The Tiki Room and the Future of our WDW Community: Where will we travel?

[Krack]

I think they probably have a good grasp of how large that group is.

I think the venomous hyperbole spewed forth by a very vocal minority of the larger dedicated fan base over the past few years has soured Disney on most feedback it receives from people more dedicated than the average every 2-5 year guest.

I'm not saying that Disney doesn't deserve criticism. There is plenty of justifiable issues to speak up about. However, for every Yeti there is a Land refurbishment that is the end of the world.

I think Disney just doesn't see the profit in accommodating a crowd that: a) will complain anyways and b) still give them money.

Oh, there's no doubt that they hate the openly critical fans. Most people don't like being criticized, even when it's deserved. It's a lot easier when people just shrug their shoulders and say "well, I don't like it, but there's nothing I can do about it" - it's messy when people at the Disney Company-level start hearing this criticism. Ask Cynthia Harriss and Paul Pressler.

 

[Krack]

I think part of the problem is that when some people say "I want this attraction back," what they really mean is "I don't think the new attraction is as good as the one it replaced." I'd be surprised if most people that claim to want old attractions back actually wanted them back exactly as they were, rather than a newer, modern interpretation of equal or better quality.

I'm guilty of this as much as anyone. I say I want "The Living Seas" back, but what I really mean is "I wish, instead of adding Nemo, they updated and reimagined the Seabase Alpha concept."

And because most people who voice this opinion don't explain their motivation, or why they liked whatever attraction was replaced, the disagreeing crowd assumes that people want old attractions back just for the sake of nostalgia.

The issue is that often, whoever is responsible for making the updates don't understand what it was that made the original special. For example, the beauty of the Original Tiki Room is the music. It's the songs. To a lesser degree, it's the atmosphere (once you are inside, making it feel like you're in a polynesian temple).

Whoever authorized Under New Management said to themselves "Well, it's just a show where birds talk." Complete misunderstanding of the concept of the attraction. Much like whoever authorized Nemo in EPCOT said "It's a water pavilion - we should throw Nemo in there for kids and get rid of all that other crap," instead of understanding that the concept behind the pavilion was that you were going to an undersea base where you learn about oceanography and get to see sealife in their natural habitat. But Future World, itself, is a whole mess now.

 

[aladdin2007]

The issue is that often, whoever is responsible for making the updates don't understand what it was that made the original special. For example, the beauty of the Original Tiki Room is the music. It's the songs. To a lesser degree, it's the atmosphere (once you are inside, making it feel like you're in a polynesian temple).

Whoever authorized Under New Management said to themselves "Well, it's just a show where birds talk." Complete misunderstanding of the concept of the attraction. Much like whoever authorized Nemo in EPCOT said "It's a water pavilion - we should throw Nemo in there for kids and get rid of all that other crap," instead of understanding that the concept behind the pavilion was that you were going to an undersea base where you learn about oceanography and get to see sealife in their natural habitat. But Future World, itself, is a whole mess now.

So very true, perfectly said. Sorta kinda the same with Gran Fiesta Tour. While its still beautiful, they went preschool and even tackier with that stage screen at the end, it looks so cheap and lame. They couldnt even retain the misty fog through the beginning tunnel with the darker look and lights. Now you see bare walls and ceiling, no effect or care for surroundings whatsoever as long as theres always a darn screen on somewhere, which leads me to SE, which I wont even get started on. But yes I agree with you and love how you explained it.

 

[jakeman]

Oh, there's no doubt that they hate the openly critical fans. Most people don't like being criticized, even when it's deserved. It's a lot easier when people just shrug their shoulders and say "well, I don't like it, but there's nothing I can do about it" - it's messy when people at the Disney Company-level start hearing this criticism. Ask Cynthia Harriss and Paul Pressler.

You missed my point.

There is a difference between criticism and internet nerd-rant.

Take the yeti for example. The headline animatronic that headlines one of the main attractions at one the theme parks has been broken for years. I think this a clear chase where everyone with any passing familiarity would be upset with Disney.

Then there are the other things. The new castle show. The HM queue. Trees. FLE expansion. I can go on and on about thing that in the big picture may not be the most constructive uses of discourse.

It's not an "us versus them". They have a responsibility to provide us as the consumer with a product we enjoy consuming, but the flip side of that we, in my opinion, have a responsibility to present criticism in a concise, constructive way.

 

[Krack]

They have a responsibility to provide us as the consumer with a product we enjoy consuming, but the flip side of that we, in my opinion, have a responsibility to present criticism in a concise, constructive way.

Oh, okay. WDI sucks lately. How is that for concise?

As for constructive? It would be nice if WDI/TDO made an effort to understand what people like about a particular attraction, before they alter it. At the risk of being not-concise, imo this applies to, The Original Tiki Room, Journey Into Imagination, Imageworks, Honey I Shrunk the Audience, Horizons, the World of Motion, pre-princess World Showcase, the Living Seas, the Wand, the BAH, the Backlot Tour, the original EPCOT entrance, the original Spaceship Earth narration, the pre-Carpets Adventureland, the pre-"Epcot" Future World (music, logos, etc), the Diamond Horseshoe, the whirlygigs, the tarps, 20k Leagues, Alien Encounter, amongst other things.

 

[jakeman]

Oh, okay. WDI sucks lately. How is that for concise?

As for constructive? It would be nice if WDI made an effort to understand what people like about a particular attraction, before they alter it.

I'm not sure you could any more effectively prove my point of why Disney doesn't take fans seriously.

 

[forevermickey]

I think part of the problem is that when some people say "I want this attraction back," what they really mean is "I don't think the new attraction is as good as the one it replaced." I'd be surprised if most people that claim to want old attractions back actually wanted them back exactly as they were, rather than a newer, modern interpretation of equal or better quality.

I'm guilty of this as much as anyone. I say I want "The Living Seas" back, but what I really mean is "I wish, instead of adding Nemo, they updated and reimagined the Seabase Alpha concept."

And because most people who voice this opinion don't explain their motivation, or why they liked whatever attraction was replaced, the disagreeing crowd assumes that people want old attractions back just for the sake of nostalgia.

I think you have something here. I have to agree with you. I am sure there are some "die hards" that feel that an attraction shouldn't change from it's original status..... but I think in most cases you are right. An attraction with it's original theme just enhanced or plused is what a lot of people crave, it doesn't lose it's authentic appeal that they crave but has an updated freshness that keeps them saying "wow"!:king:

 

[forevermickey]

The issue is that often, whoever is responsible for making the updates don't understand what it was that made the original special. For example, the beauty of the Original Tiki Room is the music. It's the songs. To a lesser degree, it's the atmosphere (once you are inside, making it feel like you're in a polynesian temple).

Whoever authorized Under New Management said to themselves "Well, it's just a show where birds talk." Complete misunderstanding of the concept of the attraction. Much like whoever authorized Nemo in EPCOT said "It's a water pavilion - we should throw Nemo in there for kids and get rid of all that other crap," instead of understanding that the concept behind the pavilion was that you were going to an undersea base where you learn about oceanography and get to see sealife in their natural habitat. But Future World, itself, is a whole mess now.

Though I do agree with fyn I have to say you as well make such a valid true point. It does seem they lose something in the translation of it all.... my 5 year old daughter may enjoy some of the changes.. but they do lose some integrity along the way.

 

[Thrill]

Who wants stagnant? I'm all for building new attractions. Just don't destroy what is there already. There is so much available space in every park that making a bad change is completely unnecessary. Sorry, WDI's track record over the last 15 years sucks; particularly when screwing with old beloved attractions. Some hits (Pirates and Haunted Mansion ride upgrades), tons of misses (too many to list - it would take forever).

People go to Disney World for different reasons. I mainly go to enjoy the things I did when I was a kid. The less of it that is still there, the less often I go. You want to tinker with something I love? That's fine, but it better be perfect. I think Disney underestimates how many people there are like me and instead is preoccupied with chasing teens and kids with pop culture that inevitably becomes dated 10 minutes after it's implemented. Classic generally stays classic. There's a reason why the original Tiki Room has a loyal, devoted and vocal (size is up for debate) fan base and nobody defends Under New Management.

Nothing to add here. I'm all for replacements when what's being replaced is bad or there's no other option for expansion. Adventureland has a bit of room that isn't moving, so if we need something new, do it there instead of messing with a classic that has a pretty small footprint as is.

 

[Expo_Seeker40]

I think we all have to step back and take a breath and realize that Tropical Serenade is not coming back for us, but because really was the cheaper option.

When Disneyland refurbished their tiki room back in 2005, they changed the show to digital when all the AA's were upgraded/some replaced. WDI for FL more than likely got their hands on this copy and are now in the process of converting the MK version to this digital copy.

We can also be greatful of a Tropical Serenade refurb thanks and only thanks to the fire and water damage. We will get completely spruced up AA's, audio, lighting, and pretty much super dooper fixed up interior thanks to all the damage.

As for the outside...remember this is no longer the tiki room as it was last in 1997. There are the Aladdin carpets outside, the garden infront of the tiki room is gone, the tiki torches don't burn anymore, etc.

The outside is pretty different. There were two AA birds in the MK preshow, but who knows if we'll even get our version of the barker bird back.

The cheap digital disneyland copy that we are getting......hey great to have the original back, but remember it was cheap.....will do well this summer and into next year because it will be a new attraction to numerous guests, and an old favorite for many semi visitors, AP's, and FL residents.

At some point the craze for it will die down and we will once again have smaller crowds and walk-outs.

What we can count on is that Trop Serenade 2.0 will have been almost entirely refurbished from top to bottom and have gone digital. It should be able to age slower in terms of upkeep, and it is likely TDO will not invest money in a stitch version or something else once TS 2.0 stays.

So, we can relish in the fact that over 10 years later we got TS back, but have to remember that once the merchandise and all the "classic is back" crap ends with WDW's 40th....the crowds will go down.

Honestly I can't envision the tiki room with anything but the original version. 3D movies, Spaceship Earth....sure I can see other versions of those, but somehow the tiki room, in all it;s 1960s glory, does work being outdated to me and my fellow community...sadly for so many tweens and young adults, it has no interest, and for an aging generation, it is nothing more than a cute look at the past.

 

[WDW1974]

I don't have my book of Walt-isms handy, so I can't pull out the one about moving forward.

For so long Disney has sadly been conditioning its fans to except something lesser that there is a very large movement in the fanboi community to think nostalgia ... to think going back ... be it retro tees or 1972-era parades in pathetic show condition or 1986 3D films etc ... is some how positive, somehow a good thing, somehow representing Disney doing a good job and following Walt's original credo.

(Go take a very cold shower at this point in the post)

It isn't.

It's Walmarting as much as putting toons in Tomorrowland or Epcot, chopping down every last tree for timeshare units or stuffing the DDP down our throats collectively.

Bringing back the original show (again, I haven't had any confirmation of this, but I've been busy with real world stuff and not really asking or caring) would be exactly in this vein.

Sure, there would be a brief spike in attendance. Very brief. I don't want to argue about Anaheim because that audience is different. WDW's demos are different in a lot of key ways and it isn't simply the 'local' excuse as to why something like the original show can and does work there and won't here. The way people visit WDW and DL would be the biggest (and you could apply this to every other Disney resort out there) because of its size and the fact of where it is located and other entertainment options.

I understand what the OP is saying. But it also comes from a point of weakness. A point of 'give us back what you ________________ took and love and nurture it and the flocks will come and sing like the birdies sing'. They won't because they didn't for a good decade before it was replaced.

The WDW of the 70s, 80s and into the 90s isn't coming back. And it shouldn't.

But it needs to keep moving foward and building on its foundation. That's not what's happened as you know. UNI builds Potter and Disney gets what? Dumbed down parades. Timeshares. Bulldozed entertainment districts. A few new overpriced eateries. And in a few years an 'expansion' at MK that really isn't one at all, mostly replacing capacity instead of adding to it. Oh, and all of these NEXTGEN pearls like interactive queues for people with the attention span of fleas and more ways to plan your trips, so they become more like work/homework and less like escapes from it.

It's amazing the people ever visited a WDW without things like character meals, FP, dining plans that required ressies six months in advance, queues with games etc and still somehow managed to have MAGICal times ... yet they did, millions and millions annually.

 

[WDW1974]

You missed my point.

There is a difference between criticism and internet nerd-rant.

Ah, jake, I so missed your fair and balanced approach to things.
BTW, did you ever watch that show 'Jake and the Fatman'?

Take the yeti for example. The headline animatronic that headlines one of the main attractions at one the theme parks has been broken for years. I think this a clear chase where everyone with any passing familiarity would be upset with Disney.

Upset? I sense a lot of resignation ... but I did hear a special guest do a podcast live tonight (I know, incredibly exciting ... almost felt like I was at the Oscars, only this was more entertaining) and this VIP said something about lubricating the yeti so maybe there is hope.

I doubt it. But you never know. Stay strong!

Then there are the other things. The new castle show. The HM queue. Trees. FLE expansion. I can go on and on about thing that in the big picture may not be the most constructive uses of discourse.

New castle show is laughable. Bad would be giving it too much credit. Worse, they actually spent some $$$ on it. Mansion queue is so very important (and I am guessing popular) that there are 13 pages of posts about it here (I may have heard a shot about that by said VIP podcast MAGICal guest tonight ... I can't tell you what it means that such a great humanitarian allows me to be in his company:wave ... as to trees, what do you have against them? You like the Brazilian looking MK as opposed to the park-like version we once had?

Oh, and let's try and be fair about the F-land project. It really isn't an expansion, so much as a replacement in capacity for attractions, dining locales and shops that have closed over the past decade or two without replacements. In the end, the net 'gain' will be very modest over what has been taken away.

It's not an "us versus them". They have a responsibility to provide us as the consumer with a product we enjoy consuming, but the flip side of that we, in my opinion, have a responsibility to present criticism in a concise, constructive way.

Disney, like most corporations, doesn't want to hear any criticisms at all. They want to hear they can do no wrong. I recall once gushing over an addition to a Disney resort with a Sr. VP and stating two small (and they were) criticisms. You would have thought I had called his mother a Snookie (not that it would have made sense at the time, but you get what I am saying).

Disney only listens to criticism largely if it gives them a PR black-eye in what remains of mainstream media or if it appears to hurt the bottom line.

I've also witnessed first-hand many times (yeah, I sometimes just sit in City Hall and listen ... you learn a lot that way) that nasty loud-mouthed people walk away with freebies, while polite, kind, intellectuals who try and make a legit criticism get treated with the 'have a magical day' manure.

So ... basically, while you may think there's such a thing as 'constructive' criticism ... when it comes to WDW, you'd be mistaken.

 

[Dads 2 Boys]

But let's not forget that there is a huge difference between classic and outdated.

We live in a different society than we did even say 10 yrs ago. Old attractions like World of Motion couldn't keep up with the pace that society was moving and it wasn't classic enough to stay around. I think Test track has clearly been a success in replacing WoM. Now, if they removed PotC to put in a more thrilling ride then guests would go bonkers.

Too much of the fanboi community IMO looks in the rear view mirror about everything (as those same people probably do in their personal lives) and for the most part it's not healthy. Times have changed and Disney has changed; some for the better and some perhaps not (depends on who you talk to).

 

[Enchantâmes]

Oh my lord you people are getting this worked up about the Tiki room? :brick:

 

[SeaCastle]

Unfortunately not everyone can be pleased. If they re-install Tropical Serenade, it's the cheap way out and it'll have the same attendance problems as usual. If they re-install Under New Management, heads will roll. If they install a completely new show, it's a terrible decision because it's not the original and it'll probably be character-infested.

Personally, I'm ecstatic with Tropical Serenade returning. I felt less intelligent walking out of Under New Management and something that atrocious should have never been open in a Disney park. Would a completely new show be nice? Possibly. But I'm not sure I'd want to take my chances on a new show.

 

[MKCP 1985]

Tiki Room: as a kid in the 70s, I thought it was kinda cool to see the birdies sing and the tikis drum and gnash their teeth, but could easily skip it for almost any other ride. It was never anywhere near my favorite, especially after some more exciting rides were added - Space Mountain in 75, Big Thunder a little while later.

80s: as a teenager, thought it was boring. Saw it with friends on a senior trip and thought "never again."

90s: Never is a long time. With young kids of my own, went back and this was the first attraction I ever saw people get up and walk out on in the middle of the show. My reaction: "I didn't know you COULD do that!" My kids didn't ask to see it again after seeing it once.

Under New Management: I'll be honest - I have never seen it. No desire to do so and no kids asking me to take them.

With that background, and not to write a novel here - Disney can do what they want with the Tiki birds and I probably won't go see it either way. :shrug:

To get me back in there, Disney could change it up to include a new story with new characters or a combination of live performers and birds/wall tikis. Get some of the performers from the Polynesian show to do a few shows a day in the Tiki Room, with some drumming and fire juggling and hula dancing and make it "adventurous" to be present during the show. Or develop a new story with new characters that are seen outside the show building - something to entice people to go inside.

 

[Enchantâmes]

I'll settle with either Tropical Serenade or Tokyo's Get the Fever! which I have seen both in person. Get the Fever updated the original show in a much more respectful way, they even featured an updated version of the Hawaiian war chant which was powered by the Tiki God's passion for the new female host Lava...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKWdb0K5JHg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sazcwDkTRTI&NR=1

 

[forevermickey]

I'll settle with either Tropical Serenade or Tokyo's Get the Fever! which I have seen both in person. Get the Fever updated the original show in a much more respectful way, they even featured an updated version of the Hawaiian war chant which was powered by the Tiki God's passion for the new female host Lava...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKWdb0K5JHg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sazcwDkTRTI&NR=1

I am not a fan of UNM, just watched the 2 You Tube video's above, thought they were a snooze fest. The Tiki Room is famous for their catchy music, I felt this missed that point totally.

 

[jt04]

Around 40 posts on a refurbished Tiki Room and I didn't see where anyone mentioned the "S" word. You know, Stitch!

Simple solution, bring back the original show for a year long celebration of the 40th. This rumor has been around for a couple years and it does make sense.

Then, after the crowds begin to thin again bring in the Stitch show.

Now if I were making the decision I would not remove the old show. Instead I would have an attraction that can run in two modes. Either the original or Stitch mode to keep everyone happy and the attraction fresh for many more years. It would also allow them to close the Stitch show in Tomorrowland and install something fitting. Wall-E?

So simple.

 

[sshindel]

The warm childhood fuzzies thing is something that bothers me when anybody mentions it. The idea that bringing back any attraction that is nostaglic for YOU is a great idea? Blah. The parks aren't designed to be your time capsule. I think some need to ride the Carousel of Progress.

As a part of the WDW community, we should be demand progress and innovation, not cop-outs and old shows.

Btw, WDW capitalized on MJ's death and the renewed craze that ensued after. That sit funny with anyone else?

I've said it on other threads about this topic on this site. I honestly dont care if they bring back the original show. What I care about is that they at least bring back the spirit of the original show, and not a show that basically spends most of it's time crapping on one of Walt's attractions as stale. I'm all for improvements and moving forward, as long as they are actual improvements. Bring back the full Tiki Room song, keep to the Aloha spirit of the original, and move forward all they want.