roj2323
Well-Known Member
I'd rather forget that disappointing factoid. It could have been an amazing addition to the park but much like Mermaid it lacks substance.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Toy Story Land expansion announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
I'd rather forget that disappointing factoid. It could have been an amazing addition to the park but much like Mermaid it lacks substance.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Of course it could have been much longer. Heck, I could have been 6'5" tall, with a full head of hair, born of rich parents and have a yard full of Rolls Royce's, but, I didn't have that happen. All this could have been should just change to might have been if that is what they decided to do. For whatever reason they chose the one we got. Could be that they didn't want to spend the money (always possible and always up to them) or they decided that the big one took up to much space in an already crowded area. Who knows? We know what their decision was, I do not believe that we have any iron clad knowledge concerning WHY it got to be what it is. All we have is speculation. If you recall from the original plans we might have just another meet and greet instead of what we did get. I think that is an upgrade myself.The Dwarf Coaster is about 2000ft. RnRC is about 3400ft. The Dwarf Coaster would have and could have been much longer. But of course you don't have to believe me.
Not that these two are an equal comparison given speed and ride dynamics though.
Regardless I still want that coffee with you sometime
As for the comparison, OK. With RnRC we got a ride that is strictly thrill. It starts off quickly, makes a few loops, passes by (in the dark) a few day glow items offering almost no detailed theme and almost before it started... it's done and because of the speed it is a shorter experience, time wise. Now 7DMT, Shorter in distance, has actual scenery and theme. Has dark ride interludes, fun sing along music (HI HO), amazing AA's and is a longer experience. I like both, but, as far as Disneyesque, I'll go with 7DMT as a winner. Because basing anything on what might have been, is just plainly a waste of time and energy. Things are what they are not what they coulda, shoulda, mighta been if the stars were aligned properly on that eventful day of decision. So, in that context, yes they are comparable because the only real complaints I have heard about 7DMT is the length of the experience. Since that seems to be the only problem, then it is absolutely comparable. Where is the uproar about how short RnRC is and how since they had a gigantic no real restriction area to build in... why isn't it a longer one?
Given its been open for quite a while now I guess people don't feel the need to cause uproar about it. Draw your own conclusions to why I suppose.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
It's simple, it's an adrenaline rush and the thrill quotient is satisfied. In fact, they people like myself don't want it any longer, but, that does not make 7DMT a bad ride nor does it need to get the bad mouthing that it does get because we think it should have been longer and damn the Disney tightwads for taking away from our experience. Those that are complaining are not those that enjoy a simple dark/light ride with no increase in heartbeat. Even before it ever opened it was described as a Kiddie Coaster. Well, DUH, it is located in a place called Fantasyland, along side Dumbo, Mermaid and Beast. Who would have thought that it might be directed toward the same audience as those attractions.
In my mind, nothing was taken away, in fact, a whole damn ride was given that wasn't originally planned. That is a win whether we want to acknowledge it or not. The people that love RnRC are those the can handle inversions and snap your neck accelerations. There are two varieties of those... the outright adrenaline junky that can't get enough "thrills" and those more like myself that enjoy it on a much more subdued level but appreciate how it was handled in a Disney park that usually isn't all into the "thrill" experience and something that the company was never based on, if you follow the history of Disney, which I know you do. In that sense 7DMT was done very well. In a place called "Fantasyland" that by nature is not themed for the "junky" it is well done, creative, detailed and fun. Not long enough for some, but, still a quality attractions that gets nothing but hate from those that feel that Disney just doesn't do enough for them. It just gets tedious is all!
The only past references to thrill that were in the era of Walt are the Matterhorn, which I haven't ridden but it appears to be Space Mountain with holes in it and Space Mountain. Now as good and as popular as SM is, can you tell me how cheap a ride like that is. A roller-coaster built inside a pitch black room. No scenery, nothing to see... all you can do is ride. The theme is limited to the queue and nothing else. Man, those imagineers must have stayed up nights for months trying to design that themed ride.
There is stuff to see, but I agree Floridas now appears cheap compared to the other 4. It hasn't kept up with the visuals of the others, and often has multiple broken star projectors.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
You seem confused as to what the complaints of SDMT actually are. It's not that we're all thrill junkies or whatever. It's that what was cut were more dark ride scenes like the mine that would've made the ride feel much more complete. We know that Fantasyland isn't the place for huge adrenaline fueled coasters.
To answer a small part of your other post the original layout would've used the exact same plot of land more or less.
Yes it is better than the M&Gs but it's still a bit of a disappointment. I also don't really care much for RnRC and prefer BTMRR.
azox
Well-Known Member
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
My point is that we only know about what other ideas were put out there because of our internet connection. Nothing in those concepts even starts to explain if they were even seriously considered before they made their decision. It never has been about what could have been since the park opened. It is what they decided to do.You seem confused as to what the complaints of SDMT actually are. It's not that we're all thrill junkies or whatever. It's that what was cut were more dark ride scenes like the mine that would've made the ride feel much more complete. We know that Fantasyland isn't the place for huge adrenaline fueled coasters.
To answer a small part of your other post the original layout would've used the exact same plot of land more or less.
Yes it is better than the M&Gs but it's still a bit of a disappointment. I also don't really care much for RnRC and prefer BTMRR.
It is widely thought that Pirates is better in DL then in WDW. Does that mean something sinister or just that they decided on the one we have. Same as Small World. Is there any reason why the WDW Small World isn't as spectacular as the DL one. Remember those were built by the old school Disney not the ones that had to worry about what Wall Street thought. Do we even give it a second thought. We have plans for both since DL was there before WDW, but, decisions were made. Did they decide to build the same thing and then cut back after or did they just decide that is what they wanted in WDW. That is the magical question that we have no way of answering. Just because there are plans in existence that show a different layout does not mean that they ever really considered doing it that way. They were ideas (concepts if you will) that were presented for review. They decided on what we have. They didn't cut back on previously approved plans, they looked at a number of them and decided on the one that is there.
I don't expect many to understand this because we are all bound up by what we think it should have been and trying to blame some unknown reason for it being less then we wanted. Since we aren't paying the bills**, we really don't have a say in it, nor, should we. The simplest way to say it is you cannot cut what never existed in an approved, green lit form.
** Yes, I know we indirectly pay the bills with our fees to be in the park, but, as soon as we spend our money to go there in spite of our objections, we have given financial approval to the situation.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
In the case of PotC we were never supposed to get it in the first place but due to complaints about "where are the Pirates" it was fast tracked. Similar scenes to the ones that were cut from DL's to our version were supposed to appear in the never built Western River Expedition which was supposed to still happen even while they were building Pirates. Here's a very in depth 3 part read on that:
http://passport2dreams.blogspot.com/2015/01/all-about-western-river-expedition-part.html
http://passport2dreams.blogspot.com/2015/01/all-about-western-river-expedition-part_29.html
http://passport2dreams.blogspot.com/2015/02/all-about-western-river-expedition-part.html
Other than IASW and PotC, nearly every other ride in MK was an expanded version of what appeared in DL.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Exactly, that is what I have been saying. How do you know that they didn't plan something bigger then at the last minute decided that they didn't want to spend that much. They had a reason for what they decided and we were not privy to it and, I don't believe we are now. They simply made a decision based on whatever reason they had. We might be upset about something that we think should be there, not being there, but, the anger that seems to always come to the surface when this stuff is discussed is beyond my ability to comprehend. Do we think that they owe us something more and if we do why do we continue to pay to see stuff that is less then what we think we deserve? This, I know, is getting to be an old, nearly meaningless statement, but "it is what it is". We cannot control those things on an individual basis. We do not know the actual reason for things being what they are, but, that doesn't seem to stop us from thinking that we can run a theme park better then they can. And if we can, why aren't we. Walt risked everything once to build what he believed in, why are we, the massive complainers, not standing up and doing the same thing. If we don't like what we see and think we can build it better, then we should. Otherwise we can express that we like or dislike something, but, we really do not have the ability to know why things are the way they are since we are not part of the decision making process.
brb1006
Well-Known Member
Is there any photos of the Epcot Billboard?
Bill Cipher
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
Must be the nights drawing in.
Next Big Thing
Well-Known Member
Question: I know it's been stated many times in the past that the Jack Sparrow Soundstage will be torn down for the entryway to this land.
If this is happening, when should we see it start to get torn down?
When there's something resembling a land to get to!
Next Big Thing
Well-Known Member
So 2018 lol
I was just wondering if they were planning on tearing it down now since they're in demolition mode.
DinoInstitute
Well-Known Member
I just realized this reading this, but does anyone know when in 2018 it's supposed to open? I would assume probably summer but I don't know and I don't remember ever reading it
Last edited: