Your right the original plan for the attraction was far better. It included more encounters with the yeti including a scene in which the yeti "rips" the track up right in front you (This scene was supposed to go where the video projection of the yeti is now).
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Slash and Burn ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
Your right the original plan for the attraction was far better. It included more encounters with the yeti including a scene in which the yeti "rips" the track up right in front you (This scene was supposed to go where the video projection of the yeti is now).
Wilt Dasney
Well-Known Member
Indeed. Since when are subtlety and authentic understatement part of designing theme park attractions? That's how you make art films, not roller coasters.
Monty
Brilliant...and Canadian
- In the Parks
- No
I don't think Joe Rhode plays by the same rules... That's one of the reasons AK is such a unique park.
But then, I was never good at detecting the subtle underpinnings of sarcasm either... :lookaroun
:lol:
Hey Ben! :wave:
Mr.EPCOT
Active Member
Not an attack, but I'd just like to point out Walt Disney World has never been branded as "The Happiest Place on Earth." That has always strictly been a Disneyland tagline. I've always prefered "The Vacation Kingdom of the World," even though it's not used anymore due to the inane "Where Dreams Come True" stigma. Your point still remains valid, though.
Not quite, if they had an unlimited budget for the Indiana Jones Adventure, it would look something more like this, with four intertwining attractions, the jeep ride and a mine cart roller coaster, with the Railroad and the Jungle Cruise all traveling through a larger main showbuilding:
Beancounters
They do so much more harm than good and should be barred from Imagineering projects.
To be fair, I think they just need to be better organized and have better leadership. It sounds like too much is spent on development for projects that never get built. They need a leader or leaders with both a guiding vision and financial savvy that has the authority to say "This is a great idea, this is what we will focus all of our efforts on," instead of so much of Imagineering designing with free reign with the small hope that maybe their project will get built.
That's probably my favorite part of the attraction, and it could be amazing if that was all through some sort of cave, or at the very least pitch black in there, instead of girders. Although, once again, to be fair, it sounds like the Matterhorn was a similar experience for the first few years that it was open. I have a doubt, though, that we could ever expect a plussing in the same manner for Everest unless there is a drastic change in management.
Building attractions, even roller coasters, and even just a themed physical space can be just as much of a storytelling art as any film or book. I think this has been well demonstrated with Pirates of the Caribbean, The Haunted Mansion, Horizons, The Twilight Zone Tower of Terror (Tokyo, too!), the Indiana Jones Adventure, and so many others. For in-depth analysis of this storytelling art, you should check out the Passport to Dreams Old and New blog.
T-1MILLION
New Member
I may be attacked for this but I want to give my input on the matter of budget cuts in the parks and resort, but I am going to do it anyway.
In my opinion the quality of attractions has been lacking before the budget cuts started happening. After Everest we were getting small attractions or Pixar redos of old ones.
Now that it had seemed to slow down I feel we should be on the verge of a new E-ticket or area at one of the parks. Budget cuts and economy push that stuff further back. Fair enough.
So things keep getting cut, and projects are being pushed back and are now unheard of from what I can tell.
Wonders of Life went seasonal to never reopen. Were the SNL references a bit dated in CC? Sure, but it was still a fun attraction for even those who did not catch them and such an important theme of WOL is now gone and has not reopened yet.
Then you have the Night Clubs closing and other entertainment venues shutting down that may have not been the largest money makers, but kept the Disney Brand of entertainment and because most of them were not raking in as much as they would of liked, they shut them down in favor or more gift shops and resturants(for the most part)
Back in the parks you have some problems with the main encounter of the Yeti and being what that entire attraction is based on I hope they get it fixed. I understand that stuff happens but I hope they do not just get to the point where they let the yeti run in B mode for years.
Then there is the waterfalls. Ok, more budget cuts. The steam effect still cut/not working as well as a mist near the peak. To be quite honest, I am not sure what is or what is not working at the moment and there is even a large status thread just to keep track of it.
Meanwhile tons of other attractions lose small or key effects to the respected attractions. Either one of those, many small or one large can change the quality of the experinence for sure.
I could go on and on and will probably be flamed for being negative but I honestly feel this way and am trying to reasonably explain.
But here is my strongest feeling about it. If the powers that be are going to keep cutting back, and holding off, cutting back more and then do not fix what we have..then not only is that a huge step down from what the Disney brand is, but then why do they keep raising prices for less of an experience?
I know there is inflation but really...paying more for hotels, admission and parking then getting less. Disney seems to be acting like a mom and pop stand.
Now let me be clear this is not just Disney but also other major parks like Univeral. As already mentioned key effects all around their parks are either toned down or shutt off only until things get better..we hope.
In my opinion the quality of attractions has been lacking before the budget cuts started happening. After Everest we were getting small attractions or Pixar redos of old ones.
Now that it had seemed to slow down I feel we should be on the verge of a new E-ticket or area at one of the parks. Budget cuts and economy push that stuff further back. Fair enough.
So things keep getting cut, and projects are being pushed back and are now unheard of from what I can tell.
Wonders of Life went seasonal to never reopen. Were the SNL references a bit dated in CC? Sure, but it was still a fun attraction for even those who did not catch them and such an important theme of WOL is now gone and has not reopened yet.
Then you have the Night Clubs closing and other entertainment venues shutting down that may have not been the largest money makers, but kept the Disney Brand of entertainment and because most of them were not raking in as much as they would of liked, they shut them down in favor or more gift shops and resturants(for the most part)
Back in the parks you have some problems with the main encounter of the Yeti and being what that entire attraction is based on I hope they get it fixed. I understand that stuff happens but I hope they do not just get to the point where they let the yeti run in B mode for years.
Then there is the waterfalls. Ok, more budget cuts. The steam effect still cut/not working as well as a mist near the peak. To be quite honest, I am not sure what is or what is not working at the moment and there is even a large status thread just to keep track of it.
Meanwhile tons of other attractions lose small or key effects to the respected attractions. Either one of those, many small or one large can change the quality of the experinence for sure.
I could go on and on and will probably be flamed for being negative but I honestly feel this way and am trying to reasonably explain.
But here is my strongest feeling about it. If the powers that be are going to keep cutting back, and holding off, cutting back more and then do not fix what we have..then not only is that a huge step down from what the Disney brand is, but then why do they keep raising prices for less of an experience?
I know there is inflation but really...paying more for hotels, admission and parking then getting less. Disney seems to be acting like a mom and pop stand.
Now let me be clear this is not just Disney but also other major parks like Univeral. As already mentioned key effects all around their parks are either toned down or shutt off only until things get better..we hope.
marcriss
Member
Actually, having been in on branding seminars at other companies and sitting through orientation at ABC, "The Happiest Place on Earth," is the Disney Parks brand. They change the tag for the current promotion, but that is the goal they set out to achieve.
I think somewhere I have napkins with it as a tag line though.....
Mr.EPCOT
Active Member
Actually, having been in on branding seminars at other companies and sitting through orientation at ABC, "The Happiest Place on Earth," is the Disney Parks brand. They change the tag for the current promotion, but that is the goal they set out to achieve.
I think somewhere I have napkins with it as a tag line though.....
Well, not to get into an argument here, but Walt Disney World may offhandedly be referred that way by some of our Cast Members, but I can guarantee you that nothing other than Disneyland in California has been marketed as "The Happiest Place on Earth." And technically, the global Disney Parks brand didn't come into being until a couple of years ago, starting with the "Where Dreams Come True" tagline. Yes, there was a Walt Disney Parks and Resorts internal division previously, but very little if any commonality between the two domestic destinations as far as marketing goes.
Although I would love to see a Walt Disney World napkin that says "The Happiest Place on Earth" on it if you have it!
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
If he said so, Disney would fire him.:lol: Seriously, when was the last time you heard an imagineer openly state "We couldn't make it better because the stupid execs kept slashing our budgets!"
ImagineerMMC said:
You have a point there, but the problem with EE is that there is a TON of build up to the Yeti. You have the imposing view of the mountain, all of the mysterious artifacts in the museum queue line, the long chain lift with the spooky cave shrine thing, and then the broken tracks where the ride begins. It all builds up to only a few breif yeti attacks, making it somewhat cop-out.
EpcotServo
Well-Known Member
Not quite, if they had an unlimited budget for the Indiana Jones Adventure, it would look something more like this, with four intertwining attractions, the jeep ride and a mine cart roller coaster, with the Railroad and the Jungle Cruise all traveling through a larger main showbuilding:
Exactly, Indiana Jones Adventure is the best attraction EVER in my mind, but IT TOO has it's share of so called "cop-outs"
brick like the Black-Lit Arrow corridor and the many scenes that DIDN'T make it into the ride.Expedition Everest cost more that a $120 MILLION, and is the absolute ideal state of Imagineering: A Story told how THEY want it to be told.
And they won't be apologizing anytime soon that they couldn't fit that scene with five dancing Yetis in Uncle Sam outfits with fireballs coming out their noses while the track flips around and around before finally sending on your way just so YOU could understand the freakin' thing.
Monty
Brilliant...and Canadian
- In the Parks
- No
I disagree. IMO it has just what it needs in the way of Yeti encounters. But I'm never likely to convince you. :shrug:
FTW!Exactly, Indiana Jones Adventure is the best attraction EVER in my mind, but IT TOO has it's share of so called "cop-outs"
Expedition Everest cost more that a $120 MILLION, and is the absolute ideal state of Imagineering: A Story told how THEY want it to be told.
And they won't be apologizing anytime soon that they couldn't fit that scene with five dancing Yetis in Uncle Sam outfits with fireballs coming out their noses while the track flips around and around before finally sending on your way just so YOU could understand the freakin' thing.
:sohappy:
Then maybe Disney isn't the place for him. Disney theme park attractions aren't supposed to be an opportunity for an Imagineer's personal expression. I understand they are artists, but any type of art still has certain "rules". Disney attractions are certainly no exception. I do agree that in terms of the look and feel of DAK, Joe Rhode did an outstanding job. It is, by far, the most beautiful Disney theme park (in Florida anyway). But all that aside, I think the choice of a roller coaster to tell the story that Joe Rhode reportedly wanted to tell was a mistake. People automatically connect a roller coaster with expecting thrills. Given the fact that Disney promoted this attraction as giving guests an up close encounter with the yeti, Disney put in guests' minds the idea that the yeti would be a huge part of the expected thrill. Seeing brief glimpses of the the yeti (including one in the form of a cartoonish projection on the wall) don't amount to much of a thrill.
By comparison, the Matterhorn at Disneyland utilizes a far less sophisticated figure for it's abominable snowman. Yet the encounters with it are, frankly, more exciting and thrilling than what you get from the yeti on EE.
I don't think the average guest really cares how a Disney attraction looks on the balance sheet...they care about how the actual real life experience is. I would say that, for what we ended up with, that $120 million was not well spent.
wdwfan22
Well-Known Member
Actually, having been in on branding seminars at other companies and sitting through orientation at ABC, "The Happiest Place on Earth," is the Disney Parks brand. They change the tag for the current promotion, but that is the goal they set out to achieve.
I think somewhere I have napkins with it as a tag line though.....
Actually Disneyland was always the happiest place on earth. The Magic Kingdom was always the most magical place on earth.
The_CEO
Well-Known Member
Monty
Brilliant...and Canadian
- In the Parks
- No
That would be your opinion, mine clearly differs. :shrug:
Joe Rohde quite clearly doesn't follow all of Disney's "rules" and Disney as an entity clearly see the value of keeping him on. I personally believe he would be vocal about it if the number-crunchers had significantly impacted the way he wanted to build Everest. So when he says the intent was to leave you with the "did I just see that?" feeling, I have no reason to believe otherwise. Your opinion to the contrary notwithstanding.
I'm curious, what makes you believe this about him? Has he made statements of this nature before?
Monty
Brilliant...and Canadian
- In the Parks
- No
Not to my knowledge. That is purely based on my own opinion of him based on my own admittedly limited knowledge of him. :shrug:
Grim Grinner
New Member
What I want
You know what I want in Everest? A sense that we barely made it. I think that right after you see the Yeti, you should pass by the wreckage of a train that "wasn't quite so lucky". You could just have a mangled wreck of a car, maybe some weathered skeletons... something of that sort.
There's no real finale or punchline. I think the addition of the wreckage would make you feel like you just escaped. Otherwise, it's just a lonely ride back to the unload station.
You know what I want in Everest? A sense that we barely made it. I think that right after you see the Yeti, you should pass by the wreckage of a train that "wasn't quite so lucky". You could just have a mangled wreck of a car, maybe some weathered skeletons... something of that sort.
There's no real finale or punchline. I think the addition of the wreckage would make you feel like you just escaped. Otherwise, it's just a lonely ride back to the unload station.
I'm neither a Disney Imagineer nor a Disney accountant, so I'm afraid I can't provide a line-by-line accounting of how I think the money should actually have been spent. But let me ask you this: Have you ever seen the price tag for an expensive movie, then seen the actual movie and come away thinking that the movie could have been a lot better...especially for what they spent on it?
That was the point of my statement. I've seen Disney (and Universal too for that matter) build much more impressive things for the money spent. Epcotservo mentioned the $120 "MILLION" (the all caps presumably to emphasize just how much money that is). Part of the intent of my response was also to point out that if someone finds an attraction somewhat lacking (or even an all out disappointment, as a lot of people do with EE) then pointing out how much money was spent to build it isn't going to suddenly change their mind.
Having said that, here are a few suggestions I would make on how the attraction could have been different (and I assume this would not have made a huge difference in how the $120 mil was spent, but again, I don't claim to have intimate knowledge on that matter...I'm just a paying guest who knows what entertains me versus what I consider kind of lame):
- For starters, I would not have placed the yeti where it currently is. It's supposed to be the "most sophisticated AA ever built" right? If that's true, why not give us a better look at it? Why essentially hide it by putting it in a spot where we only get to see it for like 2 seconds? Doesn't add up if you ask me. If it really is such an impressive and sophisticated AA, and such and awesome sight to behold, then I think a better place for it would have been in one of the spots where they do the track switch. Would doing so have changed the price tag for the ride? I can't imagine how it would have.
- Get rid of the cheesy projection of the yeti shadow. It screams "cheap". Alternatives for what they could have done instead (and spent about the same amount of money on) are too numerous to list.
- Maybe a little less "elaborate queue" and a little more ambience on the actual attraction itself. The queue just adds to the over-buildup of expectations. Seems to me they could have taken what they spent on props for the queue and spent that on props for the ride instead.
-Get rid of the plastic bird on a stick. Hey, come to think of it, that would actually SAVE money!
My guess, based solely on MY limited knowledge of him, as well as human nature and the nature of business, is that he would never publicly criticize Disney for short-changing the guests by going cheap on an attraction. I imagine that no matter how outspoken he is, or regardless of what a "rebel" he is when it comes to playing by the rules, he's savvy enough to know that such an act would cost him his job.