Where exactly does the Stitch hate stem from?

[lebeau]

Didn't they have warning signs before?

People don't read on vacation.

They also won't let their kids prevent them from doing something they want to do. I remember back in my movie theater days, a parent asked if the South Park movie was appropriate for children. The movie was rated R, so it was a pretty silly question. But everyone in the lobby assured her that it was most definitely NOT appropriate for children. She shrugged and bought her kids tickets anyway. The only reason she asked was she was hoping we would validate her bad decision.

15 minutes later, she stormed out and demanded a refund.

 

[WDWmazprty]

People don't read on vacation.

They also won't let their kids prevent them from doing something they want to do. I remember back in my movie theater days, a parent asked if the South Park movie was appropriate for children. The movie was rated R, so it was a pretty silly question. But everyone in the lobby assured her that it was most definitely NOT appropriate for children. She shrugged and bought her kids tickets anyway. The only reason she asked was she was hoping we would validate her bad decision.

15 minutes later, she stormed out and demanded a refund.

:ROFLOL: Yeah, I thought I remembered a clear warning for this ride. Some people just have no sense and don't think.

 

[WorldKey]

I just don't like him as a character and I think it was one of the ugliest, crudest characters Disney has animated (besides the character [don't know the name] in Treasure Planet that made all of the obnoxious bodily function noises). I just don't watch Disney films to see quite such crude behavior - thus I don't like Stich. OK - let me have it......

 

[wdwjmp239]

Anyone who ever went on the original Alien Encounter attraction in TL has a deep rooted hatred of the Stitch name.

Stitch (the character) is ok. But, the attraction...I don't think my roots go deep enough to describe the hatred I have for that "attraction." It's more of a timekiller than anything else.

 

[wdwjmp239]

People don't read on vacation.

They also won't let their kids prevent them from doing something they want to do. I remember back in my movie theater days, a parent asked if the South Park movie was appropriate for children. The movie was rated R, so it was a pretty silly question. But everyone in the lobby assured her that it was most definitely NOT appropriate for children. She shrugged and bought her kids tickets anyway. The only reason she asked was she was hoping we would validate her bad decision.

15 minutes later, she stormed out and demanded a refund.

Based on my experiences on what I've seen at Disney when I go is that parents pretty much do whatever they want to keep their kids happy. So, if a kid wants to go on a ride that has the potential to scare the everloving "junk" out of them, then that's the kid's business. But the parents have no right to complain to Disney (or wherever) because their kid is now scared out of his wits and is having nightmares at night.

Is this understandable? I guess so. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose.

 

[WDWmazprty]

Based on my experiences on what I've seen at Disney when I go is that parents pretty much do whatever they want to keep their kids happy. So, if a kid wants to go on a ride that has the potential to scare the everloving "junk" out of them, then that's the kid's business. But the parents have no right to complain to Disney (or wherever) because their kid is now scared out of his wits and is having nightmares at night.

Is this understandable? I guess so. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose.

I make my kid happy to a certain extent, but if I know they will be scared out of their mind, knowing it will do more harm than good, then I will be the parent with common sense and tell my kid no. They may cry and be upset for a little bit, but they'll get over it. We'll move on to the next ride and they'll forget about it.

I agree with you about different strokes for different folks, but some of those 'strokes' are ridiculous sometimes.

 

[Bairstow]

...unless parents have some kind of right to expect a sort of "Intensity cap" with Disney attractions.

In other words, when the sign at alien encounter promises that the attraction will be intense, parents might assume that this means the attraction will be "Disney scary," like Mansion or Space Mountain, and not "Scary scary."

Of course, unless they neuter everything, which I guess they've done, there's always going to be that one attraction which is the "scariest" at that one park and defies expectations that everything at Disney is going to be safely unscary, at least compared to everything else the guest has seen so far.

Now that Alien Encounter is gone, what is king of the hill for the Magic Kingdom?

 

[Fantasmic]

...unless parents have some kind of right to expect a sort of "Intensity cap" with Disney attractions.

In other words, when the sign at alien encounter promises that the attraction will be intense, parents might assume that this means the attraction will be "Disney scary," like Mansion or Space Mountain, and not "Scary scary."

Of course, unless they neuter everything, which I guess they've done, there's always going to be that one attraction which is the "scariest" at that one park and defies expectations that everything at Disney is going to be safely unscary, at least compared to everything else the guest has seen so far.

Now that Alien Encounter is gone, what is king of the hill for the Magic Kingdom?

It's a Small World...

 

[ChristianG]

...unless parents have some kind of right to expect a sort of "Intensity cap" with Disney attractions.

In other words, when the sign at alien encounter promises that the attraction will be intense, parents might assume that this means the attraction will be "Disney scary," like Mansion or Space Mountain, and not "Scary scary."

Of course, unless they neuter everything, which I guess they've done, there's always going to be that one attraction which is the "scariest" at that one park and defies expectations that everything at Disney is going to be safely unscary, at least compared to everything else the guest has seen so far.

Now that Alien Encounter is gone, what is king of the hill for the Magic Kingdom?

SWSA.... :lookaroun

 

[WDWLOYAL1971]

Originally the ride was Mission To Mars then they changed it to A.E and now Stitch. Having seen all three of them, I personally think that my favorite would be the A.E, however I do enjoy SGE.:wave:

 

[fractal]

People don't read on vacation.

They also won't let their kids prevent them from doing something they want to do. I remember back in my movie theater days, a parent asked if the South Park movie was appropriate for children. The movie was rated R, so it was a pretty silly question. But everyone in the lobby assured her that it was most definitely NOT appropriate for children. She shrugged and bought her kids tickets anyway. The only reason she asked was she was hoping we would validate her bad decision.

15 minutes later, she stormed out and demanded a refund.

LOL! That ride was awesome.

It scared the living sheet out of me. The thing was, you never moved - it was a mental thrill ride using your imagination against you.

 

[David S.]

My favorites in this space are, in order, Stitch's Great Escape, Mission To Mars, Flight To the Moon, Alien Encounter

Now that Alien Encounter is gone, what is king of the hill for the Magic Kingdom?

For me, the scariest and darkest ride in MK is Haunted Mansion. Snow White has a few skeletons in the witch's dungeon, but you pass by those so quickly, and the dark elements in the ride are thankfully canceled out by the beautiful and/or happy scenes like Snow White wishing at the well, the Dwarfs singing "The Silly Song" in their cottage, the Prince awakening Snow White with Love's First Kiss, and the Happy Ending payoff of Snow White and the prince riding off into the sunset, while the dwarfs and animals say goodbye, including Dopey waving up on the bridge!

Whereas HM sustains a dark and gloomy mood throughout, featuring coffins, ghosts, disembodied heads, graveyards, crypts, and the early, dirge-like iteration of "Grim Grinning Ghosts" as a slow instrumental. Thankfully, the tone is lighter in spots that it could have been, with the "happy haunts" concept.

 

[worldfanatic]

For me, it's the fact that the original movie is "AWFUL".
Lilo & Stich sucked.
No character should be so popular when the original movie they appeared in is pure garbage.
Simple as that.

 

[Zummi Gummi]

LOL! That ride was awesome.

It scared the living sheet out of me. The thing was, you never moved - it was a mental thrill ride using your imagination against you.

This is precisely what made it an absolutely brilliant attraction. The fear was all mental.

The comments that the ride was "too intense" for the MK are beyond stupid. Too intense for who? For you? Ok, then don't ride. However, don't ignore the large signs out front stating it's intense, ride anyway, and then go whine to guest services because little Johnny had a hissy fit on the ride.

Just because YOU found the ride to be too intense, doesn't mean the rest of us should have to suffer.

Finally, when was the MK strictly for kids? What's wrong with having some adult attractions in there, especially one as immersive and well-themed (nothing has fit into Tomorrowland as well as AE did) as this one? Not everything has to be for the 8 and under set.

 

[sublimesting]

i like the character.

I think my (and a lot of other peoples') annoyance with him comes from his over-exposure. Disney was desperate to create a new "classic" character, and they thought stitch was it.

So, they force fed stitch down guests' throats, starting with the bone-headed decision to have stitch tp the castle and cover it with "stitch is king" graphiti. Who wants to take a photo in front of the most photographed icon in the world when it looks like this?:

then he started appearing in all of the promotional materials, right alongside the fab 5. Disney was trying to make him part of "the gang" when there wasn't that kind of love for him (yet). They put him literally everywhere- he was featured on disney dollars, replaced mickey on the wake up call (and literally screams at you now), was featured on the park tickets, etc.

Then he got his own attraction, which replaced a beloved attraction among most fans.

Again, none of this is the fault of the character stitch. I actually enjoy him, and aside from the chipmunks, he's probably my favorite character to meet and greet, because he's unpredictable, especially when he doesn't have a long line waiting to see him. It's just...there was too much stitch.

exactly!

 

[David S.]

The comments that the ride was "too intense" for the MK are beyond stupid. Too intense for who? For you? Ok, then don't ride. However, don't ignore the large signs out front stating it's intense, ride anyway, and then go whine to guest services because little Johnny had a hissy fit on the ride.

Just because YOU found the ride to be too intense, doesn't mean the rest of us should have to suffer.

Finally, when was the MK strictly for kids? What's wrong with having some adult attractions in there, especially one as immersice and well-themed (nothing has fit into Tomorrowland as well as AE did) as this one? Not everything has to be for the 8 and under set.

Not to be argumentative, and I agree with a lot of your posts, but I think people have the right to express their opinions. I do agree with you about the parents ignoring the warning signs, but if people do experience the attraction and offer their honest opinion that it is too intense, scary, and/or dark for their taste, IMO, they still have the right to express their opinion. Yes, I agree, after you experience it once and don't like it, skip it, but I think as customers people still have the right to tell Disney what attractions they don't like, why they don't like them, and why they are skipping them.

Just like people are expressing their opinions now about their dislike of Stitch's Great Escape, or other people saying the CBJ is too "corny" for their taste, or whatever.

I mean, by the logic in your post, I could just as easily say to a Stitch hater "Just because YOU found the attraction too "corny", or "lame", doesn't mean those who enjoy it should have to suffer"

I'm sorry an attraction you loved got removed; it's happened to me more times than I can count. Going back to the first time WDW broke my heart as a young boy, when my parents and I walked up to my favorite attraction, The Mickey Mouse Revue, for the first attraction of our trip... and it wasn't there anymore.

But again, I do not mean any of this in an unfriendly or argumentative manner; just offering a different viewpoint, while still agreeing in part

 

[blm07]

I just had a brainstorm! Now that the Duffy pimping is old news, Stitch can take over!! The new resort in Hawaii is a good enough reason! Just imagine, Stitch around the World Showcase. Color Stitch at Kidcot, see Stitch chili fries on the menus, put up giant decals with Minnie holding Stitch dolls, watch as Stitch literally kicks Duffy in the butt!

I mean, wait, Stitch is a perfect little angel! Lilo said so!

Why can't we focus the hate on Duffy instead? You know those claws are going to come out one day! ...while he is hugging you...

 

[menamechris]

Not to be argumentative, and I agree with a lot of your posts, but I think people have the right to express their opinions. I do agree with you about the parents ignoring the warning signs, but if people do experience the attraction and offer their honest opinion that it is too intense, scary, and/or dark for their taste, IMO, they still have the right to express their opinion. Yes, I agree, after you experience it once and don't like it, skip it, but I think as customers people still have the right to tell Disney what attractions they don't like, why they don't like them, and why they are skipping them.

Thats fine, except that it didn't get removed because people were complaining about how intense it was. That was the PR statement that Disney made for removing it when people complained. There were a lot of corporate politics involved in its removal...

 

[David S.]

Thats fine, except that it didn't get removed because people were complaining about how intense it was. That was the PR statement that Disney made for removing it when people complained. There were a lot of corporate politics involved in its removal...

That makes me feel better then, because even though I NEVER complained to Disney about AE, this means that those who disliked it can't be blamed for its removal

 

[Zummi Gummi]

Thats fine, except that it didn't get removed because people were complaining about how intense it was. That was the PR statement that Disney made for removing it when people complained. There were a lot of corporate politics involved in its removal...

Did you hear that from Lee? Because if it doesn't come from a trusted source like him, I'm not sure we can believe it... :animwink: