The main FLAW of SGE script is......

[KevinPage]

The think the reason why everyone points out "plot holes" is that they are more glaring since the attraction is weak all around.

If an atraction is fun and well done, you are more willing to give it the benefit of the doubt and look past a few minor quibbles.

But when you have a weak attraction to begin with, people are going to point out every little thing that is wrong with it.

I myself don't care that he calls himself Stitch. The attraction is boring. The Stitch AA is boring (he merely walks back and forth a few times, what a total waste). The plasma cannons are neat, but by the time they are moving I couldn't care less, as I was bored out of my mind and so turned off by the whole experience.

So when the ending comes, (with insanely ackward animation), you are looking for SOMETHING, ANYTHING at that point to give you some sense of enjoyment. And when you don't get it, you notice the weakness of the ending even moreso.

 

[Nemmy]

Food isn't allowed to be taken on a Disney attraction... yet Stitch manages to steal a chili dog... something that's even hard to find in Tomorrowland, let alone not allowed on an attraction.

I had a mini picnic on TTA while waiting for Space Mountain fastpasses to become valid...

 

[Horizons78]

Hey Kevin - I think I found the problem.....

Well.....shoot. I thought it was funny. Singular wit I guess.....

 

[BJMidget]

Hmm..so just so I understand, your beef is that the attraction isn't set in the present, right?

If that's the case, then aren't there any number of attractions that really aren't set in the here and now? BTMR takes you through a 19th c. mining town, Space Mt. shows a futuristic mode of transportation, Splash Mt. would (presumably) be set sometime in the late 19th-early 20th century, since all the stories had to occur before Uncle Remus told them, and Pirates isn't set in the modern day either, is it? What about Buzz, Star Tours, Snow White, and any others I missed? All set in the past or future, as best I can tell.

Or were you just talking about the fact that the attraction is set before events that we already know about? Even if that is the case, technically ANY attraction set in the past occurs before events we already know about.

OK, that's far too much serious thought put into this. That was just my immediate reaction.

mine too

 

[DonnieDarko]

So basically you are dismissing every point that I made above. What you are saying is there can be hundreds of plot holes in an attraction, but if you like it then the aformentioned plot holes are ignored.

If one finds this attraction boring, then one should state that they themselves found the attraction boring rather than exclaiming that the attraction itself is BORING. For instance, I find Test Track boring, which is not to say that Test Track is not exciting for most.

SGE features more non-stop action than most attractions on property. Once the first preshow begins, as long as there is not trouble loading into the final showroom, it never stops for a second.

To anyone who finds the Stitch AA boring, I'd hate to know what you think of all the other AA's on property given that Stitch has more movement and personality than any other Disney figure ever manufactured. He certainly moves better than our poor stiff pirates or ghosts.

 

[KevinPage]

To anyone who finds the Stitch AA boring, I'd hate to know what you think of all the other AA's on property given that Stitch has more movement and personality than any other Disney figure ever manufactured. He certainly moves better than our poor stiff pirates or ghosts.

The pirates do what they do, there is not 1 single pirate that is intended to be THE focal point of the attraction. Stitch is not one of a hundred AA's in this attraction, he IS the attraction.

The way he is used is sub par on a good day of the week. Yeah he's all cute and stuff blinking and shuffling back and forth, but I expect more from the centerpiece of the attraction. I went in 'expecting' to be WOWED.

Was it too much to ask? Maybe, maybe not. I thought it would have been neat for him to climb around or something else.

Call me tough to please, but when Stitch is looking at the audience and going back and forth, I sat there thinking "this is it? this is the big deal AA and all he can do?" Not to mention it's an incredibly dull moment, with nothing else going on at the time. Maybe if they used him more in th attraction expect for his 2 breif appearances it would have been better.

 

[NemoRocks78]

Philharmagic- an attraction which uses many of the same tactile effects seen in Stitch. Also poorly regarded when it first opened by many on this very board.

It was? All I remember hearing was praise for the attraction.....

