a new overlay, it is still the same fairly lackluster roller coaster, IMHO.
I really like the details in Circusland, and the author really loves the details, but will the feeling still be the same in a couple years, or will the "newness" of the sub-land have worn off?
Sure, us super-fans may love Circusland, and I am glad they added the stuff for little kids and the details, (on the level of stuff in Disneyland), but when talking about success, I think we should look at the general theme park audience, and since Circusland is not completed yet, and since Dumbo is about as popular as ever, I think it is very premature to judge the success of Circusland.
PurpleRose
Active Member
I thought the article was great, although it did make me long for the Toon Town at DL.
bdearl41
Well-Known Member
An absolutely wonderful article. Artfully written and geniously thought out. The author does a great job of describing what I believe to be a very appealing aspect of FLE, in Storybook Circus. While this area gets the least amount of fanfair, it does provide an immersive experience not just limited to a queue. I have not been but from the pictures I have seen, the detail, color, and thought put into this area is fantastic. I cannot wait to see it in the evening light finished this coming April.
I think the author hits on another fantastic point in stating how its not fabricated from a movie, but instead from an idea, and sentiment of childhood fascination.
I am for one very excited about Storybook Circus, and think it has real staying power, but do agree with one of the posters above. Talking Crows on a wire would be the Cous de Gras.
I think the author hits on another fantastic point in stating how its not fabricated from a movie, but instead from an idea, and sentiment of childhood fascination.
I am for one very excited about Storybook Circus, and think it has real staying power, but do agree with one of the posters above. Talking Crows on a wire would be the Cous de Gras.