Storytime with Belle...That's it?!?

danlb_2000

Premium Member
So the idea of the attraction is that kids "recreate" the story of BATB to Belle through play-acting?
From a capacity POV this introduces a ton of variability which is not good. Is there only a certain "show time" for the kids to put on the play or does it end when it ends? What if kids do not cooperate? What if, due to the heavy international guest numbers, that the kids simply do not understand what to present to Belle? A lot of questions on how this does not become a capacity nightmare based on what info I have seen and heard.
Anytime you take the control away from the ride or show and put it in the hands of the guest is dangerous in my opinion.

I am sure the CM's will be well trained on how to handle these sorts of situations. This is probably one of the reasons they are starting previews early for this attraction so they can work out things will work in a real world setting. Also the structure of the attraction will help with the guest flow. We have been told that there are two story telling rooms, and we have seen the two pre-show rooms meaning that there can be up to four groups of guests in the attraction at the same time.
 

lilclerk

Well-Known Member
I'm an adult, I don't have or want kids, I don't like meet & greets, and I usually go to Disney solo, and I've been super excited about this since they described it at Destination D last May. Watching the video, it seems to be exactly what I expected. I also love Turtle Talk, so maybe this is the kind of m&g for me, even though I just want to watch the "show" rather than meet the characters.
Do I wish it was a ride? Absolutely. But for a m&g, I think this is pretty darn awesome, and it's a great way to update the Storytime with Belle show.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
it's Fantasyland, let alone the Magic Kingdom. it's not supposed to have four or five Expedition Everests, that's not what that part of the park is for. Fantasyland is a place for fairy tales and kid stuff. they're sort of pushing it a bit with the Mine Train, but still. there shouldn't be a freaking roller coaster in Fantasyland. maybe in the other lands, but not Fantasyland.

You mean like the Matterhorn? The roller coaster put in FL by Walt himself?
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Is there only a certain "show time" for the kids to put on the play or does it end when it ends? What if kids do not cooperate? What if, due to the heavy international guest numbers, that the kids simply do not understand what to present to Belle? A lot of questions on how this does not become a capacity nightmare based on what info I have seen and heard.
Anytime you take the control away from the ride or show and put it in the hands of the guest is dangerous in my opinion.

All your 'concerns' didn't seem to cripple the previous version of storytime with Belle.. so I think the world will survive.

You could make the same 'concerns' over how things are done in the Animation attractions too.. yet they get by too.

So have no fear.. it's been done and the sky did not fall.
 

J03Y

Well-Known Member
You mean like the Matterhorn? The roller coaster put in FL by Walt himself?

please. that's a gentle coaster at best. it's no Expedition Everest, which was the root of what i was saying. a roller coaster, like Everest or Thunder Mountain or Rockin Roller Coaster, that's what doesn't belong in Fantasyland. the Mine Train and Matterhorn are just simply gentle, and to be honest i honestly don't think Matterhorn should've been put in Fantasyland even at that point. i may see it as a gentle coaster given the others i've been on, it's still a pretty fast coaster, it should've been put closer to Tomorrowland and made part of that area, it really doesn't fit Fantasyland both as an attraction and as part of the theme.
 

Furiated

Well-Known Member
As someone that somewhat agrees with the OP, I wanted to throw in my 2 cents, although is seems from previous responses we are vastly outnumbered :)

I was also disappointed watching the preview video and seeing what the experience will actually be. Yes, I knew that it was to be an enhanced Meet & Greet and not an actual attraction or ride. I had no knowledge of what the prior Storytime with Belle was like, so I had no expectations based on that. I guess in my head I pictured something like Belle and the animatronic Lumiere going back and forth telling the BatB story with maybe some added effects in the room like in Ollivander's at WWoHP. Not watching toddlers put on a school play with cheap cardboard props.

My girlfriend is a HUGE BatB fan, and her reaction after watching the video was "Lumiere looks amazing but there appears to be a lot of kid-centric rigamarole to go through. They have the kids put on some kind of play?? Ugh. It looks dumb. Why can't they set it up so that everyone can easily check out the cool stuff while the kids do their stuff in another room?"

We would both love to check out the queue and Lumiere but have no interest in watching other people's kids putting on a play. This to me makes me think of the difference between Turtle Talk with Crush and Jedi Training Acedemy. I've been to Turtle Talk a few times and although I didn't get to ask a question (because I'm not a kid) and I have no kids of my own, it was still entertaining. Different questions (usually) get asked each time, there can be some funny questions and answers. Watching JTA is incredibly boring if it's not your kid up there, it's basically an excuse for your kid to go up and "fight" Vader for 4 seconds before being ushered off stage for the next kid to come up. Fun if you're the kid doing it, and a great photo op if you're the kid's parent. But not exactly great entertainment for everyone else.

And no, it's not like we're saying you CAN'T have attractions aimed at the younger folks, it just, to me, seemed like this would be an example of a good one that you could have still made appealing to all ages, instead of focusing on the very young, and their parents. It made me think of Hoop-Dee-Doo and how the people they pull out of the crowd are all ages. You would think they'd look for the biggest burliest guy in the room the play Beast. Out in DCA there's a Wilderness Explorers show that's a lead in to the Meet & Greet with Russell, and although it's obviously aimed at kids, they do a great job of making it entertaining for all ages, and the camp counselor running the show will even call out the adults in the back that are not participating.

Whenever something like this comes up, I always see people trot out the tired old argument of how kids can't go on the 40" height restriction thrill rides. I don't think that's a valid argument because you are forgetting, some day that kid WILL be 40" and WILL be able to ride that attraction. So the kids will have enjoyed the kids only rides AND grown up to enjoy those rides. It's not like adults will ever get to do the opposite. That's why I personally prefer stuff like Dumbo or the Storybookland Canal Boats, rides that are aimed at the younger set but can also be enjoyed by adults as well.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
As someone that somewhat agrees with the OP, I wanted to throw in my 2 cents, although is seems from previous responses we are vastly outnumbered :)

I was also disappointed watching the preview video and seeing what the experience will actually be. Yes, I knew that it was to be an enhanced Meet & Greet and not an actual attraction or ride. I had no knowledge of what the prior Storytime with Belle was like, so I had no expectations based on that. I guess in my head I pictured something like Belle and the animatronic Lumiere going back and forth telling the BatB story with maybe some added effects in the room like in Ollivander's at WWoHP. Not watching toddlers put on a school play with cheap cardboard props.

My girlfriend is a HUGE BatB fan, and her reaction after watching the video was "Lumiere looks amazing but there appears to be a lot of kid-centric rigamarole to go through. They have the kids put on some kind of play?? Ugh. It looks dumb. Why can't they set it up so that everyone can easily check out the cool stuff while the kids do their stuff in another room?"

We would both love to check out the queue and Lumiere but have no interest in watching other people's kids putting on a play. This to me makes me think of the difference between Turtle Talk with Crush and Jedi Training Acedemy. I've been to Turtle Talk a few times and although I didn't get to ask a question (because I'm not a kid) and I have no kids of my own, it was still entertaining. Different questions (usually) get asked each time, there can be some funny questions and answers. Watching JTA is incredibly boring if it's not your kid up there, it's basically an excuse for your kid to go up and "fight" Vader for 4 seconds before being ushered off stage for the next kid to come up. Fun if you're the kid doing it, and a great photo op if you're the kid's parent. But not exactly great entertainment for everyone else.

And no, it's not like we're saying you CAN'T have attractions aimed at the younger folks, it just, to me, seemed like this would be an example of a good one that you could have still made appealing to all ages, instead of focusing on the very young, and their parents. It made me think of Hoop-Dee-Doo and how the people they pull out of the crowd are all ages. You would think they'd look for the biggest burliest guy in the room the play Beast. Out in DCA there's a Wilderness Explorers show that's a lead in to the Meet & Greet with Russell, and although it's obviously aimed at kids, they do a great job of making it entertaining for all ages, and the camp counselor running the show will even call out the adults in the back that are not participating.

Whenever something like this comes up, I always see people trot out the tired old argument of how kids can't go on the 40" height restriction thrill rides. I don't think that's a valid argument because you are forgetting, some day that kid WILL be 40" and WILL be able to ride that attraction. So the kids will have enjoyed the kids only rides AND grown up to enjoy those rides. It's not like adults will ever get to do the opposite. That's why I personally prefer stuff like Dumbo or the Storybookland Canal Boats, rides that are aimed at the younger set but can also be enjoyed by adults as well.
When I was in my 20s and going to WDW with my girlfriend I would have probably been in your camp too. Of course back then I had PI to go to which was just for adults. I never cared about meet and greets and usually just skipped them along with some other kiddie type rides and shows. Having kids now I have a different perspective on things. My boys would probably not be interested in a straight up meet and greet with Belle, but the story part will interest them.

Just because the video showed only kids in the show doesn't mean it will always be that way. If they don't have enough kids "volunteer" I am sure they will draft adults.
 

Furiated

Well-Known Member
When I was in my 20s and going to WDW with my girlfriend I would have probably been in your camp too. Of course back then I had PI to go to which was just for adults. I never cared about meet and greets and usually just skipped them along with some other kiddie type rides and shows. Having kids now I have a different perspective on things. My boys would probably not be interested in a straight up meet and greet with Belle, but the story part will interest them.

Just because the video showed only kids in the show doesn't mean it will always be that way. If they don't have enough kids "volunteer" I am sure they will draft adults.

I hope that's the case, I think it would expand the appeal. And I do like Meet & Greets in general (although I think they focus on them a bit too much) so I'm not against the whole thing just because it's a Meet & Greet.
 

ImagineerDude

Well-Known Member
When I was in my 20s and going to WDW with my girlfriend I would have probably been in your camp too. Of course back then I had PI to go to which was just for adults. I never cared about meet and greets and usually just skipped them along with some other kiddie type rides and shows. Having kids now I have a different perspective on things. My boys would probably not be interested in a straight up meet and greet with Belle, but the story part will interest them.

Just because the video showed only kids in the show doesn't mean it will always be that way. If they don't have enough kids "volunteer" I am sure they will draft adults.
In the old Belle show, the Beast was usually played by an adult and it was quite funny for everyone! Sometimes, adults are afraid to show their inner child at Disney :)
 

danlb_2000

Premium Member
When I was in my 20s and going to WDW with my girlfriend I would have probably been in your camp too. Of course back then I had PI to go to which was just for adults. I never cared about meet and greets and usually just skipped them along with some other kiddie type rides and shows. Having kids now I have a different perspective on things. My boys would probably not be interested in a straight up meet and greet with Belle, but the story part will interest them.

Just because the video showed only kids in the show doesn't mean it will always be that way. If they don't have enough kids "volunteer" I am sure they will draft adults.

Actually, there are adults in the show in the video. There are two adult men playing knights.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
In the old Belle show, the Beast was usually played by an adult and it was quite funny for everyone! Sometimes, adults are afraid to show their inner child at Disney :)
If that's the case, as a bigger guy I am almost guaranteed to get picked!!! I would definitely have no problem playing along.

Actually, there are adults in the show in the video. There are two adult men playing knights.
I didn't watch it that closely. Good catch.
 

CJR

Well-Known Member
it's Fantasyland, let alone the Magic Kingdom. it's not supposed to have four or five Expedition Everests, that's not what that part of the park is for. Fantasyland is a place for fairy tales and kid stuff. they're sort of pushing it a bit with the Mine Train, but still. there shouldn't be a freaking roller coaster in Fantasyland. maybe in the other lands, but not Fantasyland.

you're thinking too adult-y, for something meant to expand an area designed for kid-friendly attractions. it's lovely that you want attractions to interest you and make you have fun, but honestly that's not what this expansion is for. i'd suggest waiting for a DHS expansion/makeover before making these kinds of arguments

As others have said Matterhorn is in Fantasyland so there have been coasters put there before. That's beside the point though, as you took my post too literally: I was meaning E-tickets, not necessary roller coasters. I agree that Everest wouldn't be a good fit, but that's not the point I was making. Not that everything would have had to be an E-ticket either; the point is that the budget spent on this expansion could have financed these e-tickets.

They overspent considering only two new rides are being build and at the expense of closing one. So after almost a half a billion dollars, we are gaining one ride and taking both new rides into account, neither one is an e-ticket. They're still going to raise prices like they put in four or five Everest's though.

With the size of the space, who's to say the expansion couldn't have been a whole new land? There's no rule that said it had to be Fantasyland. Yes, that's what they did (make it Fantasyland), but it's not what they had to do. It could have easily became a larger version of CA's Toontown, or something completely original. With almost $500 million spent on this project, just about anything was possible with this space.

Also, the statement in bold was just belittling and unnecessary considering you didn't even understand my argument. My argument is just as valid as anyone else's is. I would also recommend calling it a discussion. The beauty of these boards is the variety of opinions, they make you think "out of the box".
 

CJR

Well-Known Member
My new hope is that they might use the Fairytale Garden area to put in a ride once the Princess Fairytale Hall is completed. The Garden is literally ride next door and pretty superfluous and is sufficient space for a "traditional" dark ride.

That is exactly what I said earlier, great minds think alike! It's a great spot for a new attraction too. That area of the park is a little quiet compared to the rest of the park. After the PFH opens up, there's really no reason to have this, Bell's M&G, and PFH. There's an opportunity for Disney to toss another attraction in the MK that can really add some value to this area of the park. I vote for a Sleeping Beauty dark ride! If that's too much, a walk through like Disneyland's would be OK, although a ride's still better. It is a theme park after all.
 

dman1373

Active Member
After seeing it, it seems like a better version of the Monsters inc ride. It looks real cool way of having it timed out well and also having guest interact. I mean its not just anarchy like alot of people are acting like. And while i said it was cool that guests get to interact, each guest has limited interaction so it wont hinder anyone elses experience.
 

pumpkin7

Well-Known Member
PERHAPS... the cardboard cut outs are temporary as the attraction doesn't open for another 18 months??

Anyway, I don't have kids and I would still be happy to go and see Belle and Lumier. It's cute and I think Lumier is a fabulous animatronic. I'd just go to stare at him in awe!
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom