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

dreamfinder

dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
Wdwprince said:
even kiddie rides like Tea Cups and Dumbo could be enjoyed by guests of all ages.
Click to expand...

Tea Cups a kiddie ride? Obviously you have never been on the ride with someone who knows how to make them spin.

Casey Jr? Or Storybook Canal Boats? Both are rides that are pretty much for kids. Yeah, they have a bit of theming/backstory, but come on now. Anything that is build on that scale is meant for kids. Most parents would go on those rides to spend the time with their child, and to enjoy seeing their childs reaction.

I see no problem with the enhanced M&G. It is something that was replaced by Rapunzel and then by Merida, so for once, it is a case of addition. I may not be the biggest fan of waiting in line just to wait another 10 minutes while kids play just so I can get my picture taken with Belle, but I'll do it. The experience before, and the fun of the moment will be the pay off.
 
sshindel

sshindel

The Epcot Manifesto
Wdwprince said:
Already we are seeing moms saying "this is not for you but my kid will love it" to a guest who is paying the same ticket price as she is. Attractions should be for all ages like Walt intended. In the past, even kiddie rides like Tea Cups and Dumbo could be enjoyed by guests of all ages.

It is only now that Imagineers are isolating guests without children with attractions like these and playground queues being slapped on every attraction. This park was founded on the mission statement that guests of all ages could enjoy the attractions.

Again, moms if you want a place to take the kiddies that is just for kiddies, Legoland is down the street.
Click to expand...

Walt did not intend that every attraction could be used by every guest. Please someone correct me on this but there have always been attractions which have involved height restrictions (Matterhorn pops to mind, and I'm trying to find reference that the original 35" height requirement has always been there").
At the current parks, my children have not yet been able to ride a whole laundry list of rides. My oldest this year will finally make the height requirement for a vast majority, but will still not be able to ride Space Mountain, Rock and Roller Coaster, Mission Space, ...
If you want to say that every attraction should be able to be enjoyed by every person at the park, by all means, please start up the club asking for all thrill rides with height restrictions to be removed from the parks.
The park itself was meant to be a place for entire families to enjoy, not every single attraction. If you cannot find a way to enjoy a very well themed storytime M&G, please feel free to walk over to Space Mountian and know that my child would love to join you there, if only she was able to...
 
Mad Stitch

Mad Stitch

Well-Known Member
Wdwprince said:
Already we are seeing moms saying "this is not for you but my kid will love it" to a guest who is paying the same ticket price as she is. Attractions should be for all ages like Walt intended. In the past, even kiddie rides like Tea Cups and Dumbo could be enjoyed by guests of all ages.

It is only now that Imagineers are isolating guests without children with attractions like these and playground queues being slapped on every attraction. This park was founded on the mission statement that guests of all ages could enjoy the attractions.

Again, moms if you want a place to take the kiddies that is just for kiddies, Legoland is down the street.
Click to expand...

Well then with that argument they should never have built Expedition Everest, Rock ‘n Rollercoaster, Mission Space, Tower of Terror… Are you willing to take the wrecking ball to those attractions?
 
ajbidwell

ajbidwell

Member
awilliams4 said:
Do you believe that Space Mountain should be shuttered because kids that aren't 44' tall cannot ride?
Click to expand...

This 100%! I get so tired of people toting out the "Walt inteneded everything for everybody" line only when it refers to kid-focused attractions. I pay almost as much for my DD4 to come to the park and she is litterally not allowed to do attractions that are above her height, it's not just a matter of preferrence. If Walt saw that every park has 3-6 rides that have a height restriction I guess he would just torch all of WDW and urinate on the ashes.
 
awilliams4

awilliams4

Well-Known Member
COProgressFan said:
I think there is an enormous difference between booking a hotel room, where you will be sleeping and staying all week, and likely spending thousands of dollars to do so, and planning a lunch at maybe $20 a person.

Do you know what you want for dinner on March 1st next year? Just wondering....
Click to expand...


If I was going to WDW on March 1st I would know where I would be and therefore know where to make my dining reservation.


Checking the Calendar, March 1st is on a Friday. We like to vacation Saturday to Saturday and we leave the resort early for the drive home so we know that we will not be staying out late Friday night. The resort we stay at has some leverage in that as well. If we are staying at BLT, we would probably hit MK on the last night, BCV would probably put us at Epcot the last night.


Toward the end of our vacation, we are also tightening up on the wallet so that eliminates all buffets and a few other high priced places that if we were eating there, would do so earlier in the trip.

So that leaves Tony's or the Plaza.

If we were staying at BCV instead, than we already know we are eating at Epcot a lot. In a one week stay it is probably 4 dinners at the World Showcase. Sitting down for 3 minutes talking with your spouse about which (4) places you want to eat at Epcot in March really isn't much of a stretch. There may be 5 or 6 choices total. You just need to weed out two....so the place we would be eating March 1st would probably be the last of the 4 meals we decided to eat at while staying at BCV.

Not a big deal.
 
Mawg

Mawg

Well-Known Member
awilliams4 said:
If I was going to WDW on March 1st I would know where I would be and therefore know where to make my dining reservation.


Checking the Calendar, March 1st is on a Friday. We like to vacation Saturday to Saturday and we leave the resort early for the drive home so we know that we will not be staying out late Friday night. The resort we stay at has some leverage in that as well. If we are staying at BLT, we would probably hit MK on the last night, BCV would probably put us at Epcot the last night.


Toward the end of our vacation, we are also tightening up on the wallet so that eliminates all buffets and a few other high priced places that if we were eating there, would do so earlier in the trip.

So that leaves Tony's or the Plaza.

If we were staying at BCV instead, than we already know we are eating at Epcot a lot. In a one week stay it is probably 4 dinners at the World Showcase. Sitting down for 3 minutes talking with your spouse about which (4) places you want to eat at Epcot in March really isn't much of a stretch. There may be 5 or 6 choices total. You just need to weed out two....so the place we would be eating March 1st would probably be the last of the 4 meals we decided to eat at while staying at BCV.

Not a big deal.
Click to expand...

Seems slightly off topic
 
Animaniac93-98

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
wm49rs said:
Another way to look at things is that the FLE will give all of those pesky ankle-biters a place to call their own....
Click to expand...

I thought that's what the Kennel was for? ;)

I strongly disagree with Turtle Talk being just for kids. I think it's a great way to laugh at the stupid things the kids say to Chrush that often times confuse me as much as they do him. :D Plus it's a good use of screen tech for a change.

If we compare Belle storytimes before and after the new one is 100x better, no question. The added feature of Lumiere should also make the show more interesting, especially if he's given some improve room or if the add Cogsworth in the future (which maybe they should have done in the first place). Beast in person would be nice, though.
 
alphac2005

alphac2005

Well-Known Member
danlb_2000 said:
I see this idea thrown around alot, but personally I don't think it was ever Walt's intention that every attraction should be equally enjoyable for every age, but instead that the parks should have have something in them for everyone. Even with the kid-oriented additions in the Fantasyland Expansion, there are still a good balance in Magic Kingdom. There are things aimed at the little ones, plenty of attractions that both kids and adults can enjoy together, and some mild thrill rides that aren't suitable for the real little ones.
Click to expand...

You're very correct. Walt didn't expect three year olds on the Matterhorn and he was pretty proud of that attraction.
 
ChrisM

ChrisM

Well-Known Member
I think it's actually a neat way to plus the standard meet 'n greet experience, but obviously nothing mindblowing. As things stand now, I loathe meet and greets and think they are truly the most boring wastes of time ever conceived, but this looks tolerable (at the very least).

That said, was this truly what they had in mind for Cinderella's Chateau and Sleeping Beauty's Cottage? Instead of the Seven Dwarves Mine Ride we'd have gotten two more versions of this?

Holy hell. That would have been craptacular.
 
ExtinctJenn

ExtinctJenn

Well-Known Member
If you want to be technical, there's less for kids than adults. An adult can walk into/onto any attraction whereas children are limited by height. The bottom line is the idea was there would be something for everyone to enjoy at Disney's parks. That doesn't mean everything can be enjoyed by everyone, it means that there is something everyone can find to enjoy.
 
tomman710

tomman710

Well-Known Member
I thought they always sold it for what it was ... a meet and greet and/or revamped Storytime with Belle.

I for one have always been cynical and dismissive of those experiences (and I have little kids) ... BUT ... I don't see how any one could not be pleasantly surprised by this final product compared to how it was originally advertised.

A meet and greet wasn't turning into an E-Ticket ... but they sold it as a meet and greet and I definitely think its something more.

I hesitate to say I am impressed because god forbid that opens the flood gates to add more of these but for now I think this looks very interesting and innovative.
 
Mawg

Mawg

Well-Known Member
Wdwprince said:
It's starting to look like a zombie invasion of moms with pitchforks up in here. That would be a great Disney Halloween maze. Watch out Universal. You have some competition.

Lighten up people.
Click to expand...


Disney and Universal market themselves to different audiences with some overlap, Disney markets to young children and Universal to teenagers. In what Disney commercial do you see teenagers or young adult going around flexing their muscles around the park. That's left for Universal, go have fun.
 
Vtlsgns2

Vtlsgns2

Active Member
WDWBryan said:
Holy Moley. Relax. Here's a picture of some puppies

puppy-vinegar-water-training.jpg
Click to expand...
Instead of puppies, can I get pics of a different baby animal...a baby leopard, perhaps? You know, something a bit less...docile--more thrilling.
Teasing:)
 

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

Back
Top Bottom