Slash and Burn ...

[agent86]

But according to the standards of your "case against Everest", I can tear down EVERY "masterpiece attraction".

Let's watch!

SPLASH MOUNTAIN

I'll give you that the ride is FUN, but one minute we're outside, then the next we're in a magical world of Singing Animals? Based on a movie Disney won't even release? There's no attempt to explain the situation, and on top of everything the AAs are just neatly lifted versions of ALREADY DESIGNED characters from America Sings but in different outfits. All that you see in the queue is a shadow projector (That never works) and SIGNS. Everything else about the story you have to assume by listening to the songs and the rest is left up to your imagination. It's a warehouse (You can even see the warehouse part from Frontierland Station. :hammer with a okay looking Mountain stuck on front, (The rockwork is ok, but it's not nearly as good as Big Thunder, right next door.) and a Flume Ride with singing AA animals.

BIG THUNDER

I'll give you that the rockwork is good, but where's the story? You're loaded on a Train why? Where's the story there? All they have is a loose backstory as to the LOCATION (That they don't even tell the details of THAT unless you're told by an Imagineer or make it up with your Imagination.) And what about SHOW SCENES? The ride only has three. It's a Roller Coaster going past rocks for the entire ride except for a flooded town you whiz past, a cave with WATERFALLS and pools (Not to mention Bat Puppets whose strings you can see.) and the Big "Finale" is just a Lift Hill with Fake Rocks on sticks.

SPACE MOUNTAIN

No story, just a vague theme and a Roller Coaster in the dark.

TOWER OF TERROR

I'll give you that it has a good story and theme, but where exactly are the show scenes? You go up and see one, pass through the darkness (and a few effects such as a door on strings, a giant eyeball showing 90's people on the ride and other hits. ) From then on it's just another freefall ride but in the Dark.

INDIANA JONES ADVENTURE

After finding the incredibly tiny temple, and being paraded down corridoor after corridoor (Stone room, Cave, Stone Room, Cave, REPEAT) with nothing to look at (Aside from the stones and the caves) is a language you can't understand, pictures on rocks (in the dark), and effects that don't work, you see a quick projection and are then shaken around in the dark, see rubber snakes, a shadow projection of bugs, and cheap black light paintings and air blasts. Sure the beginging and ending are good, but the entire middle portion has nothing but effects that are broken or not operating in your ride profile. You may not even get to see the effects that ARE working. (But you do get the see the Giant Snake. :lol
:hammer:

Sure the Main Chamber is impressive, but it would've been much better had a Roller Coaster, the Train, and Jungle Cruise went through it. What we got was instead just a big red room, with fire and lasers. And what about the story? We're told not to look in the eye, we do, we see some bugs snakes and fire, escape a rolling boulder, the we get off and trek back through the stone hallways and caves once again. Where's the conclusion? Indy calling us tourists?


Look, I think Indiana Jones Adventure is the best Disney ride ever made. Did I expect Everest to be better than it? Of course not. But compared to other the my personal list of major Thrill Attractions at WDW (RNR, Tower, Mission Space, Splash, Space Mountain, Test Track, Soarin') Everest fits in right along with each of those, and in most cases succeeds them. (When everything is working. I have problems with the maintenance and operations of the Ride, which should be the real issue here, this stuff is just such hooey I can't leave it alone.)

Expedition Everest meets EVERY criteria (the "vague" ones posted above. ) for a classic Disney Thrill Attraction. Story, Theme, and Execution. And sorry I can't come up with "facts" for those, but you still don't have a single fact to prove otherwise that the Story, Theme, and Execution of the ride are well done. You like to SAY that you do to back up what you think, but when I posted concise and logical reasioning behind what I think, you rejected it and continued on your merry way,

Splash Mountain- Good Ride, Good AAs, Good Theme.
Space Mountain-Fun ride, great building.
Indiana Jones-Amazing Ride, Amazing Effects, Great Theme, great story.
Tower of Terror-Great Ride, Great Effects, Great Building.
Mission Space-Great ride, amazing technology
RNR-Fun theme, Fun Ride, Nice Details
Big Thunder-Fun ride, Great Theme

I can count the important "elements" of every ride in one hand, and if you can't it's because your over complicating all of the other rides with details. The only real important things for a Ride is Story, Theme, Execution, and Entertainment.

:lol:

Same with Splash Mountain. I can point out several spots in person to you on stage, and outside the park. (And not as huge, but I found a spot from the Mark Twain where you can see a huge chunk of Big Thunder's structure and Rebar. It's a bit funny!)


No!


Well, that can't stand. Heaven Forbid any attraction start out going through a Forest.


Like what? The much-talked-about-from-you Shadow Projector effect of Bugs? The Rubber Snakes? The Giant Fans sticking out in the Skeleton Chamber? The foggy Rats? The Black-Light flats?

Yes, Instead your just waiting in line looking at stones, Pictures, rocks, and a language you have to translate. (And again, a few awesome effects that never work or have been turned off.)

Look, Indiana Jones Adventure is my FAVORITE Disney Attraction, Ever.

But you look right past it and towards Everest with flawed arguments that can be used just as effectively with Indy.

THE STORY (Or "The Ig-noor-amoose Guide to What Just Happened")

BEGINGING

We are are on an Expedition to Everest. (Established in Scene 1, The Office, as well as in name and the details leading up to the ride.) We can see Everest through the pass, surrounded by the Forbidden Mountain, and the Himalayas. As we pass through the queue, the details and signs warn us that the Villagers believe the Pass to be home to the YETI. Signs and ancient symbloic warnings advise us to "BEWARE the Yeti" and "Respect the Tradition of the area". Before setting off on our train journey through the pass, we pass the Yeti Museum, to establish the creature in scientific and traditional terms. Despite all the warnings in this begining queue portion, we embark at the begining of the ride, but it terms of story, it's...

THE MIDDLE

Passing through the forest and up into the Mountains, we see one last warning that we're entering the Yeti's territory: A giant ancient mural in the monastery. (Even the slowest guest at this point knows the story: Going To Everest, Have to pass through what may be the Yeti's home to get there.) Once we reach the snow capped peaks and the caverns of the Pass...

PLOT DEVICE

The story (and forward motion) is stopped, because the track ahead is broken. Details such as the Footprints in the snow, and the mysterious roar in the distance are the first indications that this may be the work of the Yeti. This situation sends us (Both in terms of Physical Motion, and the story) in a Different Direction than intended.

CONFLICT

After a rush in the dark, we once again arrive to a stop. And we see the Shadow of an enormous creature, tearing up the tracks! As begin to move forward, it notices us! It leaps away, following us as we descend down twisted tracks in an attempt to get away from the creature.

END

Forced to continue into an unknown cave due to the track ahead, we finally see the Creature as it lunges toward us, we barely escape under a destroyed Trestle, and into the dark, towards the light if day. We made it back unharmed, and with the knowledge that what Prof. Pema Dorje warned of us at the beginning of the story was correct:
"You are about to enter the sacred domain of the Yeti, guardian and protector of The Forbidden Mountain. Those who proceed with respect and reverence for the sanctity of the natural enviroment and its creatures should have no fear. To all others; a warning. You risk the wrath of the Yeti."

It's a simple story, told through language, audio, Physical Motion, and Environments.


All Opinion. I think the Forbidden Mountain itself (You know WDI likes that word alot, don't they?) is a Massive Set, and I think Broken Trestle is a fine example of WDI setwork. Not to mention how huge the Yeti Room is, and the Trestle you pass under. Now in Splash Mountain why don't you point out that you can SEE the lighting, and the top of the room most of the time on those sets?

Sorry, but you've yet to offer me one reason to demote Everest from the standing of Major Disney Attraction.

I can't think of any statement of fact that can qualify anything of being a "Masterpiece", and nor can I think of any statement of fact that qualify anything of being "average" as well.
:shrug:



See above and below...



:lol:




WDW1974? A little bit. I do agree with many of his sentiments about the operations of WDW, though I may not agree with all of them, nor how they are stated. You?

Try Again Later.

Wow, it's easy to kind of get the impression that you don't really think ANY of Disney's attractions are all that great...except Everest. That's strange, but again, to each his own I guess.

 

[tirian]

I am having Chicken for dinner tonight. Fried with Mashed Potatoes and Green Beans.


It should be good.:king::slurp::lol:

I'll see your chicken and raise you red beans and rice.

 

[whylightbulb]

But according to the standards of your "case against Everest", I can tear down EVERY "masterpiece attraction".

