Rumor Stitch's Great Escape Replacement— Don’t Hold Your Breath

[lazyboy97o]

To be realistic: logistically, not everything is going to fit everywhere 100% perfectly; and that doesn't mean there is "no theming."

How is this realistic? Attractions should not be created in isolation and then placed somewhere. Their creation should be based in the story and experience. That is the problem, that attractions today are created to fulfill an external franchise mandate and not to enhance the park experience.

As someone with an artistic eye (sketching/painting) and also many years of merchandising under my belt, I know the creative can at times clash with the practical, and there is often one "leftover" item or factor that might make a design element less than perfect but is still useful and/or necessary; and the average patron of the exhibit would not be aware of the minor transgression. WDW is not built for the imagineers per se, but for everyday guests.

No good experience is built assuming ignorance of its audience. Walt Disney World absolutely should be built for the Imagineers. Strong story and experience do not push people away. The whole reason Disney has the success of Pixar and Marvel is by letting the passionate filmmakers be passionate about their stories. The result is popular success far beyond what would have been accomplished with mandates to better appeal to the "general public." The same approach has also created the current "Golden Age of Television." Why is themed entertainment somehow different that its creatives cannot be allowed to just be creative and must instead wait to see what movies are popular?

And again, from a personal perspective, while I very much appreciate the immersive theming throughout WDW, unless something is glaringly offensive, I would never be bothered by it - to wit, Stitch being in Tomorrowland. That's fine with me. I've never walked through Tomorrowland and thought, "What the heck is an alien doing here? So out of place!") That doesn't mean I don't understand theming or don't care about theming. That means it's close enough, and I get it. Not my favorite attraction (nor was the previous incarnation) and I won't miss it or visit it before it's gone, but that's neither here nor there.

The way I have always seen WDW, and I guess I never brought it to this point before even in my own head, but I'm realizing it as I type this - was that I don't take the "lands" in MK all that seriously as "boundaries." I saw it as a way to loosely group similar rides to help a person find them on the map or otherwise navigate the park, while providing a bit of cohesiveness. I don't understand guests taking it much more seriously than that. But to each his own.

Billions of dollars, along with all of the associated hours upon hours of work, have gone into developing lands. This is information well document is a variety of places, including well known books such as Disneyland Paris: From Sketch to Reality or even the two Walt Disney Imagineering books . That is a lot of effort into providing ease of navigation and a veneer of cohesiveness, all of which would have been better spent on the supposedly more important attractions.

It is hard to actually believe that you are interested in and understand theming when you completely dismiss one of the most basic, primary elements of a theme park. Over and over you are downplaying the importance of theme to themed entertainment. You keep telling us about how you never thought about this or that and it does not bother, but then try to assure us you are interested. How is that not a complete contradiction? If it does not matter to you then it does not matter. Have fun! Enjoy the experience. How do other people caring impact your not caring? How does more theme hurt your enjoyment of the rides, shows, parades and food?

Not every move they make is going to be able to be made perfect. That's OK. I'd rather they focus on the one drumming soldier in It's A Small World who isn't drumming (they did) or Pirates making peoples' feet wet, etc. rather than absolutism in theming.

How is there any difference except that one is of interest to you? Every reason you give for why theme is of little consequence applies to singular show effects like you mention. Most people do not notice them. Most people who know of them or get upset by them. You've written many words on why theme should not be much of a concern and yet they could all easily be rewritten to talk about these types of elements. They're exactly the same, just at a different scale.

 

[Magenta Panther]

Hmm...sunglasses...legs...I got it!

 

[FigmentForver96]

How is this realistic? Attractions should not be created in isolation and then placed somewhere. Their creation should be based in the story and experience. That is the problem, that attractions today are created to fulfill an external franchise mandate and not to enhance the park experience.


No good experience is built assuming ignorance of its audience. Walt Disney World absolutely should be built for the Imagineers. Strong story and experience do not push people away. The whole reason Disney has the success of Pixar and Marvel is by letting the passionate filmmakers be passionate about their stories. The result is popular success far beyond what would have been accomplished with mandates to better appeal to the "general public." The same approach has also created the current "Golden Age of Television." Why is themed entertainment somehow different that its creatives cannot be allowed to just be creative and must instead wait to see what movies are popular?


Billions of dollars, along with all of the associated hours upon hours of work, have gone into developing lands. This is information well document is a variety of places, including well known books such as Disneyland Paris: From Sketch to Reality or even the two Walt Disney Imagineering books . That is a lot of effort into providing ease of navigation and veneer of cohesiveness, all of which would have been better spent on the supposedly more important attractions.

It is hard to actually believe that you are interested in and understand theming when you completely dismiss one of the most basic, primary elements of a theme park. Over and over you are downplaying the importance of theme to themed entertainment. You keep telling us about how you never thought about this or that and it does not bother, but then try to assure us you are interested. How is that not a complete contradiction? If it does not matter to you then it does not matter. Have fun! Enjoy the experience. How do other people caring impact your not caring? How does more theme hurt your enjoyment of the rides, shows, parades and food?


How is there any difference except that one is of interest to you? Every reason you give for why theme is of little consequence applies to singular show effects like you mention. Most people do not notice them. Most people who know of them or get upset by them. You've written many words on why theme should not be much of a concern and yet they could all easily be rewritten to talk about these types of elements. They're exactly the same, just as a different scale.

Perfectly stated

 

[tirian]

Hmm...sunglasses...legs...I got it!

I will never forget how utterly bored I was in the theater. I spent the entire movie looking at my watch.

 

[Magic Feather]

'Stitch's' features some excellent high end AAs and I much prefer watching figures in action then looking at giant screens of CGI animation.
Attractions that are primarily screen based turn me off, and I will confess I may be bias as i am a serious AA enthusiast.
So 'Laugh Floor' never appealed to me and does not really 'belong' in Tomorrowland thematically in my opinion.
Despite the hate many have for 'Stitch's..', for me I feel it fits in a little better theme wise with the land and the Animatronics are entertaining to watch.

-

Sadly, if what is planned comes true, you are bound to dislike *almost* all of the attraction.

 

[Magenta Panther]

Sadly, if what is planned comes true, you are bound to dislike *almost* all of the attraction.

Hmmm...are the screens in this purported attraction going to be as cleverly used as they are in Shanghai's Pirates?

 

[Mike S]

Sadly, if what is planned comes true, you are bound to dislike *almost* all of the attraction.

When do the "screenz" complaints start with Disney I wonder. Every theme park is getting into it it seems.

Hmmm...are the screens in this purported attraction going to be as cleverly used as they are in ****hai's Pirates?

I am very curious of what misspelling led to the censorship

 

[Magenta Panther]

When do the "screenz" complaints start with Disney I wonder. Everyone's getting into it it seems.

I am very curious of what misspelling led to the censorship

I left out the "n". Oops. Fixed.

 

[No Name]

Some of the posts about how things fit and what does and doesn't... some are very good and insightful, others are painful to read. We're going to quote a plaque from 1955 and apply that to a land in 2016? Sometimes things change a bit, and not always for bad reason. Splash Mountain was a great addition. Oh well, I'm only contributing to the mess.

Wouldn't this be the first "real resurrection" for a full attraction? Or would that be Captain EO...I guess I separate films from attractions/rides.

No, they brought back the original Enchanted Tiki Room after a fire did some damage to Tiki Room Under New Management. Albeit in a modified, slightly shortened form.

But it is certainly something very rare and uncommon.

My comment was in regards to how Disney might look at the two Attractions from a budget / payroll point of view.
The assumption was the one that costs more to operate payroll wise might be the likely candidate that gets closed and replaced with the new Attraction.

'Laugh Floor' takes more staff to operate then 'Stitch's Great Escape' i beleive.
It requires multiple visable Cast , and several Entertainment Cast Members 'behind the curtains' making the magic happen in the show room.
'Stitch's Great Escape' has visable Cast only that I am aware of.

'Laugh Floor' also seems to have the larger show building and more open space to play with or segment into separate / multiple spaces if need be.
'Stitch's Great Escape' seems smaller but that may fit better for the existing plans.

Of the two, I personally prefer 'Stitch's..' to the 'Laugh Floor'.
Several reasons, the first being that it fits in with the established 'space' and quasi-futurism theme of Tomorrowland much better then a comedy show put on by cartoon monsters.
The other is more my personal interests....

'Stitch's' features some excellent high end AAs and I much prefer watching figures in action then looking at giant screens of CGI animation.
Attractions that are primarily screen based turn me off, and I will confess I may be bias as i am a serious AA enthusiast.
So 'Laugh Floor' never appealed to me and does not really 'belong' in Tomorrowland thematically in my opinion.
Despite the hate many have for 'Stitch's..', for me I feel it fits in a little better theme wise with the land and the Animatronics are entertaining to watch.

The Stitch Attraction was better when it first opened, when everything was fully functioning and it had not yet been overly 'kidified' in a post-opening tweaking.

Of course 'Alien Encounter' wipes the floor with it as a whole....but I digress....



-

I think the main reasoning behind their decision is that Laugh Floor is an extremely popular attraction while Stitch's is far from that. The difference in popularity is so great that it outdoes all concerns associated with operating costs.

Source: 3.2 star rating on google for SGE, vs. a whole room of laughing people in Laugh Floor

Laugh Floor is so good that I can get past the shortcomings you described. I must say it's one of my favorite shows. I would be more than fine if they moved it to DHS, but very upset if they completely got rid it.

 

[Mike S]

I left out the "n". Oops. Fixed.

Oh behave

 

[Oriolesmagic]

The chances of it happening are a little bit below 0% but I've always thought the perfect transition between Fantasyland and a revitalized Tomorrowland would be replacing the speedway with Journey to the Center of the Earth.

 

[seabreezept813]

Hmm...sunglasses...legs...I got it!

No, no, no..it has legs...Iger bought LEGO and inserting it here..don't worry it will be AWESOME

 

[Mike S]

No, no, no..it has legs...Iger bought LEGO and inserting it here..don't worry it will be AWESOME

Iger the acquirer acquired Lego and along with it a 5th park for WDW... It's just 45 minutes away.

And some of us thought it would never happen

 

[Donaldfan1934]

My comment was in regards to how Disney might look at the two Attractions from a budget / payroll point of view.
The assumption was the one that costs more to operate payroll wise might be the likely candidate that gets closed and replaced with the new Attraction.

'Laugh Floor' takes more staff to operate then 'Stitch's Great Escape' i beleive.
It requires multiple visable Cast , and several Entertainment Cast Members 'behind the curtains' making the magic happen in the show room.
'Stitch's Great Escape' has visable Cast only that I am aware of.

'Laugh Floor' also seems to have the larger show building and more open space to play with or segment into separate / multiple spaces if need be.
'Stitch's Great Escape' seems smaller but that may fit better for the existing plans.

Of the two, I personally prefer 'Stitch's..' to the 'Laugh Floor'.
Several reasons, the first being that it fits in with the established 'space' and quasi-futurism theme of Tomorrowland much better then a comedy show put on by cartoon monsters.
The other is more my personal interests....

'Stitch's' features some excellent high end AAs and I much prefer watching figures in action then looking at giant screens of CGI animation.
Attractions that are primarily screen based turn me off, and I will confess I may be bias as i am a serious AA enthusiast.
So 'Laugh Floor' never appealed to me and does not really 'belong' in Tomorrowland thematically in my opinion.
Despite the hate many have for 'Stitch's..', for me I feel it fits in a little better theme wise with the land and the Animatronics are entertaining to watch.

The Stitch Attraction was better when it first opened, when everything was fully functioning and it had not yet been overly 'kidified' in a post-opening tweaking.

Of course 'Alien Encounter' wipes the floor with it as a whole....but I digress....



-

Totally agree. If Disney wants more IP, they don't have a lot of it that fits into Tomorrowland's existing theme and Wreck-It-Ralph is certainly not it. I think it would be best of them to do something else with Stitch. They'd be able to salvage the animatronics from SGE and give the character proper representation.

 

[Captain Neo]

Every time I turn around Bob Iger green lights a new attraction! wow

 

[clemmo]

Every time I turn around Bob Iger green lights a new attraction! wow

Agreed it feels like this summer has seen a major uptick in rumored attractions however I will say some of the ones green lit or close shouldn't have been (I'm looking at you GOTG) though personally I don't see a problem with WIR maybe because SGE is just so awful.

 

[Matt_Black]

Totally agree. If Disney wants more IP, they don't have a lot of it that fits into Tomorrowland's existing theme

Oh, they have some, just not any they're likely to use. Treasure Planet, Meet The Robinsons, Wander Over Yonder, certain elements of Gargoyles, etc.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Oh, they have some, just not any they're likely to use. Treasure Planet, Meet The Robinsons, Wander Over Yonder, certain elements of Gargoyles, etc.

Absolutely. Looking back, Treasure Planet is one of those movies I wish was a hit. But even so, Disney should handle placement better no matter how little appropriate IP they have.

 

[BrianLo]

I believe @BrianLo and @lazyboy97o have plenty to say about Tron since they've ridden it.

I'm sure I've already said plenty enough on SDL, wherever my massive essay has disappeared to.

I really liked the attraction, never did the standby queue so not sure if that was well executed.

I doubt it will ever be cloned though.

 

[Matt_Black]

Absolutely. Looking back, Treasure Planet is one of those movies I wish was a hit. But even so, Disney should handle placement better no matter how little appropriate IP they have.

And the thing is, Treasure Planet COULD be something there'd be a demand for if they promoted it. Show it on one of the many channels you own. Give it a limited theatrical re-release in 3D/ IMAX. Say it's a classic and make people believe it. Sleeping Beauty and Alice In Wonderland weren't initially successful, but they gained a following in later years because Disney brought it back to new audiences.