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

Cmdr_Crimson

Cmdr_Crimson

Well-Known Member
TyrantBoss said:
After watching the newest Imagineer tour of Storytime with Belle I have a disturbing feeling.
I feel that the attraction will be absolutely boring for adults, especially those without kids, and teens.

Maurice's cottage looks great, but that is just the cue of the attraction.
The magic mirror looks amazing...and that takes you into Belle's library.
The talking wardrobe is fantastic and fun....but then.....

The cast member starts handing out cardboard picture frames, horse heads, and mockups of the dog/footstool.
She throws a cloth cape on a kid to play The Beast and then they are going to be part of the retelling of Beauty and the Beast. (Yes, not even The Beast shows up....you get some little kid playing The Beast...seriously?!)

That's It?!?!? That's all we get after all of this time, money and build up. We get to be trapped in a room while we watch little kids reenact the story of Beauty and the Beast? No changing scenery? No moving us through the ride or revolving stage like Carousel of Progress? Just a cast member playing Belle, 6 or 7 little kids with cardboard props, and a room where we have to sit and watch them act it out?!

Explain to me how this meets with Walt Disney's vision of having attractions fun for kids AND adults?
The only adults that can thoroughly enjoy this are the parents of the kids in the show. Everyone else gets to watch and be bored like you are in Turtle Talk with Crush.

Why do the Disney suits have to tailor everything toward only kids now?

So if I have no kids, and want to check out Storytime with Belle here is what is going to happen.
1) I wait in a ridiculously long cue just to walk through Maurice's cottage.
2) I shuffle into a little room with a group of other people to watch the show and there is nothing else for me to dobut to watch the kids perform. Yawn.
3) Meanwhile the next group will have to wait for (probably 10 minutes) the show to end and the next group to come in.
This is not Philharmagic where an auditorium of people can file in and move the line quickly. This is a small group show.

I see a major problem with this attraction. No dark ride, no fast moving flow of peope, just walk and wait. It seems very much like ToonTown and walking through Mickey's cottage. As an adult it is fun once to check it out....and I never went back there again.

IF this is all Storytime with Belle is going to be....I see a tremendous missed opportunity by Disney imagineers to make this something even more special and inclusive.

I am curious to hear everyone's feedback, or if someone has more information that can prove me wrong.
Click to expand...


And That's Why They Have Gaston's tavern.
 
D

doppelv

New Member
Furiated said:
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.
Click to expand...

This is similar to what I had expected too. I think a multimedia "show" where Belle and her magical friends can tell her story would have been much more inclusive than watching a bunch of confused toddlers play with cutouts, hoping they stay interested long enough to complete the semblance of a story.

To me, this does not equate to Walt's idea. Why do I say that? Easy, because it replicates the very situation that led him to create Disneyland. Walt wasn't concerned that there was nothing for kids to do, his girls rode the merry-go-round quite happily. His frustration was that while his girls were riding, he had to sit on a bench watching them have fun. Now, here we are 60+ years later, and the same thing is going to happen. The adults will be sitting on a bench watching the kids have fun (or freaking out). I'm hearing a lot of folks asking what attractions at Disneyland when it first opened had height requirements, I pose this question, how many attractions would Walt have felt awkward experiencing? How many meet and greets opened with Disneyland? Walt's park had can-can girls for crying out loud!

Now, let me just say that despite all of this, I normally have no problem with meet and greets, but I really think this experience is exclusive. I, as a male in his 20's without children will feel awkward experiencing this "attraction", which is a shame because from what I've seen, the lead-in is really a world class experience. I think the general idea does have merit, but the execution seems lacking. I will be fair, and will withhold complete judgment until I've seen it in person, but I can't say I'm thrilled with the precedent it's setting.
 
danlb_2000

danlb_2000

Premium Member
doppelv said:
This is similar to what I had expected too. I think a multimedia "show" where Belle and her magical friends can tell her story would have been much more inclusive than watching a bunch of confused toddlers play with cutouts, hoping they stay interested long enough to complete the semblance of a story.

To me, this does not equate to Walt's idea. Why do I say that? Easy, because it replicates the very situation that led him to create Disneyland. Walt wasn't concerned that there was nothing for kids to do, his girls rode the merry-go-round quite happily. His frustration was that while his girls were riding, he had to sit on a bench watching them have fun. Now, here we are 60+ years later, and the same thing is going to happen. The adults will be sitting on a bench watching the kids have fun (or freaking out). I'm hearing a lot of folks asking what attractions at Disneyland when it first opened had height requirements, I pose this question, how many attractions would Walt have felt awkward experiencing? How many meet and greets opened with Disneyland? Walt's park had can-can girls for crying out loud!

Now, let me just say that despite all of this, I normally have no problem with meet and greets, but I really think this experience is exclusive. I, as a male in his 20's without children will feel awkward experiencing this "attraction", which is a shame because from what I've seen, the lead-in is really a world class experience. I think the general idea does have merit, but the execution seems lacking. I will be fair, and will withhold complete judgment until I've seen it in person, but I can't say I'm thrilled with the precedent it's setting.
Click to expand...

