'The Little Mermaid' attraction for WDW?

[SirGoofy]

I find the whole "no more clones" argument rather alarming. What would the Magic Kingdom be like without clones? Without the Haunted Mansion, or Pirates of the Caribbean? Without out Jungle Cruise or it's a small world? It wouldn't be the same I'll tell you that. So if this attraction turns out to be an instant classic, I'll welcome a clone with open arms.

 

[nibblesandbits]

Here's the thing. How many "non-fanatics" have ever been to both domestic resorts?

I'm guessing the number is rather small. If that's right, then clones are a great idea. You give people in both halves of the country a convenient opportunity to see what you believe is your best work. You get to amortize the development costs against the (mostly disjoint) set of visitors to both resorts.

True, the fanatics would appreciate fewer clones. But, let's face it---the fanatics are going anyway.

For the record, I don't mind them at all, and in some cases are glad they are there. Orlando is much more convenient to me than is Anaheim. Dragging my kids across three time zones is a once every so often thing. Visiting sunny Florida during the dead of winter is an every year sort of thing. I love Soarin---despite the fact that it has little to do with the Land pavillion, I'm glad it is there, because I get to enjoy it every year, not every so often.

I'd imagine our West Coast friends might feel the same way about Tower---even though the exterior doesn't tell anywhere nearly the same story that Florida's does, it's still a great attraction.

And...wasn't what Walt originally planned for the park a lot of clones? He wanted the East Coast version of DL...which, means clones. I mean, most of the rides could be found at both coasts...POTC was brought over specifically b/c people on the east wanted it, for pete's sake!

I don't necessarily mind "clones" if they have some differences, however, I do see a tiny problem if there are no differences. I'd kinda like to see Soarin changed a bit, but either way, I love the attraction.

I have actually yet to go to CA. I'm planning to go at some point, but nothing is set in stone yet. So, I don't mind clones being built in one place or the other simply b/c I don't visit the one coast very often.

 

[TP2000]

And...wasn't what Walt originally planned for the park a lot of clones? He wanted the East Coast version of DL...which, means clones. I mean, most of the rides could be found at both coasts...POTC was brought over specifically b/c people on the east wanted it, for pete's sake!

That's the dirty little secret. When Walt passed away in late 1966, he hadn't done any real work on the "theme park" part of Walt Disney World. His second park was an exact clone of his first park, and he didn't seem to care.

Ever watch the Epcot '66 film that Walt hosted in October, 1966 about two months before his death? He stands in the WDI workroom for the "Florida Project" and shows maps and sketches. It's on the Tomorrowland DVD hosted by Leonard Maltin.

Standing at the huge maps, Walt points out to the viewers the location of the "park". Freeze the DVD there and notice... it's an exact replica of Disneyland circa 1966.

The Imagineers and Walt just did a 1960's version of cut and paste, and plopped a Disneyland clone in the eventual location of Magic Kingdom. Right down to Disneyland exclusives that Magic Kingdom never got; Casey Jr. Circus Train and StorybookLand - Check. Matterhorn Bobsleds - Check. It's A Small World behind the Motorboat Cruise lagoon - Check. Mine Train Through Natures Wonderland - Check. New Orleans Square - Check. Even the Sailing Ship Columbia dock near the Indian Village - Check.

Walt had no intense interest in Disneyland 2.0, he was more excited about Epcot and the master planned community of industrial parks, housing and jetports he was going to build. The park was just the "weenie" that would get tourists there and develop interest in the place, and Walt had no plans beyond copying Disneyland up until his death.

Now, certainly Walt knew the Florida park wouldn't be an exact duplicate of Disneyland. He'd already learned a lot in the 11 years of operating Disneyland, and I'm sure even Walt would have widened walkways, increased dining and ride capacity, etc.

But those types of changes only came about in the late 1960's, after Walt had died and left the planning of the Florida property to his brother, Ron Miller, Richard Nunis, etc. Those were the guys that started to change the Magic Kingdom a bit, push out walkways, cut StorybookLand from the plans, slot in Liberty Square instead of New Orleans Square, etc.