Let's watch! [/quote]I never said that these attractions couldn’t be criticized and I also never said that they were all masterpieces. What I have been saying that you can’t seem to comprehend is that Everest should never be called a masterpiece. It’s a fun coaster (albeit quite tame) accompanied by a pleasant Himalayan atmosphere. That’s it. There just isn’t much more to it. The only attraction I’ve called a masterpiece on this forum is Sinbad in Tokyo. I’ll add Indy Crystal Skull, 20K, TOT and Pooh (all Tokyo versions) and Pirates from France. The reason I can classify these as masterpieces is because they offer top grade quality and acceptable quantity of every show and themeing element they feature. Everest is lacking in the quantity department mostly. Most of the in-ride show elements (four if you really stretch it) are passable but not interesting enough to make most people care.

SPLASH MOUNTAIN

I'll give you that the ride is FUN, but one minute we're outside, then the next we're in a magical world of Singing Animals? Based on a movie Disney won't even release? There's no attempt to explain the situation, and on top of everything the AAs are just neatly lifted versions of ALREADY DESIGNED characters from America Sings but in different outfits. All that you see in the queue is a shadow projector (That never works) and SIGNS. Everything else about the story you have to assume by listening to the songs and the rest is left up to your imagination. It's a warehouse (You can even see the warehouse part from Frontierland Station.

) with a okay looking Mountain stuck on front, (The rockwork is ok, but it's not nearly as good as Big Thunder, right next door.) and a Flume Ride with singing AA animals.

You have seen the same Splash Mountain that I’ve seen right? You have to use your imagination to figure out that Brer Rabbit is looking for his laughing place and likes to trick the antagonists Brer Bear and Fox? You can’t tell from the song, “I’m looking for a little bit of adventure…fun…” that he is in search of adventure and fun? You can’t tell from the dialog, sound effects and his big butt sticking out above our log that Brer Bear has been tricked into a bee hive? All the way through the ride we are fed the story through song, visuals and dialog. It’s a simple story but it has a main character, antagonists, a plot, obstacles and conflicts, an inciting incident and a conclusion.

Why is it a bad thing to use AA figures that are no longer being used in another attraction? That is a great way to save money that can be utilized for other elements in the attraction.

You think the mountain is just okay? There is double the amount of detail and art finish in this mountain than Everest and Thunder. Not that I think they need anything more with respect to detail in the other mountains but to say that Splash rock work is just “okay” without explaining how you come to that conclusion is a meaningless statement.

BIG THUNDER

I'll give you that the rockwork is good, but where's the story? You're loaded on a Train why? Where's the story there? All they have is a loose backstory as to the LOCATION (That they don't even tell the details of THAT unless you're told by an Imagineer or make it up with your Imagination.) And what about SHOW SCENES? The ride only has three. It's a Roller Coaster going past rocks for the entire ride except for a flooded town you whiz past, a cave with WATERFALLS and pools (Not to mention Bat Puppets whose strings you can see.) and the Big "Finale" is just a Lift Hill with Fake Rocks on sticks.

Here is an example of you using some of your own criteria to attempt to prove me wrong. I don’t feel that every attraction needs a complex storyline to be good. But if there is a story every tool available at our disposal should be used to convey the story if it’s worth telling.

Attraction storytelling is similar to film in that they are both mostly visual mediums. What I mean by that is that the more the story has to be delivered by exposition as opposed to a natural occurring event within the world being created the less interesting and realistic it becomes. The story points you list for Everest below can only be derived from written exposition that most guests will not bother to read. It’s true that the attraction designer has a disadvantage due to the short amount of time he or she has to tell a story. Many use the queue as a copout almost. I have no problem with that as long as the rider has the opportunity to garner each story point from the ride also. Such is not the case with Everest or Big Thunder for that matter.

I’ve said all that to say I agree with you as far as Big Thunder goes. But I never said that was part of the criteria to consider in comparing Big Thunder to Everest. I’d say they are almost equal when it comes to story but that is not saying much unfortunately. There are much better examples below of more interesting and better told stories.

No, Big Thunder is richer in terms of show elements than Everest and at least most of the waterfalls work. At least there is a Mountain Goat, an Eagle and several other AA animals scattered throughout the mountain. What do we get in Everest…trees. I like trees but I can see that anywhere. The mining town alone is larger than any one show element in Everest. The mining equipment scattered throughout Is another bit you forgot to mention. Let’s add up the show elements in comparison. Earthquake effect with show action lanterns, shadows, actuated rocks. Bats, rainbow water drops, mister, silhouettes in mining town along with building sets and lighting, steam, water jets, all the animals and details mentioned before. Are you sure you could count that on one hand? While Big Thunder is not my favorite attraction at least it contains more than triple the number of show elements making it more than a nice coaster with a pleasant atmosphere.