I have read the merry-go-round story before, but as someone else pointed out recently, why was a merry-go-round one of the first attractions built in Disneyland? As for adults sitting and watching their kids have fun in Storytime with Belle, that's their choice. You can clearly see in the videos that have been released so far that the adults are encouraged to participate right along with the children. Yes, this may be uncomfortable for childless adults, but that's not what the Walt merry-go-round story is about. I think this M&G has more opportunity for children and parents to experience it together then a normal M&G.
 
Lucky

Lucky

Well-Known Member
Witchy Chick said:
I do not see much difference in riding "kiddie" rides like Snow White or Peter Pan, and in walking through a kiddie attraction like Storytime with Belle. /shrug
Click to expand...
Same here. I don't get the fixation with rides, rides, rides when the "ride" in question is just a carnival-like slow moving vehicle. If it's the scenes that are the attraction wouldn't you rather move through them at your own pace (like in the M&M country houses) instead of the pace dictated by the "ride"? The main difference is that a "ride" takes up far more space in the park. I don't see how M&M's country houses (RIP) or these new houses could be experienced better as "rides."
 
D

doctornick

Well-Known Member
danlb_2000 said:
I think this M&G has more opportunity for children and parents to experience it together then a normal M&G.
Click to expand...

This. If anything, the entire development of Storytime with Belle is a way to embrace Walt's comment about something for the whole family -- instead of an ordinary M&G which would only appeal to young children, this is an experience that everyone in the family could be entertained by. The details in the cottage aren't there for 3 year olds to appreciate.
 
LithiumBill

LithiumBill

Well-Known Member
I think the point is lost... there is something for EVERYONE at the MK.

Not every attraction is geared for every visitor...

I don't ride DUMBO, because I feel it's be silly for me to climb aboard. But I enjoy watching my kids ride. I ride Space Mountain, and my wife does not... Should they have not built SM because some people choose not to ride roller coasters? Your son is afraid of the dark, so then they must eliminate all dark rides... and so on.

This is an amazing experience for kids and families... If you don't want to view the show, go ride Splash or Thunder or the HM again... It's that simple.

Not everything, is for everyone. It's the over PC'ification of this country. "If it's not for me, then no one else shall enjoy it."
 
Magenta Panther

Magenta Panther

Well-Known Member
I guess I don't get why the kids are supposed to put on a show. DISNEY is supposed to put on the show. I can see major difficulties with this. Unwilling, shy kids who don't want to volunteer, unenthusiastic parents, cast members talking over the animatronics...what is it with this "interactive" kick anyway? That attraction could have had numerous AAs and effects telling US the story of Beauty and the Beast. It's a shame, because so many aspects of it are marvelous. OH well.
 
LithiumBill

LithiumBill

Well-Known Member
Magenta Panther said:
I guess I don't get why the kids are supposed to put on a show. DISNEY is supposed to put on the show. I can see major difficulties with this. Unwilling, shy kids who don't want to volunteer, unenthusiastic parents, cast members talking over the animatronics...what is it with this "interactive" kick anyway? That attraction could have had numerous AAs and effects telling US the story of Beauty and the Beast. It's a shame, because so many aspects of it are marvelous. OH well.
Click to expand...

I don't think the participants are key to the storytelling. Watching the video it is fairly obvious that the animatronics are cued by a CM after the the interactive pieces are done... I can envision slow days where there are only 10 people in the room, and not all the "cast" is filled... this is why they are working out the kinks in a soft open.

They are prepared for no, or very little participation. But my guess is the bigger issue will be if there are 15 kids in the room and there is not ENOUGH characters to be portrayed... That could get messy with tears...
 
Lucky

Lucky

Well-Known Member
Most attractions are passive. I wouldn't want them all to be participatory or interactive, but don't see anything wrong with a few. A little variety is good.
 
WDW1974

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
That's the word for a well-respected insider friend of mine who recently experienced the new interactive uber-immersive (yeah, I'm being sarcastic) meet and greet that will surely make everyone forget The Boy Who Lived and Michael Bay's big playthings.

I am under a sorta personal NDA here to said friend, but the attraction is to use the friend's words 'something only the simpering mommy bloggers from the Midwest, your friend Lou, and mentally challenged fans' could find worthy of the money spent ... it has a cool Lumiere AA, a few nice effects yet the whole is once again a WDW trainwreck.'

Once again, it would appear that Disney swung for the infield and the ball simply bounced foul behind the plate. WHOO-HOO, TDO!!!!!
 
tomman710

tomman710

Well-Known Member
WDW1974 said:
That's the word for a well-respected insider friend of mine who recently experienced the new interactive uber-immersive (yeah, I'm being sarcastic) meet and greet that will surely make everyone forget The Boy Who Lived and Michael Bay's big playthings.

I am under a sorta personal NDA here to said friend, but the attraction is to use the friend's words 'something only the simpering mommy bloggers from the Midwest, your friend Lou, and mentally challenged fans' could find worthy of the money spent ... it has a cool Lumiere AA, a few nice effects yet the whole is once again a WDW trainwreck.'

Once again, it would appear that Disney swung for the infield and the ball simply bounced foul behind the plate. WHOO-HOO, TDO!!!!!
Click to expand...

Can you give specifics about what makes it a disaster?

I mean typically I feel like you and I are on the same page but this was nothing more than a meet and greet, right? ... I mean what did we really expect? I thought the animatronics looked great but it was never something that I ever thought people outside of Mongello would call "fantastic" ...
 

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

Back
Top Bottom