Walt was perfectly fine with cloning an entire park, right down to the ticket booth for Casey Jr. Circus Train.

 

[brucie]

So is there a Little Mermaid ride going to WDW or is this just for DCA??? Is it just wishful thinking or has anyone heard for sure????

 

[jmuboy]

So is there a Little Mermaid ride going to WDW or is this just for DCA??? Is it just wishful thinking or has anyone heard for sure????

DCA for now. Don't look for a WDW version anytime soon. It would be great in the MK but WDW does not like to add new rides to the MK.

 

[New Horizons]

Some cryptic info..

I had the opportunity to talk to an iron-clad source (get your bus driver comments ready!) who is always reluctant to tell me much as they love their job and would like to keep it. I asked about the 20k space and they said the balloon test done there (last year?) shows exactly whats going there or at least one part of it. I mentioned Mermaid Lagoon. They smirked for a moment and then said "Don't judge a book by it's cover" with a sly smile and wouldn't say anymore. Which was not a denial of the ML concept for the spot (Yeah!!)and I'm assuming the "Book" comment would mean maybe the shell of ML with the Little Mermaid ride inside?? Given who this is coming from the comments mean SOMETHING - I'm just not sure what. Any Ideas?

 

[culturenthrills]

DCA for now. Don't look for a WDW version anytime soon. It would be great in the MK but WDW does not like to add new rides to the MK.

Whether or not it is TLM ride, something big is probably gonna be built at MK in the next 5 years. They are way past due for a major attraction and some different ideas are on the drawing board. I think first they need to rehab and update their current classic attractions. That is planned for SM and JC and hopefully they will finally bring Peter Pan and Snow White up to the same level as their DL counterparts. But there is a huge plot of land in Fantasyland and something will go there eventually.

 

[AEfx]

That's the dirty little secret. When Walt passed away in late 1966, he hadn't done any real work on the "theme park" part of Walt Disney World. His second park was an exact clone of his first park, and he didn't seem to care.

Ever watch the Epcot '66 film that Walt hosted in October, 1966 about two months before his death? He stands in the WDI workroom for the "Florida Project" and shows maps and sketches. It's on the Tomorrowland DVD hosted by Leonard Maltin.

Standing at the huge maps, Walt points out to the viewers the location of the "park". Freeze the DVD there and notice... it's an exact replica of Disneyland circa 1966.

Wow, so nice to see people who also understand that clone-hate is a fan invention, hehe.

You know what this topic always makes me think of (BTW, thanks for the great info you posted above)? Does anyone, for one bloomin' second, think that if Walt had survived that the Castle at Disneyland wouldn't have been demolished long ago?

That's a pretty profound thought, because most people see the Disneyland castle as "untouchable". And while I really dislike the whole "Walt would want..." excuse (mostly because, as you point out, it's used to defend things often the opposite as he would have done based on statements made during his lifetime), I can't imagine he would have ever tolerated the MK's castle being so much grander and, frankly, beautiful.

However, you dare mention that to a "fan" and you will get the look of death. Many see the Castle as a monument, whereas if I believe anything I've ever read about the man is true it would have driven him nuts until he made the Disneyland castle just as grand in scope as it's counterparts across the world.

I like that there are a few unique attractions at each resort, because I am a Disney fan and like many wish to visit them all at some point. However, again like most Disney fans, I'm closest to one park I frequent the most, and I'm tickled when the "cream of the crop" comes from elsewhere and gets it's own version in my "home" resort. Disney has proven over and over that they can take the same theme and make it unique (the Haunted Mansion is a good example) while keeping the original intent and technology. It is doubtful what we ever get in Orlando will be a bit-for-bit "clone" anyway, and with our abundance of space hopefully it will be the biggest, best one.

AEfx

 

[nibblesandbits]

Wow, so nice to see people who also understand that clone-hate is a fan invention, hehe.

You know what this topic always makes me think of (BTW, thanks for the great info you posted above)? Does anyone, for one bloomin' second, think that if Walt had survived that the Castle at Disneyland wouldn't have been demolished long ago?

That's a pretty profound thought, because most people see the Disneyland castle as "untouchable". And while I really dislike the whole "Walt would want..." excuse (mostly because, as you point out, it's used to defend things often the opposite as he would have done based on statements made during his lifetime), I can't imagine he would have ever tolerated the MK's castle being so much grander and, frankly, beautiful.

However, you dare mention that to a "fan" and you will get the look of death. Many see the Castle as a monument, whereas if I believe anything I've ever read about the man is true it would have driven him nuts until he made the Disneyland castle just as grand in scope as it's counterparts across the world.

I like that there are a few unique attractions at each resort, because I am a Disney fan and like many wish to visit them all at some point. However, again like most Disney fans, I'm closest to one park I frequent the most, and I'm tickled when the "cream of the crop" comes from elsewhere and gets it's own version in my "home" resort. Disney has proven over and over that they can take the same theme and make it unique (the Haunted Mansion is a good example) while keeping the original intent and technology. It is doubtful what we ever get in Orlando will be a bit-for-bit "clone" anyway, and with our abundance of space hopefully it will be the biggest, best one.

AEfx

Great post! :wave:

 

[Preacher Gravy]

I had the opportunity to talk to an iron-clad source (get your bus driver comments ready!) who is always reluctant to tell me much as they love their job and would like to keep it. I asked about the 20k space and they said the balloon test done there (last year?) shows exactly whats going there or at least one part of it. I mentioned Mermaid Lagoon. They smirked for a moment and then said "Don't judge a book by it's cover" with a sly smile and wouldn't say anymore. Which was not a denial of the ML concept for the spot (Yeah!!)and I'm assuming the "Book" comment would mean maybe the shell of ML with the Little Mermaid ride inside?? Given who this is coming from the comments mean SOMETHING - I'm just not sure what. Any Ideas?

I am new to the boards, and have never been to WDW, or any other Disney park (First trip next October) One of the things that I got excited about as I cruised the internet in planning my vacation was a video on youtube of Tokyo Disney's Winnie the Pooh Ride. If I remember correctly, you entered through a giant storybook then got on the honey pots that were trackless. One of the first scenes was pooh holding onto a balloon. . . but maybe I am misunderstanding what a balloon test is. Or maybe 'not judging a book by its cover' is a great big hint that the new ride will use this technology from Tokyo. Any thoughts?

 

[Enigma]

I find the whole "no more clones" argument rather alarming. What would the Magic Kingdom be like without clones? Without the Haunted Mansion, or Pirates of the Caribbean? Without out Jungle Cruise or it's a small world? It wouldn't be the same I'll tell you that. So if this attraction turns out to be an instant classic, I'll welcome a clone with open arms.

Your darn right it wouldn't be the same..IT WOULD BE BETTER! Did you know Magic Kingdom was originally going to get a totally different slate of fantasyland rides (rides based on Sleeping Beauty, Mary Poppins, and Icahbod Crane/headless horseman). Instead of Pirates Magic Kingdom was supposed to get the massive e-ticket mountain "Western River Expedition" which would have been an audio animatronic boat ride with drops and a final drop into the rivers of america. The Western river mountain would have also been home to big thunder mountain coaster, mule rides up the mountain, and a little indian village on the top.

Clones suck...they stifle the creativity. Once in awhile if it fits the theme its ok or if you can make the ride differet (Submarine Voyage in California was different from the 20,000 leagues under the sea ride in florida) that would be preferable.

 

[AEfx]

Clones suck...they stifle the creativity.

That's a really generic argument that gets used a lot but really makes little sense in a theme park environment. While we all appreciate the art of Imagineering, this isn't about reaching artistic plateaus. This is about pleasing guests. That's why theme parks exist, not as some esoteric form of expression.

The point is, if a ride pleases people on one coast, it doesn't make a tinkers darn worth of difference if that ride exists in a similar form 3000 miles away. A great attraction is a great attraction. That's like saying you should only print one copy of a book, because if more copies of the book are available somehow the book is less enjoyable because more people will be enjoying it somewhere else. The only people that care about things like are the small minority of us who come to sites like this and who even realize that the ride appeared elsewhere before.

As I said above, ask the average guest walking out of "Soarin'", "Does it make you enjoy that ride less to know one exists in California as well?" and you likely will get a blank stare. Most people don't think about such things.

AEfx

 

[lilredfoxie]

Am I the only one who still thinks Ariel shoulda took over the Living Seas, not nemo -.-

 

[tirian]

Am I the only one who still thinks Ariel shoulda took over the Living Seas, not nemo -.-

That was part of the Project Gemini plan for Epcot.

 

[Dayma]

I really hope this ride gets made. My daughter loves Arieal!

 

[SoFlaDisneyFan]

That's a really generic argument that gets used a lot but really makes little sense in a theme park environment. While we all appreciate the art of Imagineering, this isn't about reaching artistic plateaus. This is about pleasing guests. That's why theme parks exist, not as some esoteric form of expression.

The point is, if a ride pleases people on one coast, it doesn't make a tinkers darn worth of difference if that ride exists in a similar form 3000 miles away. A great attraction is a great attraction. That's like saying you should only print one copy of a book, because if more copies of the book are available somehow the book is less enjoyable because more people will be enjoying it somewhere else. The only people that care about things like are the small minority of us who come to sites like this and who even realize that the ride appeared elsewhere before.

As I said above, ask the average guest walking out of "Soarin'", "Does it make you enjoy that ride less to know one exists in California as well?" and you likely will get a blank stare. Most people don't think about such things.

AEfx

This should be the end-all quote on "clone: yay/nay" discussions. Very good points made here! To go even further, the casual guests that do know of, or have actually experienced "clone" attractions on the opposite coast, can be quite boisterous in their keen observations. Remember, WDW would have no "Pirates..." attraction was it not for guest inquires and complaints in the early days of the Magic Kingdom. An A+ attraction gets its proper notice, and guests who have either experienced the attraction for themselves, or have seen/heard incredible details, want to know why the same company does not provide the very same attraction at the “clone” or “sister” park of its distant relative. From Magic Kingdom to Magic Kingdom, there is certainly room and proper definition for good “clones”. This can be argued better when the clones make their way from Disney/MGM Studios to Disney’s California Adventure (Twilight Zone Tower of Terror) or Disney’s California Adventure to Epcot (Soarin’). WDW’s Fantasyland certainly has the space (and need) for a new classic dark ride based on one of the most beloved and important Disney Animation classics. WDW’s Fantasyland just needs more classic dark rides in general!

 

[tirian]

:sohappy: for AEfx

And I agree with SoFlaDisneyFan: Fantasyland needs more clones! (Well, it needs updated ones.)

 

[minnie61650]

From what I have been reading on other sites there is a good chance that the MK will be getting the Little Mermaid ride in 2011. MK will be 40 years old and a new major dark ride would be a nice tie in for their celebration.
I am hoping!

 

[PuertoRekinSam]

Plus him and the guys at Pixar (and most of the folks at Imagineering) are huge disney parks fans (they probably even watch your videos martin). Bob Weiss said John Lasseter started freaking out when he saw the concept to revive the old flying saucers as part of Carsland and greenlit it immediatly partly because of the nostalgia factor.

:veryconfu What does the former head coach of the Supersonic's have to do with anything?

Now if this was something Al Weiss mentioned....

 

[TP2000]

I really hope this ride gets made. My daughter loves Arieal!

And yet this ride doesn't open at Disney's California Adventure until 2011. And if they do decide to build a version at WDW, it's been reported that it won't appear until several years after DCA's version opens. The timeframe 2013-2015 was tossed around by an "insider" on another website. None of the "insiders" on this website has been able to mention any type of timeframe for a WDW version, or even if it has even been considered for possible future planning, much less serious planning and construction. 2015 seems prudent as a WDW date for the Little Mermaid ride, maybe even later.

Will your daughter still like Ariel when she is a teenager?