As far as effects quality, this is a ride from the eighties. It is badly in need of an upgrade. Even so, the effects work for what it is. You should expect much more from Everest being almost twenty years newer I believe.

SPACE MOUNTAIN

No story, just a vague theme and a Roller Coaster in the dark.

See my point about story above.

As far as just being a roller coaster in the dark it really depends on which Space Mountain you are talking about. WDW’s SM is so far inferior to Paris or any of the other ones that it’s not worth talking about. Although I don’t like France’s coaster system the light show is pretty good and far surpasses Everest in terms of quantity and impact. Actually the same goes for the other three Space Mountains. Sorry but as far as impact and innovation, for its day Space Mountain wins. Yes I know the track switch in Everest is a nice innovation. But as far as how that impacts the show it doesn’t come close to SM’s innovations back in the 70’s.

TOWER OF TERROR

I'll give you that it has a good story and theme, but where exactly are the show scenes? You go up and see one, pass through the darkness (and a few effects such as a door on strings, a giant eyeball showing 90's people on the ride and other hits. ) From then on it's just another freefall ride but in the Dark.

Now you are hitting closer to home since I was at WDI for this project and IJA. Once again it’s in order of magnitude, quantity and quality that make this stand out above Everest. Also, the innovations in the ride system here support the story and help to immerse riders in the world. Everest trains go backward. There is no explanation as to how they stop at the top of the hill and why they stop at the end of the backwards run. Yes it’s fun and I love that part for the visceral thrill but there is no imagination used to make it more interesting and realistic. The fact that TOT takes place in the Twilight Zone allowed us many liberties that Everest designers didn’t have. But that’s no excuse to be lazy and settle.

Once again to repeat myself, the sheer number of show elements is enough to make this stand out. The Corridor scene contains pepper’s ghost video, RP video, fiber optics along with the raked set of the hall. The Fifth Dimension scene contains numerous reflection gags, star field door and eye effect. The drop sequence contains lighting effects, air blast and video. The unload area includes authentic props from the Twilight Zone. Sorry…TOT has more show elements than Everest.

INDIANA JONES ADVENTURE

After finding the incredibly tiny temple, and being paraded down corridoor after corridoor (Stone room, Cave, Stone Room, Cave, REPEAT) with nothing to look at (Aside from the stones and the caves) is a language you can't understand, pictures on rocks (in the dark), and effects that don't work, you see a quick projection and are then shaken around in the dark, see rubber snakes, a shadow projection of bugs, and cheap black light paintings and air blasts. Sure the beginging and ending are good, but the entire middle portion has nothing but effects that are broken or not operating in your ride profile. You may not even get to see the effects that ARE working. (But you do get the see the Giant Snake.

)

Sure the Main Chamber is impressive, but it would've been much better had a Roller Coaster, the Train, and Jungle Cruise went through it. What we got was instead just a big red room, with fire and lasers. And what about the story? We're told not to look in the eye, we do, we see some bugs snakes and fire, escape a rolling boulder, the we get off and trek back through the stone hallways and caves once again. Where's the conclusion? Indy calling us tourists?


Look, I think Indiana Jones Adventure is the best Disney ride ever made. Did I expect Everest to be better than it? Of course not. But compared to other the my personal list of major Thrill Attractions at WDW (RNR, Tower, Mission Space, Splash, Space Mountain, Test Track, Soarin') Everest fits in right along with each of those, and in most cases succeeds them. (When everything is working. I have problems with the maintenance and operations of the Ride, which should be the real issue here, this stuff is just such hooey I can't leave it alone.)

This is also in my top three Disney attractions. I worked heavily on this ride while at WDI so I’ll try not to personalize any of your comments since you said it is your favorite.

I completely disagree with you when it comes to the queue. There is so much more to look at and enjoy than Everest and certainly more than just “stones and caves.” Each queue scene is different in terms of style, audio, gags, lighting, graphics…pretty much anything that can be employed in a queue. This was really the first queue to ever contain interactive elements of this nature. The pre-show film is interesting, humorous and authentic. Little details such as the shadow of the film reel on the wall, the items in the excavation office, the lights all being run from the generator, the radio broadcast etc. far exceed Everest’s efforts. Most of the queue gags are animated and brought to life in some way as opposed to the static, boring interpretive panels at Everest. Don’t forget, we are talking about entertainment value here. What would most guests enjoy more, reading the panels or activating booby traps?

Most effects are rather simple in construction and don’t have to be complex to be effective. In fact, it’s usually the simple ones that impress the most. Calling those UV panels cheap is inaccurate by the way. As far as UV paint finish goes they are pretty standard but still well done. We did have a very cool effect installed that only lasted a few days because Disneyland maintenance refused to keep it running. It was a very expensive ice machine and conveyor/release system. When it was turned on it made it appear as though chunks of the ceiling were falling into the pit. It’s a shame because it was truly impressive. Anyway back to the point. The effects here, too numerous to list, are well done and much more effective than Everest. Do I really need to list them one by one? The rat screen, boulder, Chamber of Destiny, crackle bars…the list goes on and on. Each one of those is more effective than anything on Everest. Who marvels at the Yeti shadow projector or even just talks about it after riding? Even the wasted AA figure, I’ve never once heard anyone say anything about that at the end of the ride. By contrast you constantly hear people exit IJA and mention the rats, the boulder that they thought they were going to get hit with, the fire etc.

The current operational condition of each element is not what we are talking about here. I’m pointing out that WDI has been so inefficient lately that their product shows it.

Expedition Everest meets EVERY criteria (the "vague" ones posted above.

) for a classic Disney Thrill Attraction. Story, Theme, and Execution. And sorry I can't come up with "facts" for those, but you still don't have a single fact to prove otherwise that the Story, Theme, and Execution of the ride are well done. You like to SAY that you do to back up what you think, but when I posted concise and logical reasioning behind what I think, you rejected it and continued on your merry way,

I don’t’ think I did. You are just making it more complicated than it is. I pointed out very logical and simple reasons why Everest doesn’t measure up to the original Disney standards. I didn’t say it wasn’t fun or okay, but it is a disappointment and does not meet the criteria set by the WDI “old guard” or even my company’s standards.

I can count the important "elements" of every ride in one hand, and if you can't it's because your over complicating all of the other rides with details. The only real important things for a Ride is Story, Theme, Execution, and Entertainment.

Okay, by that logic Everest fails in comparison to most other rides of the same scope because of the reasons pointed out above. The entertainment value relies too heavily on the coaster and not nearly enough on show. The finer points of the story is elusive to most guests. The theme is carried through as far as atmosphere but with respect to suspension of disbelief in the Yeti department…not so much.

Well, that can't stand. Heaven Forbid any attraction start out going through a Forest.

The problem is not that we go through a forest, it’s the fact that this is one of the few sequences in the entire ride and they wasted it on nothing.

Like what? The much-talked-about-from-you Shadow Projector effect of Bugs? The Rubber Snakes? The Giant Fans sticking out in the Skeleton Chamber? The foggy Rats? The Black-Light flats?

Yes all of the above and then some as mentioned above. About 30 more show elements than Everest.

WDW1974? A little bit. I do agree with many of his sentiments about the operations of WDW, though I may not agree with all of them, nor how they are stated. You?

Try Again Later.

I like WDW 1974 and his main points. I agree with him on most things and leave that area of concern in his capable hands. As for me I preach about what I know personally and deal with on a daily basis. This is my business and I do know what I’m talking about. You can believe what you want to but I was there during the end of WDI’s glory days. I’ve worked with Universal Creative and seen how they operate. I’ve worked for Landmark, Creative Presentations Falcons Treehouse and others. Now I own my own company and have been the producer of several attractions, two of which included the design, fabrication and installation of full attractions with so much less available to us than Disney. Others have been for Disney or Universal. I’ve seen many sides of this business and can speak with enough authority whether you want to listen or not. I hope you do listen however, even if you disagree.

 

[agent86]

I don’t feel that every attraction needs a complex storyline to be good. But if there is a story every tool available at our disposal should be used to convey the story if it’s worth telling.

:sohappy: Exactly!! And that, once again, is my point that EpcotServo and a couple of others fail to get. Attractions like the Matterhorn and Space Mountain aren't really presented as attractions that even have a storyline. But they are good enough attractions that they can stand on their own without needing a storyline. Attractions like Big Thunder and Haunted Mansion take it up a notch by having a great backstory, but also being a good enough attraction that it's not necessary for the guests to even know that story. It just enhances the attraction further if you happen to know it. Then, of course, attractions like Splash Mountain and Tower of Terror have very obvious storylines, but are still great attractions on their own even without the storylines.

