News Splash Mountain retheme to Princess and the Frog - Tiana's Bayou Adventure

[Disney Glimpses]

Yeah, MMRR was a good replacement for TGMR from a business perspective. What was a walk-on is now eating a lot of capacity, all day (and generating Genie+ revenue).

 

[BubbaisSleep]

As I said, I’m certainly not alone in my view. The ride was not a hit with guests when they scrapped it.

As a fan of GMR I would be a little heartbroken finding most of my party would fall asleep during the ride. The concept of GMR is great though. I wish they modernized it and added MMRR into Animation Courtyard.

 

[LittleBuford]

As a fan of GMR I would be a little heartbroken finding most of my party would fall asleep during the ride. The concept of GMR is great though. I wish they modernized it and added MMRR into Animation Courtyard.

As a fan of classic movies and old-school dark rides, I always wanted to love it, but it somehow felt less than the sum of its parts. Only the Wizard of Oz scene truly wowed me.

 

[LittleBuford]

Not according to the huge numbers of voters that outnumbered the fans of MMRR. They all said they prefer the GMR and want it back. After all, that is what MGM/Hollywood Studios was suppose to be about. The magic of movie making. MMRR merely belongs to places like a Toontown, like the one in Disneyland California. Sorry to point this out. Just informing what I've observed.

For what it’s worth, here are the guest ratings for both attractions on TouringPlans, which suggest that the new ride is generally more popular than the old:

The Great Movie Ride | Disney's Hollywood Studios

Entering through a re-creation of Hollywood's Chinese Theater, guests board vehicles for a fast-paced tour through soundstage sets from classic

touringplans.com

Mickey & Minnie's Runaway Railway | Disney's Hollywood Studios

Disney restarted regular production of Mickey Mouse cartoons in 2013. Mostly written and directed by Paul Rudish, these 4-minute vignettes—

touringplans.com

 

[ToTBellHop]

Didn’t anyone ever think that this is referring to renovations? After all, this isn’t a real announcement, and it’s nothing but speculation. Also, maps with the address showed it is not anywhere near Splash Mountain, but near Jungle Cruise. Most likely this might be something else.

It’s absolutely Splash.

 

[celluloid]

Unless I'm mistaken, it didn't score all that well with guests when Disney decided to pull the plug on it. It's a matter of personal taste at the end of the day, and I realise that you are far from alone in missing the ride.

It was also left to rot, being high maintenance and staffing. So it all circles back to why the people's concerns over PATF are well founded.

 

[celluloid]

Lest anyone claim the Mine Train is an E-ticket, Splash Mountain is the newest E-ticket attraction in the Magic Kingdom. TRON will hold the title of the newest E-ticket for all of probably 15-18 months before the shell of Splash Mountain retakes this title.

Fun to think about.

"Fun"

Exactly. It points out what has been done to the parks under the leadership since The Disney Decade.

 

[DCBaker]

Not according to the image of the address on the map. And it didn't say retheme either. Again, that was speculation.

See here - you need to be looking at the RCID map.

View attachment 672555

https://rcid.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Solutions/s2.html?appid=ea296a2e5e274cf2856d5cb450c3a96b

 

[LittleBuford]

It was also left to rot, being high maintenance and staffing. So it all circles back to why the people's concerns over PATF are well founded.

I'm not sure I understand the bolded. If Splash Mountain were to experience the same fate as the Great Movie Ride, that would be a good thing, since they successfully replaced the latter with something more popular.

 

[MisterPenguin]

RCID maps are not always correct or trustworthy like other computer maps. I seen this design before, and they are sometimes incorrect. This is one reason why I don't look through computer maps. Those images don't mean anything either. Also, People claim which one is the correct destination, but it would turn wrong sometimes. Sorry.

Google Maps' street address for buildings inside of WDW theme parks is usually way more off than the RCID map ever is.

 

[UNCgolf]

I'm not sure I understand the bolded. If Splash Mountain were to experience the same fate as the Great Movie Ride, that would be a good thing, since they successfully replaced the latter with something more popular.

From a Disney business perspective, sure, but I assume he was talking from an individual fan perspective.

I think MMRR is fine and would have been an excellent addition, but also think it's a significantly worse attraction than GMR. Plus, GMR was like 15 minutes longer than MMRR and I think it had a higher hourly capacity too (at worst they're basically the same). That means it needs to be significantly busier to make up for the overall loss.

 

[erasure fan1]

It was also left to rot, being high maintenance and staffing. So it all circles back to why the people's concerns over PATF are well founded.

Exactly. Disney took the cheapest way out with Great movie ride. In a park that is lacking in attractions they decide to close GMR. Instead of giving Mickey his own building and updating GMR with, I don't know, maybe movies from your 70 billion dollar purchase of Fox. When you know you are adding a huge draw to the park with star wars, and you need the capacity. It really does speak volumes about how these type of things are handled. So yea, everyone is well within their right to think this will fall short.

 

[danlb_2000]

RCID maps are not always correct or trustworthy like other computer maps. I seen this design before, and they are sometimes incorrect. This is one reason why I don't look through computer maps. Those images don't mean anything either. Also, People claim which one is the correct destination, but it would turn wrong sometimes. Sorry.

The RCID maps are very trustworthy, all the permitting is done based on those maps. 4955 is absolutely the address for Splash Mountain, it says so on the RCID map, and everything around it has addresses close to that number. You can go to the RCID mapping site and check for yourself...

https://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html

We know the re-theme is happening, it was announced along with a completion date of 2024. Disney isn't going to hire their biggest contractor to spend a year and a half renovating a ride only to then retheme it afterwards. There is no doubt that this is for the re-theme.

 

[danlb_2000]

RCID maps are not always correct or trustworthy like other computer maps. I seen this design before, and they are sometimes incorrect. This is one reason why I don't look through computer maps. Those images don't mean anything either. Also, People claim which one is the correct destination, but it would turn wrong sometimes. Sorry.

And if you need any more proof, here is a different permit that links that address to Splash..

 

[LittleBuford]

From a Disney business perspective, sure, but I assume he was talking from an individual fan perspective.

I think MMRR is fine and would have been an excellent addition, but it's a significantly worse attraction than GMR for me. The fact that it's like 15 minutes shorter than GMR and has a lower hourly capacity (I'm pretty sure) also means it needs to be much busier to make up for the overall loss.

I'm just not sure the comparison holds from a more general (not business) perspective. Whatever one's personal feelings, GMR was generally not all that popular, and certainly less so than the ride that has replaced it (we have actual data attesting to this). Splash Mountain, by contrast, remains very popular, and the retheme will have to do very well indeed to equal or exceed it in most people's eyes.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Are you comparing MMRR with what GMR actually was, or with what you imgained it could have been with a careful update?

Having ridden both a number of times now, I would wholeheartedly agree that The Great Movie Ride was the superior attraction. Runaway Railway is, like, cute . . . but the level of showmanship is some of the worst I've ever seen in a supposed headliner. Much of it looks like it was set up for a temporary expo and could be brought down in a day.

 

[UNCgolf]

Are you comparing MMRR with what GMR actually was, or with what you imgained it could have been with a careful update?

What it actually was. The final version of GMR, even as they let maintenance slip significantly and made some other changes, was still a better ride than MMRR -- the fully functional original version was dramatically better than MMRR -- but an update could have restored it to its place as one of the best rides ever built at WDW (to be fair, an update also could have made it worse). It was an Imagineering masterpiece; MMRR is a fine attraction but not close to being one of the best rides at WDW.

I'm just not sure the comparison holds from a more general (not business) perspective. Whatever one's personal feelings, GMR was generally not all that popular, and certainly less so than the ride that has replaced it (we have actual data attesting to this). Splash Mountain, by contrast, remains very popular, and the retheme will have to do very well indeed to equal or exceed it in most people's eyes.

The Touring Plans link you posted suggested before it closed they expected it to have 40+ minute waits on average crowd level days, so I'm not sure the general popularity level is as dramatically different as you're suggesting. I don't doubt MMRR is more popular, though, if only because it's newer and features Mickey Mouse.

The fact that it was 15 minutes longer makes a gigantic difference that people overlook, though. It could have half as many riders as MMRR in an hour and still be arguably better for park capacity because of that difference (of course there are other factors, like how long someone spent in line before boarding, although with FP+ and now LL that's much less of a factor than it would have been 25 years ago). That's a separate argument from ride quality, though -- just pointing out that Disney needs to get back to building some longer attractions (as they did with Rise).

 

[Sir_Cliff]

What it actually was. The final version of GMR, even as they let maintenance slip significantly and made some other changes, was still a better ride than MMRR -- the fully functional version was dramatically better than MMRR -- but an update could have restored it to its place as one of the best rides ever built at WDW (an update also could have made it worse). It was an Imagineering masterpiece; MMRR is a fine attraction but not close to being one of the best rides at WDW.

I'm with @LittleBuford on GMR in that I don't think the whole was equal to the sum of its parts. It was an impressive attraction taking into account the elaborate sets and number of AAs and the concept sounds good on paper. I always felt it just fell a bit flat, though, and wonder whether any amount of sprucing up the existing attraction with new technology could have fundamentally changed that. I suspect part of the issue was that it was such a slow-moving ride on such massive vehicles that it never really conveyed the charm or dynamism of any of the movies portrayed nor felt truely immersive. I don't think a slow crawl through a new Avengers scene, for example, would have changed that.

So, I get why people enjoy and appreciate the attraction as a work of theme park design, but as an actual attraction I think it was just ok.

Splash, of course, is a different beast where the ride mechanics will remain the same and its popularity is such that it probably couldn't handle many more people than it already does most days. They really just have to make sure they don't screw it up and somehow end up spending a lot of money to make a less popular attraction.

 

[UNCgolf]

I'm with @LittleBuford on GMR in that I don't think the whole was equal to the sum of its parts. It was an impressive attraction taking into account the elaborate sets and number of AAs and the concept sounds good on paper. I always felt it just fell a bit flat, though, and wonder whether any amount of sprucing up the existing attraction with new technology could have fundamentally changed that. I suspect part of the issue was that it was such a slow-moving ride on such massive vehicles that it never really conveyed the charm or dynamism of any of the movies portrayed nor felt truely immersive. I don't think a slow crawl through a new Avengers scene, for example, would have changed that.

So, I get why people enjoy and appreciate the attraction as a work of theme park design, but as an actual attraction I think it was just ok.

Splash, of course, is a different beast where the ride mechanics will remain the same and its popularity is such that it probably couldn't handle many more people than it already does most days. They really just have to make sure they don't screw it up and somehow end up spending a lot of money to make a less popular attraction.

I have no issue with that opinion -- not everyone is going to love everything, and there are certainly rides I really like that people seem to hate (Na'vi River Journey) and ones I think are pretty bad that others love (Toy Story Mania).

I'm curious how you feel about MMRR, though. Do you think it's really impressive/great or are you ambivalent about it? I'm certainly in the latter category -- it's not a bad ride and it does some things well, but it's underwhelming. It feels more like a complementary D ticket than a headlining E, which again, is fine, but not really fitting for the location or what it replaced (even if someone didn't think GMR worked well I don't think there's an argument against it having the scale of an E in the park centerpiece location).

 

[LittleBuford]

The fact that it was 15 minutes longer makes a gigantic difference that people overlook, though. It could have half as many riders as MMRR in an hour and still be arguably better for park capacity because of that difference (of course there are other factors, like how long someone spent in line before boarding, although with FP+ and now LL that's much less of a factor than it would have been 25 years ago). That's a separate argument from ride quality, though -- just pointing out that Disney needs to get back to building some longer attractions (as they did with Rise).

I didn’t mean to bring up the issue of capacity. As you say, that’s a separate matter from ride quality.