Stevek
Well-Known Member
I will vote after June 12th.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Snow White's Scary Adventures Vs. Snow White's Enchanted Wish
- Thread starter Sharon&Susan
- Start date
Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
Looking forward to your review!
Nland316
Well-Known Member
I wouldn’t necessarily say the new changes warrant a book report label for the ride. While it does have the major story beats, they’re portrayed in a rather stylized fashion - the mirror shattering, animated book, etc.
Especially when you compare to a true book report ride, like Mermaid, which shows movie accurate scenes that left very little room for creativity and finesse.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
While I think that this approach is a great one for FL dark rides I don’t think it’s the only approach. Im also not convinced the WED guys were necessarily purposely designing the FL dark rides to focus on one tone as much as they were masterful at creating a 3D experience based off the IP at hand. Of all the FL dark rides, I think they leaned the farthest into one tone with Scary Adventures. With that said, I’m not sure how similar the 55 and 83 versions were. Im assuming 55 was just as “scary.”
When I think of the movie Snow White, I don’t think scary romp through the forest. I think the movie is much more balanced than that. Of all the FL dark rides, I feel that I experienced the least amount of the essence/ emotions from the movie with Scary Adventures. For me personally, I’m sure the lack of music has something to do with that.
Sounds like with this re do we lost the feeling of it being a first person journey and a lot of the “scariness for some modern bells/ whistles, music and an overall richer atmosphere. If I walk off of Enchanted Wish feeling something and more of my senses are stimulated, it will be an upgrade for me as I felt nothing on Scary Adventures. Hopefully the ending isn’t too much of a jumbled mess.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
I believe Walt talked about how each ride was focused on one tone or emotion and Snow White's was fear. As for the movie, Snow White is quite dark and scary.
I loved the way the ride progressed previously. Fun introduction, now we see the Queen has been watching, perverting that feeling. We head towards her ominous castle and quickly duck into the mines. Colorful and mysterious, but still not overly whimsical. We then head into the Queen's lair. We see her transform. We see what she has done to others. We see the poisoned apple created, and then we run. She tries to get us at every turn. The forest itself is trying to stop us. Luckily, the Dwarves we saw in the first scene succeed in defeating her. The end. There's a logical flow and the Dwarves bookend the storyline nicely.
The new one has the same opening, but the shadows on the wall busy up the Queen spying scene. We no longer divert away from her scary castle but instead see our happy Dwarves marching on a log, making the previous Queen seem very out of place. The mines are full of life and whimsy, making the turn into the Queen's lair more abrupt and messy. We see her poison an apple, and then we see a mirror under a bridge shatter once Snow White takes a bite. The Dwarves then chase up a mountain (do they chase her away, is she still alive? Its unclear). It seems odd because while the Witch was scary, she did what she had set out to do in this version. She poisoned Snow. Without the chase, the mountain scene doesn't feel like a pay off but rather just a moment to check off. We then see the Prince has found her dead body. A book tells us that's good. We then see she's happy with a deer. But she was happy at the start and we weren't really following her character in the middle. The Queen's keep sequence in the center of the new attraction stands in stark contrast with the first 1/3 and the last 1/3. That means 2/3 of the attraction is light and fun and focused on Snow and the Dwarves and the middle 1/3 doesn't fit with the new ride.
Kram Sacul
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
The one without Kim Irvine’s involvement.
johnsmith1917
New Member
That's exactly how I feel. I'm a massive fan of the animation and music in Snow White, and the previous ride gave me little of the overall tone or energy of the film. The film was a delicate balance of warmth with some spooky, which the new ride I think accomplishes well. It finally feels like a Snow White ride not a Spook ride given a Snow White layover. Before, it felt like the imagineers were definitely trying to fit a round peg in a square hole
Last edited:
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
Interesting. Are you sure? I’ve never read anything hearing Walt describe the FL dark rides like that. I thought it was some retroactive imagineer/ fan made descriptions of them. Anyway, your description of Scary Adventures reads better then it actually played for me in real life. But some of the problems you have with the ride sound valid. I’m curious to see what my takeaway will be.
Sorry, I’m skipping over the rest of your post for now. I’m riding in person in a week and it looks like you are giving a pretty detailed description of the new ride.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
I agree with everything except your last line. It didn’t feel that way to me. I just didn’t really appreciate what they were going for. Snow Whites tone is “scary” and as an adult that really didn’t work for me as it obviously was not scary, thrilling or suspenseful. I’m much more stimulated by music and beautiful/ rich scenery but I like a nice balance. Not like these new rides like Frozen or BATB where they leave out all of the drama/ dark stuff. I guess the loss here is that Scary Adventures was super unique and nothing like it will probably ever be built by Disney again. I also wish they left the exterior/ dungeon alone.
DavidDL
Well-Known Member
I honestly think they both "succeed" in what they were/are claiming to be. Snow White's Scary Adventures was (mostly) that and Snow White's Enchanted Wish is what it purports to be, too. It really just all comes down to which attraction you like more because they're both aiming to be different things. I have some very minor gripes with the new version but I think the sudden ending of Scary Adventures immediately followed by "..and they lived happily ever after!" is worse.
The original (scarier) MK version probably did the "scary adventures" thing best, based on what I've seen. It was definitively what it claimed to be and didn't try to be anything else. Just a scary dark ride where a witch was trying to get you and eventually does. But DL's wanted to open cheerfully, then spook the ever loving daylight out of kids, then confusingly end with a jarring "suddenly everything is alright!" sort of deal.
I think there's definitely a conversation to be had regarding if something meant to terrify small children belongs in Fantasyland. Maybe they did originally want each FL attraction to convey something different but given how the parks have expanded, is it still necessary? Is the parent who accidentally takes their child on "the Snow White" ride first and has to deal with the fact that their child won't trust them on or want to ride anything else afterwards really going to say "well, it's what the Imagineers originally intended for this area so I guess it's okay"?
The original (scarier) MK version probably did the "scary adventures" thing best, based on what I've seen. It was definitively what it claimed to be and didn't try to be anything else. Just a scary dark ride where a witch was trying to get you and eventually does. But DL's wanted to open cheerfully, then spook the ever loving daylight out of kids, then confusingly end with a jarring "suddenly everything is alright!" sort of deal.
I think there's definitely a conversation to be had regarding if something meant to terrify small children belongs in Fantasyland. Maybe they did originally want each FL attraction to convey something different but given how the parks have expanded, is it still necessary? Is the parent who accidentally takes their child on "the Snow White" ride first and has to deal with the fact that their child won't trust them on or want to ride anything else afterwards really going to say "well, it's what the Imagineers originally intended for this area so I guess it's okay"?
George Lucas on a Bench
Well-Known Member
Yes.
DavidDL
Well-Known Member
Okee68
Well-Known Member
I personally resent Enchanted Wish, because not only is it a watered-down version of an opening day attraction which was always known for its creepy edge, but it also represents everything I can't stand about Imagineering since the nineties or so, and it isn't even particularly good as a ride anymore. The very thought of Enchanted Wish just makes me cringe all around.
Throughout all the various iterations of the Snow White dark ride, the elements that resonate with me the most are the freeform adaptation of the story, the first-person perspective and resulting absence of Snow White herself, the grim and macabre scenery, the overwhelming focus on the Queen in her peddler's disguise, and the unnerving tone in general. Obviously, Enchanted Wish explicitly rails against all of this in favor of happy scenes with the Dwarfs, an incredibly rushed retelling of the story from the film, and a drawn-out assortment of pretty fairytale endings.
l predictably love the 1971 WDW version of Snow White the most, so my ideal version of the attraction actually isn't "Snow White" at all, rather the sinister exploits of the Witch. The biggest mistake concerning the WDW ride was advertising it as a Snow White ride to begin with. It might not have been watered down if it had only been given an appropriate title, façade, and loading queue.
I'm not saying the Disneyland ride should be like the 1971 version—the 1983 ride was already ideal for Disneyland in nearly every department. My idea of what the Snow White dark ride should ideally be is just incredibly far removed from Kim Irvine's, and therefore Enchanted Wish doesn't resonate with me. I think Snow White, like Mr. Toad's Wild Ride, deserves to remain an exemplar of 1950s Imagineering; a highly embellished Pretzel ghost train themed around the Evil Queen and the uninviting locations from the film.
Throughout all the various iterations of the Snow White dark ride, the elements that resonate with me the most are the freeform adaptation of the story, the first-person perspective and resulting absence of Snow White herself, the grim and macabre scenery, the overwhelming focus on the Queen in her peddler's disguise, and the unnerving tone in general. Obviously, Enchanted Wish explicitly rails against all of this in favor of happy scenes with the Dwarfs, an incredibly rushed retelling of the story from the film, and a drawn-out assortment of pretty fairytale endings.
l predictably love the 1971 WDW version of Snow White the most, so my ideal version of the attraction actually isn't "Snow White" at all, rather the sinister exploits of the Witch. The biggest mistake concerning the WDW ride was advertising it as a Snow White ride to begin with. It might not have been watered down if it had only been given an appropriate title, façade, and loading queue.
I'm not saying the Disneyland ride should be like the 1971 version—the 1983 ride was already ideal for Disneyland in nearly every department. My idea of what the Snow White dark ride should ideally be is just incredibly far removed from Kim Irvine's, and therefore Enchanted Wish doesn't resonate with me. I think Snow White, like Mr. Toad's Wild Ride, deserves to remain an exemplar of 1950s Imagineering; a highly embellished Pretzel ghost train themed around the Evil Queen and the uninviting locations from the film.
Last edited:
BasiltheBatLord
Well-Known Member
There's no doubt in my mind that they're gonna totally ruin Toad when/if they ever get around to it.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
The thing about Toad is there is practically no upside in giving it the “upgrade” treatment. What is it going to do, make kids care more about Toad? Aside from that, the ride is all plywood cutouts. I’m sure there are some tasteful things they can do with lighting and projections but that’s where it should end. I think they did touch it it would be more Alice (hopefully without the movie screen) and nothing like the Snow White change which was done for a very specific reason.
I don’t doubt there are some bored imagineers who will find a reason to do it but it’s so unnecessary.
They just need to let Toad be Toad. Pinocchio on the other hand could use some love. There’s probably some cool stuff they could with Roger and the Heffumps and Woozles scene on Pooh too.
Last edited:
BasiltheBatLord
Well-Known Member
Unless I'm mistaken, all of these Fantasyland dark ride changes originated from a plan to upgrade them all for the 60th. Of course nothing to say that plan can't change and they leave Toad alone, but at this point with 3/5 of the rides touched up I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually try to go for all of them.
Come to think of it though I can't even remember what they did to Peter Pan.
Last edited:
1HAPPYGHOSTHOST
Well-Known Member
Perfectly said
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
They ruined London and by making it neon, making it look flat and close.
ThreadMaster5
Active Member
I came for the hate and i wasn't disappointed, yeah the old ride was fun in a dark way, but this new ride is far better. I've ridden it quite a few times now and each time is better, the only gripe i really have is the mirror smashing. For anyone hoping toad or pinocchio get some love i wouldn't bank on it, especially toad.