Then there's Expedition Everest. It's not an enjoyable enough attraction to really be considered one of the "greats" like any of the aforementioned attractions. But to defend it, fans of it always want to point out "but look at the storyline", which only a hardcore fan would even be aware of. The storyline that EpcotServo described about Everest is one that I feel very confident the vast majority of guests aren't even aware of. But yet he and others refer to that as a means of proving that it's a great ride.

 

[unkadug]

I wonder why, in whylightbulb's rebuttal posts, all smilies have been replaced with links to his home computer. Who is Kenneth? Has he given himself away? :lol:

 

[MousDad]

Interesting quote from Jim Hill's 1/5 article:

But believe it or not, the executives who run the Walt Disney World Resort don't operate in a vacuum. These folks are always aware of what Universal & SeaWorld are up to. They pay incredibly close attention to their Central Florida competition. Which is why these suits are concerned that the boys back in Burbank -- by putting the brakes on construction of anything of size for the WDW theme parks for at least the next six months -- may unintentionally be hobbling Disney World into 2010 and 2011. And that -- by coasting through the first half of 2009 -- the Resort may then be forced to pay catch-up with its competition for the next five years or so.[end quote]

Interesting, I say, because we usually hear about WDW's management being the problem, or at least being Rasulo puppets who really don't care about the future of the resort. Hill's statement, however, seems to suggest that WDW management is unwittingly hand tied.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

I wonder why, in whylightbulb's rebuttal posts, all smilies have been replaced with links to his home computer. Who is Kenneth? Has he given himself away? :lol:

I really wish I gave a ________ who he is :animwink:

 

[unkadug]

I really wish I gave a ________ who he is :animwink:

No you don't! :lol:

 

[whylightbulb]

I wonder why, in whylightbulb's rebuttal posts, all smilies have been replaced with links to his home computer. Who is Kenneth? Has he given himself away? :lol:

LOL actually I wrote that on a company computer so you are probably looking too much into it. Our IT guy is named ken so maybe that's where the name comes into the picture. But if you feel the need to sleuth a little be my guest.

 

[whylightbulb]

:sohappy: Exactly!! And that, once again, is my point that EpcotServo and a couple of others fail to get. Attractions like the Matterhorn and Space Mountain aren't really presented as attractions that even have a storyline. But they are good enough attractions that they can stand on their own without needing a storyline. Attractions like Big Thunder and Haunted Mansion take it up a notch by having a great backstory, but also being a good enough attraction that it's not necessary for the guests to even know that story. It just enhances the attraction further if you happen to know it. Then, of course, attractions like Splash Mountain and Tower of Terror have very obvious storylines, but are still great attractions on their own even without the storylines.

Then there's Expedition Everest. It's not an enjoyable enough attraction to really be considered one of the "greats" like any of the aforementioned attractions. But to defend it, fans of it always want to point out "but look at the storyline", which only a hardcore fan would even be aware of. The storyline that EpcotServo described about Everest is one that I feel very confident the vast majority of guests aren't even aware of. But yet he and others refer to that as a means of proving that it's a great ride.

Very well said.

Having a storyline is nice but it doesn't make or break an attraction unless that storyline is used throughout the experience and conveyed through the ride or show in more ways than written panels. I've used the example of Sinbad in Tokyo. In the queue we see some pretty graphics that partially tell the tale. But in the ride the story unfolds as we progress. Not only that but everything is so well done that you don't need to understand Japanese to get what's going on. Myself and the group I was with were able to discern even the little nuances that made the story interesting. The choices and the friends he had made during his journey. How he used the gifts given to him in each location to get himself and others through difficult situations to finally end up back home with the incredible finale fanfare.

If this were done at WDW today the queue would have been through Sinbad's home town museum where we would have been treated to interpretive panels telling us all about the various characters that reside in each location of Sinbad's voyage. Then, rerouted through a special wing of the museum, we see a "temporary" display dedicated to Sinbad himself, exhibiting photos of the gifts he brought back after his voyage. The ride itself would showcase the atmosphere of each location as we imagine what it must have been like for Sinbad and what he accomplished in each region. But look out, because there is potential danger as we run across the giant (heard over an amazing sound system). Okay so maybe I'm exagerating a bit but it isn't that far off from Everest.

 

[ClemsonTigger]

I can tell you that the pictures don't do it justice. Until you step through the gates to encounter the massive DisneySea globe with its amazing detail framed by the Mira Costa exterior you have no idea what immersive themeing is. Every custom lamp fixture to every nook and cranny of this park will take you by surprise. I'm not exagerating. There is creative detail to be enjoyed everywhere you look and hear. There is no comparison to the attractions in Tokyo either. You could spend hours in each land just walking around. Anyway...I know this has been discussed before but I wanted to go off on a positive tangent for a change.

Agree with the comments
....and welcome the change!

 

[whylightbulb]

Interesting quote from Jim Hill's 1/5 article:

But believe it or not, the executives who run the Walt Disney World Resort don't operate in a vacuum. These folks are always aware of what Universal & SeaWorld are up to. They pay incredibly close attention to their Central Florida competition. Which is why these suits are concerned that the boys back in Burbank -- by putting the brakes on construction of anything of size for the WDW theme parks for at least the next six months -- may unintentionally be hobbling Disney World into 2010 and 2011. And that -- by coasting through the first half of 2009 -- the Resort may then be forced to pay catch-up with its competition for the next five years or so.[end quote]

Interesting, I say, because we usually hear about WDW's management being the problem, or at least being Rasulo puppets who really don't care about the future of the resort. Hill's statement, however, seems to suggest that WDW management is unwittingly hand tied.

I think a quote from that article that is just as interesting is: "And given that Parks & Resorts' own surveys show that Disney World could go a full six years without adding a new ride or show to WDW's current assortment of attractions before there'd then be any really noticable drop in attendance and/or occupancy levels ... Well, why spend money now on Disney World when the company really doesn't have to?"

Some on this board question why myself or others in similar situations "waste our time" on a discussion board like this. This is one reason. If visitors and fans alike respond to surveys in that matter than clearly there needs to be some attempt to wake these people up. For me the motivation lies in the fact that the more projects Disney approves the more potential work there is for my company. They also stimulate the industry so that other park owners and companies will decide to initiate new projects. Aside from that, new high quality attractions are fun.

 

[epcotWSC]

Interesting quote from Jim Hill's 1/5 article:

But believe it or not, the executives who run the Walt Disney World Resort don't operate in a vacuum. These folks are always aware of what Universal & SeaWorld are up to. They pay incredibly close attention to their Central Florida competition. Which is why these suits are concerned that the boys back in Burbank -- by putting the brakes on construction of anything of size for the WDW theme parks for at least the next six months -- may unintentionally be hobbling Disney World into 2010 and 2011. And that -- by coasting through the first half of 2009 -- the Resort may then be forced to pay catch-up with its competition for the next five years or so.[end quote]

Interesting, I say, because we usually hear about WDW's management being the problem, or at least being Rasulo puppets who really don't care about the future of the resort. Hill's statement, however, seems to suggest that WDW management is unwittingly hand tied.

I'm sure there's a slice of truth to this. If you're running WDW, I don't care whether you're a park guy or not, you still want to make profits. If you see that the other guys (the competition) are making these huge new rides to compete with you, well you have to stay ahead of the competition for your future well being (you still want to be increasing profits and getting your big bonuses 5 years down the road, don't you?). So yeah, I could see WDW management wanting to possibly do more than what everyone here says. Maybe it's really coming from those higher up on the chain of command.

 

[Buried20KLeague]

In Al Lutz's article today over at miceage, he seems to confirm what we've been talking about here as well... Ahead of this quote, he's talking about DCA's overhaul...

"The Imagineers assigned to these multiple DCA projects can't believe the luck they had in getting all of this work approved and fully funded when they did in ‘07, as the economic crisis of ‘08 has literally put a stop to nearly everything once planned for Walt Disney World, and put up smaller roadblocks for Hong Kong and Paris. If the DCA plans had been just one year later in the pipeline, they too would have likely been halted or dramatically scaled back as has happened to all current proposals for Florida. Parks Chief Jay Rasulo, who is infamous for not being interested with anything to do with the parks, has left the DCA project firmly in the hands of top Imagineer Bob Weis and top Disneyland fan John Lassetter.
When it comes to the plans for the other Disney Parks properties, the Imagineering leaders there have less stature than those currently involved with Anaheim, and with money now very tight it's been a struggle to get their plans on to Jay's radar screen. Not a day goes by that the Imagineers working on DCA don't thank their lucky stars that it all worked out at least for them.
With the few refurbishment projects slated for Walt Disney World repeatedly slashed, yet continuing to gain approval by the skin of their teeth, the executive planners in Orlando have to now be content with a drastically scaled down rehab to Space Mountain and some more DVC units as their main recession-era offerings for the next few years. Even the plan for Walt Disney World to take Disneyland's old Parade of Dreams has fallen through, due to a lack of funding and political will from Florida."

This seems like another confirmation of what we're talking about... Spit and polish refurb of Space, everything else being halted (including TLM clone currently being off the table), no Parade of Dreams to replace the OLD OLD OLD daytime parade at MK... All while Disneyland and DCA plow forward.

Link to article:

http://miceage.micechat.com/allutz/al010609a.htm​

 

[tirian]

Interesting quote from Jim Hill's 1/5 article:

I think a quote from that article that is just as interesting is: "And given that Parks & Resorts' own surveys show that Disney World could go a full six years without adding a new ride or show to WDW's current assortment of attractions before there'd then be any really noticable drop in attendance and/or occupancy levels ... Well, why spend money now on Disney World when the company really doesn't have to?"

Some on this board question why myself or others in similar situations "waste our time" on a discussion board like this. This is one reason. If visitors and fans alike respond to surveys in that matter than clearly there needs to be some attempt to wake these people up. For me the motivation lies in the fact that the more projects Disney approves the more potential work there is for my company. They also stimulate the industry so that other park owners and companies will decide to initiate new projects. Aside from that, new high quality attractions are fun.

Answers:

1. It's a Jim Hill article. Don't forget your salt.

2. Disney spins its surveys to "confirm" what's already been decided.

3. At this point, Rasulo would have been fired from any other Fortune 500 company for not doing his part to ensure his division's FUTURE success. How long will it take for WDC execs to look past the short-term profits and see that slashing the parks division will only hurt them in the long run? The parks can't coast on past successes forever.

 

[epcotWSC]

Answers:

1. It's a Jim Hill article. Don't forget your salt.

2. Disney spins its surveys to "confirm" what's already been decided.

3. At this point, Rasulo would have been fired from any other Fortune 500 company for not doing his part to ensure his division's FUTURE success. How long will it take for WDC execs to look past the short-term profits and see that slashing the parks division will only hurt them in the long run? The parks can't coast on past successes forever.

Until the numbers take a hit, they probably won't do anything. Let's not forget that the Disney brand is a very strong brand. As long as Disney is popular through their entertainment and the parks are still in good shape (not great or amazing, but good), then people will still go.

 

[Giraffe Lounge]

Attraction storytelling is similar to film in that they are both mostly visual mediums. What I mean by that is that the more the story has to be delivered by exposition as opposed to a natural occurring event within the world being created the less interesting and realistic it becomes.

I don't think that second sentence makes any sense. I also have a hard time connecting attractions being a "visual medium" with the point you're trying to make about exposition.

This is also in my top three Disney attractions. I worked heavily on this ride while at WDI so I’ll try not to personalize any of your comments since you said it is your favorite.

For someone concerned about anonymity you seem to resume drop a lot. :shrug:

 

[Captain Chaos]

I don't think that second sentence makes any sense. I also have a hard time connecting attractions being a "visual medium" with the point you're trying to make about exposition.




For someone concerned about anonymity you seem to resume drop a lot. :shrug:

Maybe he/she is trying to make us believe he is in the industry so we can follow along in his UNIVERSAL RULES DISNEY DROOLS campaign??? :shrug:

 

[tirian]

Until the numbers take a hit, they probably won't do anything. Let's not forget that the Disney brand is a very strong brand. As long as Disney is popular through their entertainment and the parks are still in good shape (not great or amazing, but good), then people will still go.

True, but that doesn't change the man's lack of interest.

It's also true that many (not all) WDW execs are fed up with Rasulo's method of watering everything down. DL folks are reportedly ticked off, too.

 

[jt04]

True, but that doesn't change the man's lack of interest.

It's also true that many (not all) WDW execs are fed up with Rasulo's method of watering everything down. DL folks are reportedly ticked off, too.

The problem may not be Jay, Tirian.

Until all execs get "ticked off" it will probably be more of the same. And I don't think the current CEO wants a bunch of "go along to get along" executives.

There is a great article about him on CNN. If an executive manager isn't passionate enough to fight for their projects than I am not sure they are working for the right CEO.

Just a hunch from a "frothing fanboy". :ROFLOL: