Super Star Limo: My Favorite Disney Ride Of All Time.

[Darkbeer1]

Disney made a BIG mistake not selling the photo they took and showed at the end of the ride...

People had such a classic "What the F...." look, that it would be a big seller...

God, I still remember all the times I rode it to get photos and videos, and then someone needed a specific thing so they could write about it, thank goodness the Cove Bar was there.....

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

Disney made a bigger mistake closing Superstar Limo.

It exists now...only on YouTube.

 

[Disney Irish]

I never got to ride it myself, but I do like the nod to the Spitting Image style puppets. Someone in WDI must have been a fan of the UK show.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

It's ironic that so many fans rail against Eisner and Iger while celebrating Roy Disney Jr. when he played a pivotal in pursuading Eisner to come to Disney, which ushered in the subsequent transformation of Walt Disney Productions into the massive Walt Disney Company that we know today. Roy, while serving on Disney's board, assisted in the ouster of then Disney CEO Ron Miller, a leader who had his own share of issues.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/1984/09/08/business/disney-s-chief-is-forced-out.html

I remember this period well. Disney had hit rock bottom, and for better or worse, it's almost shocking how far the company has come since Miller was running things.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

They're obviously more powerful than ever, but we have lost so much charm.

With all that revenue coming in, there's so much potential for great things to be happening with these theme parks, but the impression you get is that they care more about making money than delivering a great product that deserves the money. The current and previous management inherited this stuff and they only occasionally deliver the goods, AKA when it will make a Titanic load of money like Star Wars.

 

[Rich T]

They're obviously more powerful than ever, but we have lost so much charm.

With all that revenue coming in, there's so much potential for great things to be happening with these theme parks, but the impression you get is that they care more about making money than delivering a great product that deserves the money. The current and previous management inherited this stuff and they only occasionally deliver the goods, AKA when it will make a Titanic load of money like Star Wars.

This. This. This. I'm glad Disney survived and thrived past its crisis period in the early 80's. But now... Disney isn't Disney anymore, except in specific recent films and attractions. The overall company is becoming just another faceless behemoth.

 

[Rich T]

I never got to ride it myself, but I do like the nod to the Spitting Image style puppets. Someone in WDI must have been a fan of the UK show.

If Genesis's "Land of Confusion" had been blasting through the ride, it might have worked...

This is world we live in...
And this was the budget given...

 

[dweezil78]

With all that revenue coming in, there's so much potential for great things to be happening with these theme parks, but the impression you get is that they care more about making money than delivering a great product that deserves the money.

Yes and no. I agree a lot of the charm is gone, but I think unfortunately the days of charm are over (with some exception that shows up as surprises here and there.) But I do think the company turns out a quality product more than not.

But for example, in the case of Star Wars they could have very easily gone with the original plans of doing a half-baked redo of Tomorrowland with Star Wars crammed in there and a lame Millennium Falcon plunked on top of the old Peoplemover Station. Instead we got a (depnding on your personal taste) fairly cool temporary Tomorrowland overlay, some really nice, intricate re-working of the ROA, a new Big Thunder Trail, and updated Disneyland RR... all in preparation of a massively intricate immersive new land. None of that really had to happen, especially with the level of attention they each received. SWL could have been smaller, there could have been one attraction instead of two, less to explore, etc. It could have all been done cheaper and with less quality.

Quality product, however, is extremely different than an individual's taste and like of said product. And you are right, not all of it is up to snuff... some of it is half way there, some of it is a total miss. I think that's always been the case though. For every great project, there is an equally lame one waiting to be ripped apart.

I wish I could say everything I've done in my life and in my career was great and up to the standards it should be, I'd be lying if I did though!

 

[Rich T]

It's ironic that so many fans rail against Eisner and Iger while celebrating Roy Disney Jr. when he played a pivotal in pursuading Eisner to come to Disney, which ushered in the subsequent transformation of Walt Disney Productions into the massive Walt Disney Company that we know today. Roy, while serving on Disney's board, assisted in the ouster of then Disney CEO Ron Miller, a leader who had his own share of issues.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/1984/09/08/business/disney-s-chief-is-forced-out.html

I remember this period well. Disney had hit rock bottom, and for better or worse, it's almost shocking how far the company has come since Miller was running things.

It's all very human. I liked the way Roy successfully fought to save the company by bringing in Eisner, but then later tried to talk to Eisner about directions he disagreed with... and then at the end (and I'm sure this wasn't fun for him) having to get Frankensteisner the heck out of there.

 

[Rich T]

...the days of charm are over (with some exception that shows up as surprises here and there.) But I do think the company turns out a quality product more than not.

If the days of charm are over, then Disney has officially killed its golden goose and morphed into something that is *not* what made many of us--worldwide--fans in the first place. As I've mentioned before, the name "Disney" will soon carry no more meaning than "Comcast."

 

[Deleted member 107043]

It's all very human. I liked the way Roy successfully fought to save the company by bringing in Eisner, but then later tried to talk to Eisner about directions he disagreed with... and then at the end (and I'm sure this wasn't fun for him) having to get Frankensteisner the heck out of there.

Roy knew that Disney was undervalued and took it upon himself to protect his financial interests by bringing in a Hollywood big gun to take things in a different direction. He knew exactly what he was doing and what the risks were.

I never quite understood why he ended up agressively wanting to overthrow Eisner and the Save Disney campaign when it was obvious Eisner's successor would only double down on the successful blueprint exploiting Disney content he had created. My guess is that at some point some bad blood developed between the two and it was partially personal.

 

[Rich T]

Roy knew that Disney was undervalued and took it upon himself to protect his financial interests by bringing in a Hollywood big gun to take things in a different direction. He knew exactly what he was doing and what the risks were.

I never understood why he ended up agressively wanting to overthrow Eisner when he knew his successor would only double down on the successful blueprint exploiting Disney content Eisner had created. My guess is that at some point some bad blood developed between the two.

To be fair to Roy, I don't think *anyone* could foresee what would happen with Michael Eisner after Frank Wells died and Disney's America got torpedoed and DLP bombed. Bad blood between Roy and Michael or not, Eisner seemed to be making it clear to the world (through his own actions and choices) that he just didn't give a flying fig about quality at the parks or maintaining the legacy of quality animation anymore. Video sequel after video sequel. Maintenance issues killing people at Disneyland. DCA 1.0. Eisner needed to be removed.

 

[Phroobar]

They're obviously more powerful than ever, but we have lost so much charm.

With all that revenue coming in, there's so much potential for great things to be happening with these theme parks, but the impression you get is that they care more about making money than delivering a great product that deserves the money. The current and previous management inherited this stuff and they only occasionally deliver the goods, AKA when it will make a Titanic load of money like Star Wars.

Why do you keep talking about the Titanic when the Titanic never sunk? It was really it's sister ship the Olympic that sunk in order to collect on insurance.

 

[dweezil78]

If the days of charm are over, then Disney has officially killed its golden goose and morphed into something that is *not* what made many of us--worldwide--fans in the first place. As I've mentioned before, the name "Disney" will soon carry no more meaning than "Comcast."

I was referring more-so to GLOAB's lo-fi definition of charm at the parks. As a company, I think Disney continues puts out very charming content still. Not all of it of course, but it's certainly there.

Also, while not 100% exclusive to it, a lot of what we deem 'charming' comes with age like a fine wine. Early Disney animated features, by all accounts, were at the time deemed pioneering, innovative, and groundbreaking -- not necessarily what we would call 'charm' today.

I would also argue that outside of the Disneyland up to the late 60s, there's not a ton of the same kind of "charm" to be found (by GLOAB's definition) at any other Disney park in the world so it's not like that is a relatively new trend.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

To be fair to Roy, I don't think *anyone* could foresee what would happen with Michael Eisner after Frank Wells died and Disney's America got torpedoed and DLP bombed. Bad blood between Roy and Michael or not, Eisner seemed to be making it clear to the world (through his own actions and choices) that he just didn't give a flying fig about quality at the parks or maintaining the legacy of quality animation anymore. Video sequel after video sequel. Maintenance issues killing people at Disneyland. DCA 1.0. Eisner needed to be removed.

That's all true, of course, but it doesn't mean Eisner wasn't brought to Disney specifically to revive a stagnant brand and steer it into this millennium by whatever means necessary and in turn increase the value of shareholders' investment. Likewise it's not like Roy didn't understand the disruption the Save Disney campaign might have on the selection of Eisner's successor. Iger became the CEO of Disney as a direct consequence of the Save Disney campaign.

It would have been impossible to predict exactly what the journey would be, but Disney has arrived at this point not by accident but by design, and Roy Disney Jr. used considerable muscle and influence to make it happen. Twice.

 

[Curious Constance]

Yes and no. I agree a lot of the charm is gone, but I think unfortunately the days of charm are over (with some exception that shows up as surprises here and there.) But I do think the company turns out a quality product more than not.

But for example, in the case of Star Wars they could have very easily gone with the original plans of doing a half-baked redo of Tomorrowland with Star Wars crammed in there and a lame Millennium Falcon plunked on top of the old Peoplemover Station. Instead we got a (depnding on your personal taste) fairly cool temporary Tomorrowland overlay, some really nice, intricate re-working of the ROA, a new Big Thunder Trail, and updated Disneyland RR... all in preparation of a massively intricate immersive new land. None of that really had to happen, especially with the level of attention they each received. SWL could have been smaller, there could have been one attraction instead of two, less to explore, etc. It could have all been done cheaper and with less quality.

Quality product, however, is extremely different than an individual's taste and like of said product. And you are right, not all of it is up to snuff... some of it is half way there, some of it is a total miss. I think that's always been the case though. For every great project, there is an equally lame one waiting to be ripped apart.

I wish I could say everything I've done in my life and in my career was great and up to the standards it should be, I'd be lying if I did though!

If you had an unending supply of money and the ability to hire people with extraordinary talent to do everything for you in your life and career, I'd hold you to a higher standard and expect more wins. If you threw $1.50 into the pot while hoping to drain the wallets of every one of your customers, I'd call you on it.

 

[Curious Constance]

Everyone uses the excuse "Oh, not everything has to be amazing." "Not everything has to be mind blowing."

I say, why not? If not Disney, then who? If you pride yourself on being one of the premier vacation destinations in the world, you better be willing to back that up. Not scrimp and cut every corner they can.

Not everything has to be a mega E ticket, but that doesn't mean it can't be amazing. Perfect example is Winnie the Pooh. You can go cheap (DL) or you can go amazing. (Tokyo)

There is no excuse for them at this point in time to ever go cheap.

They can't even fork over the dough to keep the friggin most Instagramed photo location in the world in good shape.

Embarrassing.

 

[Curious Constance]

Dayyyuuummm, you can take the girl out of the HOB, but you can't take the HOB out of the girl. HOB for life ya'll

 

[dweezil78]

Not everything has to be a mega E ticket, but that doesn't mean it can't be amazing.

That's actually exactly what that means.

 

[Curious Constance]

That's actually exactly what that means.

You can have a smaller, more charming ride like Winnie the Pooh and have it be amazing or junk. There really is no excuse for them to ever choose the junk option.