To anyone who finds the Stitch AA boring, I'd hate to know what you think of all the other AA's on property given that Stitch has more movement and personality than any other Disney figure ever manufactured. He certainly moves better than our poor stiff pirates or ghosts.

I can name a few AAs that I have found to be better than the Stitch AA.....

- Wicked Witch of the West (Great Movie Ride)
- Hopper (It's Tough to be a Bug!)
- S.I.R. (The ExtraTERRORestrial Alien Encounter)
- Timekeeper (The Timekeeper)
- Imhotep (Revenge of the Mummy at USF)

Another thing I hated about the Stitch AA was that it appeared to just be turning around on the turntable at some parts....its legs should have been moving at all times to make it look like he was actually walking and turning around.

At least Revenge of the Mummy no longer holds the "worst ending of any attraction" title. :animwink: :lol:

 

[Djali999]

Another thing I hated about the Stitch AA was that it appeared to just be turning around on the turntable at some parts....its legs should have been moving at all times to make it look like he was actually walking and turning around.

Which row were you seated in?

If you can get a proper view (or maybe if you had bothered to go on it more than once), you'd have noticed that his legs do move as if he's walking around.

Timekeeper is very good, and so is the Witch, but both Timekeeper and Witch are carried mostly on their voices, especially Timekeeper. Stitch is a lot of "mime", which is much harder to pull off. Not to say that it hasn't been done before.

 

[NemoRocks78]

Which row were you seated in?

If you can get a proper view (or maybe if you had bothered to go on it more than once), you'd have noticed that his legs do move as if he's walking around.

Back row....

I do know that his legs move but there are some parts in which they don't....I even took a second look at the video to confirm that.

I've been debating on whether I should go back on it next Saturday for a "final" experience....if I do, I am definitely going to sit in the front so I can get a good look at this AA.

 

[KevinPage]

I sat in the 2nd row and thought his legs could have used more movement, seemed like they "cheated" a wee bit.

Granted, Stitch is short and stumpy, so it's harder to pull off more sophisticated movements than a human being with long arms and more range of motion. (if you wanted to use something in its defense).

I'm still more impressed with the mannerisms of TimeKeeper for this very reason.

I won't discredit probably enjoying the attraction more after a few repeated visits. But the fact is, should it really take that much? An attraction should make you fall in love with it immedaitely and want you to come back for more to experience more fun things.

With Stitch it's as if I'm going on it again to "hopefully" enjoy it more. Alot of vacationers don't have the time or patience for that and are likely to hit it 1 time on the trip.

 

[dxwwf3]

Hey Kevin, In case you were wondering I found a link to a site that has the complete video of the attraction (Well it might have missed just a little bit of the main chamber, but not much). And I did watch the show and I did have a couple of positive things to say about it.

Here's a link to that post, in case anyone else didn't see it: http://forums.wdwmagic.com/showpost.php?p=789810&postcount=19

 

[Main Street USA]

I have a pretty simple idea here. Anyone who is complaining about the storyline is reading too much into it. Also, you're all seeming to forget something rather obvious.........

....this ride being a prequel to the movie is, and was, a RUMOR, not a fact. That, alone, takes care of 90% of the storyline "problems." Did you ever think that maybe they just made a new storyline completely seperate from the film? Geez. Get over it....enjoy it.....or don't enjoy it....and if you don't, don't go back. It's not rocket science.

 

[AEfx]

So basically you are dismissing every point that I made above. What you are saying is there can be hundreds of plot holes in an attraction, but if you like it then the aformentioned plot holes are ignored.

Your anger is really misplaced.

If you like the attraction, then be happy and enjoy it. Does your enjoyment of it really have anything to do with if other people enjoy it or not? Do you really need to make yourself feel better about Stitch by ragging on other attractions that do have outstanding features?

The truth is, there is nothing outstanding about this attraction. Most of the elements are mediocre at best. The Stitch AA is the best thing about the show - but he is in it for such a short period of time it's not enough to be fufilling as the "focal" point of the presentation.

Philharmagic, for example, is brilliant in my eyes. No matter how many times I see it, it's more magical than the last. The effects are appropriate and exciting, and on top of it all it's served up with some of the most beloved characters in the Disney family with some of the best music Disney has ever produced.

Can you say the same about Stitch? I can't. That's why we can forgive if the plot is a bit weak in Philharmagic, although it certainly has much more of a begining, middle, and end than Stitch does.

You are also missing essential theory if you are going to make arguments like this. Look into Bertolt Brecht's theories of Epic Drama, where a succession of scenes are relatively meaningless when taken alone but when presented together form a greater whole. This is very similar to the eventual decisions Walt and the Imagineers made when designing things like the Haunted Mansion and PotC. They realized that a moving vehicle isn't the best way to tell a linear story, and instead designed set pieces that when put together make a whole, epic experience. Philharmagic is a great example of this as well - it's not the cohesion of scenes it's the overall effect of the experience.

And again, I cannot say SE exhibits any of these characteristics. Stitch feels like taking one scene out of Pirates, or Philharmagic, for example, and selling it as a full attraction. There is no cohesiveness to the experience. I was left feeling "Stitch escaped, so what?". There was no consequence for anyone, we are let go, see you later. That's why most reviews will tell you that it will play well to children (well, those that can get over the darkness), because those children ONLY want to see Stitch. It's clear that's the audience it's intended for.

I think most people are disapointed because this was never going to be an epic attraction, so it NEEDED a story. The effects aren't enough on their own, and neither is the Stitch AA because of it's brief appearance time. These elements could have been woven together with a story that makes people feel like the experience mattered, not just that we happened to witness Stitch escape - which would have been great if this had been part of some sort of epic progression. But it's not.

I hope everyone who experiences Stitch enjoys it; from the reviews I've read, with very, very few exceptions (basicly one or two posters on these boards) people really haven't. /shrug. As I've said before, fans of the ride should rejoyce - it means smaller lines for you.

AEfx

 

[DonnieDarko]

....this ride being a prequel to the movie is, and was, a RUMOR, not a fact. That, alone, takes care of 90% of the storyline "problems."

The attraction IS in fact a prequel to Lilo and Stitch

As for everyone else, there is no way to win this debate because your logic keeps changing!

I sat in the 2nd row and thought his legs could have used more movement, seemed like they "cheated" a wee bit.

I do know that his legs move but there are some parts in which they don't....I even took a second look at the video to confirm that.

Good lord folks. Okay so I looked at this video and his legs are moving the whole time. They aren't moving when he's NOT moving. You are mad at them for not having his legs move when his torso moves?

I can name a few AAs that I have found to be better than the Stitch AA.....

- Wicked Witch of the West (Great Movie Ride)
- Hopper (It's Tough to be a Bug!)
- S.I.R. (The ExtraTERRORestrial Alien Encounter)
- Timekeeper (The Timekeeper)
- Imhotep (Revenge of the Mummy at USF)

Wicked Witch is an excellent AA, but it only has upper body movement. Hopper in DCA is almost as amazing as Stitch but the DAK version isn't as advanced. S.I.R. is also limited to upper body movement. Same with Mr. Williams (Timekeeper). Imhotep is quite an impressive guy but only performs a few swift movements.

For god sake, the Stitch AA has such true emotion in it's eye's and full body movement. It's positively beautiful.

 

[Main Street USA]

The attraction IS in fact a prequel to Lilo and Stitch

Uh, no it isn't. You simply think, just like everyone else, that is's true because you heard it so many times before this attraction opened.

You want the Official description of the attraction? Well, here you go:

Opening Fall 2004. Report for duty as a new security recruit in the Galactic Federation Prisoner Teleport Center. Your job? Guard Experiment 626, the six-limbed alien known as "Stitch" with an appetite for chaos and the uncanny ability to wreak havoc wherever he goes. Be prepared for hilarious high-jinks when Stitch unleashes his naughty self in this out-of-control, high-energy escapade complete with sights, sounds and — ewwwww —smells! You're in the midst of the mayhem and you never know when — and where — Stitch will appear next!

No mention of anything there, and that's straight from Disney. Stop whining about plot holes based on a prequel, folks. This is not a prequel. It's a fun short story about an incident with Stitch, a character that the public has grown to love. Get over it.

AND, as a side note, none of you worked on this attraction, nor are any of you imagineers, nor are you even well educated in the development of theme park attractions. It's entirely possible, or should I say likely, that you just don't get it.

 

[AEfx]

No mention of anything there, and that's straight from Disney. Stop whining about plot holes based on a prequel, folks. This is not a prequel. It's a fun short story about an incident with Stitch, a character that the public has grown to love. Get over it.

That's interesting, because it being a prequel is the only thing I can see that can justify the utter lack of plot. So if it's not a prequel, then it really IS lacking. I've never seen the movie, can't comment on that issue, and have said so before - I can just say it left me with a rather large empty feeling after. As I said above, it's for kids who want to see Stitch live.

AND, as a side note, none of you worked on this attraction, nor are any of you imagineers, nor are you even well educated in the development of theme park attractions. It's entirely possible, or should I say likely, that you just don't get it.

OK, I'm sorry, but I HAVE to call you on this one.

So, you are saying we are a bunch of uneducated folks who can't appropriately appriciate the ride because we didn't design it or work at it?

That's truly an astonishing assumption - are you saying the intended audience for this ride is...the imagineers who created the overlay? That you have to be an imagineer to understand it?

If you think this, I hate to say it, but you don't get it. This attraction was designed for theme park guests. And I'd dare say that the audience here is a bit more familiar with theme park development than your average park go-er.

If we don't get it (which apparently most of the people who have seen the attraction don't, in your view) the chances of most theme park guests "getting it" is going to be very low and that is not a sucessful attraction.

That argument really makes no sense whatsoever.

AEfx

 

[Main Street USA]

So, you are saying we are a bunch of uneducated folks who can't appropriately appriciate the ride because we didn't design it or work at it?

That's truly an astonishing assumption - are you saying the intended audience for this ride is...the imagineers who created the overlay? That you have to be an imagineer to understand it?

If you think this, I hate to say it, but you don't get it. This attraction was designed for theme park guests. And I'd dare say that the audience here is a bit more familiar with theme park development than your average park go-er.

If we don't get it (which apparently most of the people who have seen the attraction don't, in your view) the chances of most theme park guests "getting it" is going to be very low and that is not a sucessful attraction.

That argument really makes no sense whatsoever.

AEfx

My post flew right over your head. You clearly got angry, then lashed out in defense before truly trying to understand what I meant.

Your exactly right, this attraction was designed for theme park guests....families! DING DING DING! NOT teenage or mid twenties Disney fanatics (and in some cases, borderline nutcases) who pick apart an attraction because they don't appreciate or completely understand what THE MOST TALENTED TEAM OF DESIGNERS IN THE WORLD wanted to do with it.

Look, you're all basing your opinions on what the FEW people (again, primarily teenagers and 20 year olds :hammer: ) think about it. That's ridiculous. If you don't see something wrong with that, then you're gonna need a little help in life with just about everything you do and say.

Here, let me give you a review on the HoverRound Old People's Mobility Chair. THIS THING STINKS! It's way too slow, and it doesn't pop wheelies like I want it to!

I also have a review on the new YMCA Elmo. THIS THING STINKS! It sings the same darn song over and over again! This thing is supposed to entertain me? What a piece of junk!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[AEfx]

My post flew right over your head. You clearly got angry, then lashed out in defense before truly trying to understand what I meant.

Your exactly right, this attraction was designed for theme park guests....families! DING DING DING! NOT teenage or mid twenties Disney fanatics (and in some cases, borderline nutcases) who pick apart an attraction because they don't appreciate or completely understand what THE MOST TALENTED TEAM OF DESIGNERS IN THE WORLD wanted to do with it.

Look, you're all basing your opinions on what the FEW people (again, primarily teenagers and 20 year olds :hammer: ) think about it. That's ridiculous. If you don't see something wrong with that, then you're gonna need a little help in life with just about everything you do and say.

I'm not angry at all. I know you'd like to think that what you said was profound, but it really was simply not thought through. You were a little more clear in your second posting, but your first was not. Of course we are not the typical audience - but what you say that makes no sense is that we don't "completely understand what the Imagineers wanted to do with it". I understand what you are trying to say, but the logic doesn't follow. People who are fans of Disney aren't going to get it, but the average-Joe and Jane park visitor will because they aren't expecting much?

I simply pointed out a very, very silly statement that you made. You said, and I quote, "AND, as a side note, none of you worked on this attraction, nor are any of you imagineers, nor are you even well educated in the development of theme park attractions. It's entirely possible, or should I say likely, that you just don't get it."

You say that likely we don't "get it" because we didn't work on the attraction. It's plain as day. My very simple point remains - that's hogwash. If it is so esoteric that only Imagineers can "get it", then it is more of a failure than I thought. What you say makes no sense - the average park visitor is going to know even LESS about such things than we do, and most don't even know what an Imagineer is.

If what you are trying to say is that it's soley intended for kids to see Stitch live, end of story, then yes, I whole-heartedly agree with you. But a great Disney attraction that does not make. For something as hyped up as Stitch, I think many people were expecting an actual cohesive attraction for EVERYONE, not just the kiddies. If that is their intention, then great - it still could have been a whole lot better if it had actually had a script that appealed to a wider demographic. Now, I don't hold that every Disney attraction needs to appeal to absoultely everyone (which is a point I have made in defense of the Villians park idea), however, in this case it could have easily had a much broader audience if it had been executed in a slightly different way.

I am basing my opinion on the ride on the only thing I can - my own experience. I saw it twice, and wasn't impressed. It's that simple. Little kids will like it because they get to see Stitch - I've maintained that in anything I have written about my experiences with this attraction. A better script, even with the same "so-so" effects, would have saved SGE for EVERYONE, not just the kids who want to see Stitch "live". Right now it's not much more than a meet and greet with Stitch - where you only see Stitch for a minute, and you don't get to really "meet" him.

Your point about people being overly critical is well taken, but misplaced. A lot of people who have seen Stitch seem to agree on the same few facts - things that lack in the show. What I do not understand is why people who DO like the attraction get such in a tizzy about it. You guys are the angry ones, it's written all over the postings that a few of you have made about it.

You like tomatoes, I like apples. We're here to share our opinons, and I'm totally cool with you supporting Stitch, but you also have to understand that some of us didn't like it, and we are entitled to share why. It doesn't mean we "don't get it", it means we didn't like it, or didn't think it lived up to it's potential.

AEfx

 

[AEfx]

Uh, no it isn't. You simply think, just like everyone else, that is's true because you heard it so many times before this attraction opened.

Hmm..to this other point, I was just reading my "Stitch Monitor" (he took over the passholder newsletter this time).

There is an interview with one of the Imagineers, Kevin Rafferty.

"Kevin calls it sort of a 'prequel' to the movie story, with members of the original voice cast and a peppy new musical score. The action takes place at the galactic Federation Prisoner Teleport Center. Stitch (then known as 'Experiement 626') seems..."

Hmmmmmmm....don't know about you Main Street USA, but it certainly sounds to me like the intention of the Imagineers was for it to be a prequel. Regardless of your opinons of the pre-release stuff, this is from the mouth of the Imagineer who worked on the ride.

Just thought you might like to know, since you are so fond of telling us what the Imagineers intended.

AEfx

 

[Wilt Dasney]

I think this is the WORST ATTRACTION EVER! I've never been on it and my main reason for feeling that way is cuz I said so.

Anybody want to question my logic? :lookaroun