What's up with the changes in Stitch's Great Escape?

[thimblekisses]

I know we've discussed Stitch's Great Escape to death, and most people hate Stitch and don't want to talk about him. We've also discussed the changes that have been made to it recently. Well on our last trip on Easter week, we finally went on Stitch again for the first time in a while. We definitely saw the new video, where Stitch knocks on the castle door and talks to Cinderella (something like "Cindereellllaaaaa, your prince is here!" and "You're not my prince!!!", real clever dialogue ) and there were a few other changes as well, such as more spitting. One really good spit sprayed everyone, though I don't recall if it was in the dark or not. There was definitely a longer period of darkness.
My biggest question is, what is with the new audio of the little kid narrating what's going on? There's this little kid voice that says things the whole time that really threw me off because I don't remember hearing it before. When it first gets dark the voice says something like "Mommy, it's Stitch." when he walks on your shoulders and breathes on you and all that. Then later it says something to the effect of "Mommy, he's going to hotwire the transporter!" followed by the aliens a few minutes later saying "Oh, no, he's hotwired the transporter!" Is that designed to make it less scary for little kids, or something? It sounds as if the little kid voice is not scared and is trying to comfort his mom or something. I found it to be kindof annoying.
This is probably very old news, but can anyone give me any thoughts on this?

 

[RSoxNo1]

I haven't been on it since it's opening week, but it sounds to me that by adding the voice of an unscared child is to make the ride less scary. Unfortunately, it sounds like although they're decreasing the ride's scariness, the overall dialogue and script doesn't seem to be improved for all generations.

 

[wdwmagic]

My biggest question is, what is with the new audio of the little kid narrating what's going on? There's this little kid voice that says things the whole time that really threw me off because I don't remember hearing it before. When it first gets dark the voice says something like "Mommy, it's Stitch." when he walks on your shoulders and breathes on you and all that. Then later it says something to the effect of "Mommy, he's going to hotwire the transporter!" followed by the aliens a few minutes later saying "Oh, no, he's hotwired the transporter!" Is that designed to make it less scary for little kids, or something? It sounds as if the little kid voice is not scared and is trying to comfort his mom or something. I found it to be kindof annoying.
This is probably very old news, but can anyone give me any thoughts on this?

Disney decided that in the first version, many people simply had no idea what was supposed to be happening (largely because it was in pitch black, and the superb animatronic Stitch was no longer visible). The new audio is an attempt to guide people to what is actually happening.

Unfortunately, with the exception of the incredible AAs, the entire attraction remains a complete mess, and isnt anywhere near to the standard of Alien Encounter.

 

[KevinPage]

What really bothers me is how can WDI be this "stupid" (for lack of a better word).

I mean, how in the world can any normal person not 'cringe' at the original script, let alone these new additions. They may have somewhat addressed the "scary factor" but have made the script even WORSE.

Unless management is totally belligerent and mandates these exact changes, someone's head at WDI should roll for this.

And how can Al Weiss, president of WDW actually give this a thumbs up (assuming they have to run this by him as well) :veryconfu :veryconfu

 

[marni1971]

WDI can`t take the blame... management have the final say from closing AE to the final details for SGE. Plus it was they who farmed out the rehab to an outside company at a price less than what WDI bid for. Initial AE cost - around $60m. SGE rehab - around $14m apparently.

Even taking into account the retheming of Mission to Mars and re equipping the theatres (plus SIR) the AE cost (1994) dosn`t seem to harsh. Now if WDI wanted to spend $20m-$30m on SGE, and the budget from the outside company was half that, it is managements head that should roll. Not that they ever do.

 

[wdwmagic]

WDI can`t take the blame... management have the final say from closing AE to the final details for SGE. Plus it was they who farmed out the rehab to an outside company at a price less than what WDI bid for. Initial AE cost - around $60m. SGE rehab - around $14m apparently.

How could an outside company rehab AE when the attraction uses WDI proprietory AAs and control systems?

 

[Lee]

Bids were taken from an outside company for the Stitch makeover, causing WDI to compete for the job.
WDI got it...but at a much reduced budget than was originally planned.

 

[wdwmagic]

Bids were taken from an outside company for the Stitch makeover, causing WDI to compete for the job.
WDI got it...but at a much reduced budget than was originally planned.

How was that ever going to work? I cant see how an outside company could take over an attraction that is already in place, that uses proprietory, and patented systems.

 

[Lee]

Well...in the event the outside company got the job, they would have designed the show, handled the removal of all the AE materials, the reconfiguring of the theatres, the installation of the new effects...pretty much everything that WASN"T proprietary. WDI would come in at the end to handle that part.

The unfortunate side effect of the huge growth in the themed attraction industry is the competition that has been created for WDI. While once they were the only ones doing it, they now have to compete with other companies (many staffed by ex-Imagineers) who do the same stuff, and are willing to do it at reduced budgets.

The story as I heard it:
-WDW decides to make the change from AE to Stitch.
-WDI develops the show at a budget of around $25 million.
-An outside company puts in a bid for the show at less than $20 million.
-WDW has to take that seriously, and WDI modifies their proposal to $15 million.
-The other company comes back with $12 million.
-WDI cuts it to the bone and gets the job for roughly $10 million.

At least, that's the way it was told to me....... :veryconfu

 

[Shaman]

Is anyone else disturbed by the fact that the WDC has WDI competing with outside companies, for a job that should be theirs considering that THEY'RE PART OF THE COMPANY! What the heck? Did I miss something?

*sigh*

 

[wdwmagic]

That whole story sounds pretty crazy to me. I just cant see how you can have outside companies bidding to do work on systems developed by others, and also I cant see how you can have one company bidding against another bid that they dont even know the creative and technical content of. If that is how things are being run right now, no wonder we have problems.

To me though, Stitch doesnt seem to be lacking in funding. The AAs, which are the most cost intensive element, are superb. The area that is lacking, is the usage of those AAs, which comes down to developing a solid story. Those solid stories dont take millions of dollars to develop. It seems that the current storyline was developed in about 5 minutes at the end of a long day. WDI has to take some of the wrap for that part.

 

[KevinPage]

Is anyone else disturbed by the fact that the WDC has WDI competing with outside companies, for a job that should be theirs considering that THEY'RE PART OF THE COMPANY! What the heck? Did I miss something?

*sigh*

The premise of this it to make WDI more accountable for their $$$ decisions. If Disney relied only on WDI, they are limiting their possibilities and WDI doesn't have the "push" to create quality content at a reasonable price.

It may sound weird and not the "perfect" solution, but I think Walt or Roy initially instituted this policy way back in the day.

 

[KevinPage]

WDI can`t take the blame... management have the final say from closing AE to the final details for SGE. Plus it was they who farmed out the rehab to an outside company at a price less than what WDI bid for. Initial AE cost - around $60m. SGE rehab - around $14m apparently.

Obviously management has to "sign off" on everything BUT WDI are the ones who "created" the storyline. WDI are the ones who decided to add these inane remarks into the plot.

Unless we have some proof that management said WE INSIST that you include "canned" remarks by children into the attraction to make it less scary and/or WDI was not allowed to recreate and spend more $$$ to redesign it properly, how can WDI not be blamed for this aspect

WDI is not to blame for the overall state of the newer attractions over the years, but let's get real, WDI is not infallable, as evidenced by this.

 

[KevinPage]

Well...in the event the outside company got the job, they would have designed the show, handled the removal of all the AE materials, the reconfiguring of the theatres, the installation of the new effects...pretty much everything that WASN"T proprietary. WDI would come in at the end to handle that part.
The unfortunate side effect of the huge growth in the themed attraction industry is the competition that has been created for WDI. While once they were the only ones doing it, they now have to compete with other companies (many staffed by ex-Imagineers) who do the same stuff, and are willing to do it at reduced budgets.

Do you know what attractions that WDI has actually LOST the bid on

I'm assuming they have had to lose at least 1 over the years, otherwise it seems like a really underhanded way of just driving down the cost of the attraction that WDC knows WDI is going to do anyway.

And if outside companies never win a Disney contract, word would get around the industry they are simply being used to reduce an internal bid and companies would no longer enter into the fray.

 

[Shaman]

The premise of this it to make WDI more accountable for their $$$ decisions. If Disney relied only on WDI, they are limiting their possibilities and WDI doesn't have the "push" to create quality content at a reasonable price.

It may sound weird and not the "perfect" solution, but I think Walt or Roy initially instituted this policy way back in the day.

In my opinion...it doesn't matter WHO came up with this idea or practice...It seems a bit rediculous...Maybe I'm being naive...but why doesn't management just say...the price to a certain project is too high? Why go through such an act just to lower the price...not only does it take away from the quality of the attractions, in the end...but it also makes Imagineers less willing to be loyal to the company....(not that they needed another reason)...

But again...thats just my opinion...

 

[KevinPage]

(I know, I know, enough with MY posts in this thread already).

But after reasing Lee's description it may have turned out like this:

WDI had a good script with an initial plan for the attraction

Bidding war ensures, WDI has to make cuts to original plan, which therefore affects the storyline and certain elements are not able to be instituted.

They scramble and piece together a storyline last minute to fit into the budget they have based on the theatre effects and AA's.

In conclusion, you can say this is the fault of management by having the cost reduced, BUT I'm sure anyone on this message board could have come up with a more intelligent/inventive/creative script that what was in place.

Could WDI have had an amazining plot to begin with but the budget was cut so they couldn't implement features that would pull it off? I'll even give WDI the benefit of the doubt on this one.

But still, there is no excuse for the script that we ended up with. I normally can understand the logic behind Disney's decisions, whether they be good or bad over the years. But this Stitch script really has me befuddled. How the heck did ANYONE approve this :veryconfu :veryconfu

FYI - I also love that Steve, our humble WDWMagic god, is actually "mixing it up" as opposed to just sitting on the fence and staying neutral. :sohappy:

 

[marni1971]

Thanks for clearing that up, Lee. I knew I had read something along those lines (damn my memory)

WDI may not be infallable (those who are left) but they can only work with what they are given. Virtually every attraction conceived since before EPCOT Center has been scaled down for financial reasons, and the purse strings have been tightened even more over the last few years. Small budgets can be worked with or can fail a project - Dreamflights makeover of If You Could Fly worked well, DLC`s Pooh flopped. Rocket Rods failed spectacularly despite WDI`s warning to management about funding. Large budgets can create a legacy - Tower of Terror is soon to be in 4 parks - or can turn out to be not as a `must-see` as planned (Mission:Space; originally a target for cloning but overall less-than-stellar responses seem to have mothballed that for now).

Perhaps WDI could have tried to come up with a better storyline in the first place, or fix, but without knowing the criteria they were set to from above its unfair to judge them. At the end of the day, it wasn`t WDI who decided to put an attraction appealing to children in a dark theatre, one who`s very function was to scare by using more than just sight...

And, yes, it is nice to see Steve joining in! :wave:

 

[General Grizz]

Thanks for the info, Lee. And I also like the "new Steve." :lol:

I, for one, am upset to hear the poor extent of the rehab. More needs to be done. . . Lee: what happened to this big budget that was supposed to be put into a rehab?

 

[wdwmagic]

Rocket Rods failed spectacularly despite WDI`s warning to management about funding.

I can see with a technological hurdle, like with Rocket Rods, that money would be an issue. I believe in that scenerio there were issues with the track infrastructure and more, which is obviously espensive. It just seems to me with Stitch that they difficult part, the technology of those AAs is done. It is so frustrating that the lowest cost part, the story, is such a major short-comming and let down.

 

[KevinPage]

Perhaps WDI could have tried to come up with a better storyline in the first place, or fix, but without knowing the criteria they were set to from above its unfair to judge them. At the end of the day, it wasn`t WDI who decided to put an attraction appealing to children in a dark theatre, one who`s very function was to scare by using more than just sight...

And, yes, it is nice to see Steve joining in! :wave:

Now, now, don't go being an apologist for WDI. No one doubts they have to work under tougher or more stringent guidelines than they should. But they should be able to come up with something far better than they did.

They created the Stitch & lasor cannons AA on what we think is a "limited budget". Storyline literally requires minimal, if any, budget. IF the script/plot was only AVERAGE or so/so, than I've have a tendency to agree with you more. There are minor gripes to the animation and pre show quality, but they are "serviceable". The script is not.

But anything short of Rafferty & Sklar being strapped to "The Rack" & being forced to smell Eisner's choice of "Yeti scents" I'm not giving WDI a pass on this aspect.