Tta is open

Future Guy

Future Guy

Active Member
jt04 said:
:veryconfu
Click to expand...

I thought it was pretty generally accepted that Michael Eisner was against attractions that had a presentational, rather than narrative, style. While he was in charge, any new thing he approved had to have a backstory of some sort and tell a story rather than just presenting an idea, and if you play by those rules then Magic Journeys, the original JII, If You Had Wings, and the original Tiki Room would not make the cut.

Tomorrowland never had a backstory until the 1994 redo, and no one really thought it needed one. I like the current design aesthetic better than the old one, but the presence or absence of any kind of backstory to explain it wouldn't affect my enjoyment of TL one bit.
 
SirGoofy

SirGoofy

Member
Future Guy said:
I thought it was pretty generally accepted that Michael Eisner was against attractions that had a presentational, rather than narrative, style. While he was in charge, any new thing he approved had to have a backstory of some sort and tell a story rather than just presenting an idea, and if you play by those rules then Magic Journeys, the original JII, If You Had Wings, and the original Tiki Room would not make the cut.

Tomorrowland never had a backstory until the 1994 redo, and no one really thought it needed one. I like the current design aesthetic better than the old one, but the presence or absence of any kind of backstory to explain it wouldn't affect my enjoyment of TL one bit.
Click to expand...

Disney lands have almost always had an encompassing story. It's what makes Disney, Disney.

And I don't know what JII you rode, but the thing had a pretty good story, if you ask me.:lol:
 
RHeath2

RHeath2

Member
EPCOT Explorer said:
Which turned out to be is land encompassing and altering visual kinetic.

What did you want, a loop?:rolleyes:


Ok, I know I am a Doom and Gloomer, but the line is drawn here, for me.:lol: There is ALWAYS the potential for them to do more, but there is also the potential for LESS....which is what we originally thought they would do.


Sheesh.:lol:
Click to expand...


Caught me totally off guard. Thanks for the laugh.:wave:
 
TalkingHead

TalkingHead

Well-Known Member
Future Guy said:
I thought it was pretty generally accepted that Michael Eisner was against attractions that had a presentational, rather than narrative, style. While he was in charge, any new thing he approved had to have a backstory of some sort and tell a story rather than just presenting an idea, and if you play by those rules then Magic Journeys, the original JII, If You Had Wings, and the original Tiki Room would not make the cut.

Tomorrowland never had a backstory until the 1994 redo, and no one really thought it needed one. I like the current design aesthetic better than the old one, but the presence or absence of any kind of backstory to explain it wouldn't affect my enjoyment of TL one bit.
Click to expand...

I see your point. Walt's Disneyland didn't need an overcooked backstory to justify the presence of an attraction. Take the Matterhorn, for instance. There's no fancy "we're on a mission to find the Abominable Snowman" story---and before the addition of the Snowman in the 70s, there was no "we're on a mission to bobsled down the Matterhorn to save the day". It was simply, "you're bobsledding around the Matterhorn." Let your imagination work its magic.

I, too, get annoyed with the overly complicated storylines that are lost on the majority of the guests. I think much of the stories are lost on guests because the presentation of these storylines is too expository. I much prefer the old-school WDI attractions that simply put you in the middle of the action and let your imagination explain what you're seeing. Pirates and Mansion didn't need explicit storylines to impress generations of guests (and I don't count the storylines that could only be found in the SOP guides).

Disney does well when it emphasizes theming over expository storytelling.
 
kungfoosally

kungfoosally

New Member
i dont care if they threw live gerbils and crayons in each car and called it a refurb. i'm just glad it's open again and they didnt try something stupid like they did with the peoplemover at disneyland a few years back.
 
panther726

panther726

Member
EPCOT Explorer said:
Which turned out to be is land encompassing and altering visual kinetic.

What did you want, a loop?:rolleyes:


Ok, I know I am a Doom and Gloomer, but the line is drawn here, for me.:lol: There is ALWAYS the potential for them to do more, but there is also the potential for LESS....which is what we originally thought they would do.


Sheesh.:lol:
Click to expand...

Exactly! This was closed firstly for the SM refurb, TTA isn't an attraction you can completely change and make it an E ticket or anything. Most people pay no attention to the TTA except disney fans like us! (waiting for the, not about just the average guest, Disney accepts mediocracy, flaming!)
 
jt04

jt04

Well-Known Member
panther726 said:
Isn't Mystic Manor a spinoff on Haunted Mansion for HKDL?
Click to expand...

I think that is what everyone thought, but it is something completely different. In fact it is unique enough that it could be placed in a park with a Haunted Mansion and not really conflict.
 
devoy1701

devoy1701

Well-Known Member
TalkingHead said:
I see your point. Walt's Disneyland didn't need an overcooked backstory to justify the presence of an attraction. Take the Matterhorn, for instance. There's no fancy "we're on a mission to find the Abominable Snowman" story---and before the addition of the Snowman in the 70s, there was no "we're on a mission to bobsled down the Matterhorn to save the day". It was simply, "you're bobsledding around the Matterhorn." Let your imagination work its magic.

I, too, get annoyed with the overly complicated storylines that are lost on the majority of the guests. I think much of the stories are lost on guests because the presentation of these storylines is too expository. I much prefer the old-school WDI attractions that simply put you in the middle of the action and let your imagination explain what you're seeing. Pirates and Mansion didn't need explicit storylines to impress generations of guests (and I don't count the storylines that could only be found in the SOP guides).

Disney does well when it emphasizes theming over expository storytelling.
Click to expand...


While many people do enjoy Pirates and the Haunted Mansion simply for the attractions that they are, they do infact have very detailed back stories that make the experience exciting on a whole new level if you know the story. Pirates might be alittle off nowadays because of the Jack Sparrow Overlay, but if you've ever listened to The Story and Song of the Haunted Mansion from 1969, coinsiding with the opening of the original attraction (and pre Eisner mind you), every room and scene of that attraction makes sense and fits together. Rather than just seeming as if your touring the mansion, you feel like you're with Mike and Karen following the Raven to find a way out of the Mansion. That 25 minute recording featuring Pete Renoudet as the Ghost Host still gives me chills when I listen to it.

I would actually say that The Haunted Mansions backstory is the most ellaborate ever created by WDI...I guess you just never took the time to learn it.

(btw...BTMRR and the whole of Frontierland come in a close second in my book for best background story!!!)
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom