Unpopular Disney world opinions

Moth

Moth

Well-Known Member
Magic Kingdom is booty. RoA being torn out doesn't make it's case better and Villains just adds onto the spaghetti. It's only saving grace is having a pretty nice Adventureland and- nevermind look at those ugly carpets.

Disney has failed to capitalize on the majority of non-princess post-2000s IP in their parks, specifically Lilo and Stitch, and I think Berk in EU is going to be a wake up call in this department on how Disney can figure out ways to milk an alien. The fandom wants to grovel and groan when they see Stitch but outside of a bad re-theme, he's had nothing. The lack of Wreck it Ralph, WALL-E, Incredibles, Tangled, Big Hero 6, and other IPs like Phineas and Ferb have been obvious.

It's time for WDW Jungle Cruise to meet the big Disney's America in the sky.

Toy Story Land is perfectly fine, and if Galaxy's Edge wasn't sold as the second coming of Jesus by Disney it would be seen as a "fine" land too.
 
JackCH

JackCH

Well-Known Member
There is a massive disconnect between what most Disney goers want out of the parks and what the “Disney purists” want.

The RoA going away is going to be a net positive for the park and the average guest will view it as an improvement.

Cosmic Rewind is a phenomenal attraction and I’m even fine with where it is.
 
Sir_Cliff

Sir_Cliff

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
I'm definitely on board with rides not necessarily needing a linear narrative -- one of the complaints people have made here about Na'vi River Journey is that it doesn't tell a story, and I've never really understood that particular complaint. I don't think it needs a story (and there are other classic Disney attractions that don't really have a narrative, like Haunted Mansion and Jungle Cruise); you're just experiencing being on a river in a jungle on an alien planet (and, at least IMO, it absolutely nails that).

I've never really understood the complaint about book report rides either, though. If you're building a ride based off a specific movie, isn't that often what people want? People generally want to see the scenes and characters from the film they enjoyed. I think that's part of the reason FEA felt off to me (although certainly not my biggest issue); it's basically a collection of scenes similar to scenes from the film (Elsa singing Let It Go in the ice palace, etc.). If they ever built an Aladdin ride, e.g., I think people would want to see the Cave of Wonders, they'd want to see an A Whole New World flying carpet scene, they'd want to see a Friend Like Me scene, etc., which doesn't have to be done as a book report, but if you have all those scenes it seems like it's almost inherently one.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I understand that view and am not sure where I sit on book report rides in principle. In practice, though, I'm trying to think of one that I would rate very highly. Absent that, I tend to side with those who argue theme park rides aren't a good medium for telling a narrative story. Splash Mountain is perhaps the main exception, perhaps because it tells a short and simple story equivalent to a short rather than a feature film over a relatively long ride.

I would imagine trying to fit in the major plot points of a film into a relatively short ride probably serves as a bit of a straightjacket which necessitates shoehorning things in that don't really fit or flow naturally and making it harder to linger on key moments. With the Aladdin example, I think what you mention would actually does work best as kind of a book report ride in that it recreates memorable moments from the film but isn't one because it isn't bound to telling a narrative story. The conceit could be as simple as Aladdin and Jasmine taking a spin on the carpet, or that you're doing it and bumping into them along the way. That way, they can just leave out stuff like introducing Jafar and having him defeated at the end, for example, and concentrate on giving guests the feeling of riding on a magic carpet through the world of Aladdin with all the music they want to hear.

That's what I kind of respect about FEA: they don't worry about explaining why Elsa is in her ice castle singing Let it Go and I don't think it really matters; who knows, maybe she just likes to go up there sometimes in the summer and sing to herself! As far as Tiana is concerned, I think that ride is another victim of over-thinking everything.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
Sir_Cliff said:
Yeah, I understand that view and am not sure where I sit on book report rides in principle. In practice, though, I'm trying to think of one that I would rate very highly. Absent that, I tend to side with those who argue theme park rides aren't a good medium for telling a narrative story. Splash Mountain is perhaps the main exception, perhaps because it tells a short and simple story equivalent to a short rather than a feature film over a relatively long ride.

I would imagine trying to fit in the major plot points of a film into a relatively short ride probably serves as a bit of a straightjacket which necessitates shoehorning things in that don't really fit or flow naturally and making it harder to linger on key moments. With the Aladdin example, I think what you mention would actually does work best as kind of a book report ride in that it recreates memorable moments from the film but isn't one because it isn't bound to telling a narrative story. The conceit could be as simple as Aladdin and Jasmine taking a spin on the carpet, or that you're doing it and bumping into them along the way. That way, they can just leave out stuff like introducing Jafar and having him defeated at the end, for example, and concentrate on giving guests the feeling of riding on a magic carpet through the world of Aladdin with all the music they want to hear.

That's what I kind of respect about FEA: they don't worry about explaining why Elsa is in her ice castle singing Let it Go and I don't think it really matters; who knows, maybe she just likes to go up there sometimes in the summer and sing to herself! As far as Tiana is concerned, I think that ride is another victim of over-thinking everything.
Click to expand...

I think people would want to see Jafar on an attraction like that, though -- isn't that a big part of the reason people are excited for a Villains land?

I don't think a Villains land is a good idea, because I don't think most of the Disney villains really work outside of the context of their own stories. I think they should be included in attractions centered around that IP.

Frozen didn't really have a capital V villain the way many other Disney films do, so I don't think it's a major issue there. If Disney is determined to use their movies as the basis for all attractions, though, the ones that have major villains should be incorporated into those attractions. That's one of the major complaints about Tiana, too.

I agree that theme park rides aren't generally the best medium to tell a linear narrative (with maybe a few exceptions), but I don't think a ride necessarily has to retell the entire movie (so maybe what I'm suggesting isn't what other people call a book report ride? I'm not really sure). I do think people generally want to see the high points of the film, though, including the villain.
 
Last edited:
D

DisneyFanatic12

Well-Known Member
Moth said:
Disney has failed to capitalize on the majority of non-princess post-2000s IP in their parks, specifically Lilo and Stitch, and I think Berk in EU is going to be a wake up call in this department on how Disney can figure out ways to milk an alien. The fandom wants to grovel and groan when they see Stitch but outside of a bad re-theme, he's had nothing. The lack of Wreck it Ralph, WALL-E, Incredibles, Tangled, Big Hero 6, and other IPs like Phineas and Ferb have been obvious.
Click to expand...
I agree, it’s interesting how they have failed to capitalize on a lot of different IP in the parks.
 
Coaster Lover

Coaster Lover

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
Dolewhips are highly overrated... there are dozens of better options if you are looking for a refreshing treat.

Pirates at Magic Kingdom is by no means sacred and I would not shed a tear if they ever announced it would be removed. It was a rushed, trimmed down clone of a substantially better ride and an arguably better alternative ride would have been built if "fans" didn't interfere.

Infact I will go so far as to say that I don't think there is a single ride at Magic Kingdom that I would consider "untouchable". Keep the originals at Disneyland, the clones at Magic Kingdom are not sacred to me.

CRT and BOG are 100% skipable.

All of the rides that they replaced at EPCOT needed to be replaced... if they were still there today (as they were when they opened) we'd all be complaining about how dated the rides are.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
Coaster Lover said:
All of the rides that they replaced at EPCOT needed to be replaced... if they were still there today (as they were when they opened) we'd all be complaining about how dated the rides are.
Click to expand...

Imagination would still be one of the best rides at WDW right now if it was functioning in its original incarnation. That's not to say it wouldn't have benefitted from some updates, but it really wouldn't be significantly outdated.

World of Motion would have needed some changes towards end (like Spaceship Earth) but the majority of that ride would also still be good to great right now.

Horizons is the one that would have needed a significant overhaul; its vision of the future was very 1980s.
 
Last edited:

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

Back
Top Bottom