Under the Sea ~ Journey of the Little Mermaid closing for month long refurbishment Feb 2-Mar 6

Mike S

Mike S

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
I agree. The only thing I dislike about Universal's attraction storytelling is that they still use the "something goes wrong!" trope for every attraction. Gringotts, for example, could have been just as fun if it was just a ride through the bank on the crazy rail system, since in the films its already a crazy ride. Instead, you have to witness the most significant thing to ever happen at the bank. But I will take that over a recap of the films any day.

Every time I ride The Seas with Nemo at Epcot, I can't help but think what a missed opportunity it was. While I'd prefer no character attractions in Epcot, if they had to introduce them to the pavilion to breathe life into it, the slightest amount of thought and creativity could have made the ride fit better with Epcot. I've posted it before - how about a ride-along field trip with Mr. Ray? You'd still be able to use the characters from the film but it could be educational and not just a recap of the movie. Instead they went with the lazy, least creative route. They attempt to spin it as a "new adventure" but, come on, why would Nemo intentionally be a brat and hide from his dad? And why would they encounter the exact same characters from the first adventure?
Click to expand...
Fully agree on Nemo. About Gringotts a simple coaster ride through the bank would've been fun but I do really like the ride they did build. For intance if it was just a ride through the bank we wouldn't have Bellatrix and Voldemort in the ride. I also like how they included an area like what was seen in the first film instead of just going with the crazy high speed area in the huge cavern from the seventh one.
Skip to about 1:20
 
voodoo321

voodoo321

Well-Known Member
I first rode the Mermaid ride at DL. Highly dissapointed. Not for the scale of the ride. I was maybe the first person on this forum to comment on the lighting. My impression and comment was that it was like riding through a furniture showroom with Disney props. I feel the same way with the queue on TSMM. Same bad lighting at WDW when I rode it. I can't fathom how this went unnoticed while testing the ride. Lighting can be expensive but it's a minor expense on a production of this scale. Rode it again at DL a few months ago. I was skeptical because i didn't think the ride was much anyway and only thought the new lighting and paint would make a bad ride, passable. I was wrong. It changed the atmosphere entirely and made the ride somewhat immersive. Sure, it could use some other changes and fixes. But it's amazing how lighting can change the atmosphere and mood of any place. Not just a ride. I'm so thrilled that they were able to admit their mistake with this. It makes it re-rideable to me, like the so called "cheap" dark rides. It puts you in another place and time.
 
Tom Morrow

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
Mike S said:
Fully agree on Nemo. About Gringotts a simple coaster ride through the bank would've been fun but I do really like the ride they did build. For intance if it was just a ride through the bank we wouldn't have Bellatrix and Voldemort in the ride.
Click to expand...
That's true. The fans probably wanted to be able to see Voldemort somewhere in the two lands, and this was the way to do it.
 
K

Kungaloosh1937

Active Member
The cool thing about Gringott's is that it's one of the first rides ever that takes place concurrent with a scene in a book/movie... we were just never made aware of it as readers/viewers. It can now be said in canon that Bellatrix and Voldemort came to the bank to find the imposters (they just found us instead and went on a futile chase), but as it wasn't particularly important to the narrative of the book or the movie, it was never told nor shown.
 
D

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
I agree. The only thing I dislike about Universal's attraction storytelling is that they still use the "something goes wrong!" trope for every attraction.
Click to expand...

I think you need a mix of different types of rides. I actually have no problem with rides where you are a passive observer, though a park should have a good mix of experiences. Disney FWIW does have a number of "you are part of the storyline" rides, though you can make an argument that the balance is off -- personally, however, I don't mind the existing balance and it's interesting to note that the edutainment rides that people laud regarding old EPCOT Center were firmly in this vein as opposed to the rides that replaced them where the audience if "doing things" (e.g. Test Track, M:S).

Personally, I think the Uni formula gets old when pretty much every experience ends up being "something goes horribly wrong".

Every time I ride The Seas with Nemo at Epcot, I can't help but think what a missed opportunity it was. While I'd prefer no character attractions in Epcot, if they had to introduce them to the pavilion to breathe life into it, the slightest amount of thought and creativity could have made the ride fit better with Epcot. I've posted it before - how about a ride-along field trip with Mr. Ray? You'd still be able to use the characters from the film but it could be educational and not just a recap of the movie. Instead they went with the lazy, least creative route. They attempt to spin it as a "new adventure" but, come on, why would Nemo intentionally be a brat and hide from his dad? And why would they encounter the exact same characters from the first adventure?
Click to expand...

100% agree with this and have said it as well. It's one thing to decide to use Nemo at the Living Seas, but the execution is horrible. There was an opportunity there to introduce characters in a way that fit into the proper ambiance of Epcot (see the Lion King movie at the land for an example of how to do it in a reasonable manner) and WDI just blew it.
 
DoTheImpossible

DoTheImpossible

Active Member
(BIT OF A STRETCH...) I understand the refurb was coming eventually but the timing is interesting. Could they want Mermaid at its best before they kill the show in DHS (If they do)? If so, could be a hint as to the timing of the DHS announcement.
 
Oriolesmagic

Oriolesmagic

Well-Known Member
CJR said:
Touché. It's more like they just stopped working on it after a while. We can always argue that they're taking a break and nothing is ever truly complete at Disney.
Click to expand...

You could argue that about anything in the world really.

The new Spaceship Earth in the ascent is wonderful. A much needed update and improvement. But they dropped the ball quite heavily on the descent.

Back to the Little Mermaid, judging from what everyone is saying, it seems like this update will improve the ride tremendously! So color me pumped.
 
Jose

Jose

Well-Known Member
Seems like they have already started tests:
theseapic-jpeg.79723
 
Brer Panther

Brer Panther

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
Even ignoring the pacing and plot, I take issue with any ride made in this day and age that is nothing but a re-telling of the movie. Sure, that was great for the 50's, 60's, 70's, but we've progressed. Take the opportunity to let the ride take you in to the movie's universe, but expand on the story! I also prefer modern rides to not have you be just a bystander. A great example is Radiator Springs Racers - you still see the locales and characters from the movie, but 1. it's not a recap of the film, and 2. YOU are part of the story, its happening to you!

Although to be fair, with most omnimovers you are just a bystander to the action, but not always. In Haunted Mansion, you are being given a tour of the mansion, for example.
Click to expand...

I think a good example of a "story recap" ride that puts you into the story is the Winnie the Pooh ride. It recaps the Winnie the Pooh and the Blustery Day short, but it tries to have you interact with the characters (the scene where you bounce with Tigger).

As for the complaints about the ride's rather arupt ending... Honestly, I have a theory that the Imagineers blew half the budget on the façade and Audio-Animatronics, and then had to make due with what little they had left.
 
Sage of Time

Sage of Time

Well-Known Member
hpyhnt 1000 said:
Good to see some little things already happening. This should really help make it feel like the dark ride it was always intended to be. Don't know how Imagineering missed something as basic as the lighting first time around...
Click to expand...
If it were truly the dark ride it was meant to be, it would need about 2 more scenes at the end that actually show some of the more scary points of the film and the demise of ursula. Not a foolish cardboard cut out. Ugh. So anticlimactic.
 
Brer Panther

Brer Panther

Well-Known Member
Sage of Time said:
If it were truly the dark ride it was meant to be, it would need about 2 more scenes at the end that actually show some of the more scary points of the film and the demise of ursula. Not a foolish cardboard cut out. Ugh. So anticlimactic.
Click to expand...

Again, I subscribe by the "We blew all our money on making an animatronic seagull and had to finish the ride with what little we have left" theory.
 
Sped2424

Sped2424

Well-Known Member
Brer Panther said:
I think a good example of a "story recap" ride that puts you into the story is the Winnie the Pooh ride. It recaps the Winnie the Pooh and the Blustery Day short, but it tries to have you interact with the characters (the scene where you bounce with Tigger).

As for the complaints about the ride's rather arupt ending... Honestly, I have a theory that the Imagineers blew half the budget on the façade and Audio-Animatronics, and then had to make due with what little they had left.
Click to expand...
Good theory but since the DCA one is the exact same ride and came first minus the facade it doesn't hold up. This was just a poorly designed ride through and through.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom