Why the hate for Little Mermaid ride?

[NickWilde]

Two words....

Disco Ariel .

If you look closely? You'll still see the (defunct) Disco Ball on the ceiling .

Is this anything like the Disco Yeti on Everest?

 

[Figments Friend]

A lot of the 'hate' is for some of us, the version(s) that were built ended up being a complete disappointment when compared to the original concept presented by Tony Baxter some years ago.
Now THAT version was awesome....and was going to be something far more interesting and have a truly magical element to it, not to mention have a cohesive retelling of the story.

The ride system was to be a bit more fun ( similar to 'Peter Pan's Flight' ), effects would create the illusion of you actually going 'under the sea', more sets and AAs present, and special lighting ( not just black light effects ).
Ursula's ocean battle was to have been a climatic and cool element, but it was cut due to budget as well as some concerns about children finding it too scary.
Thus we have the 'neutered' version today where scenes just jump ahead to....nothing really all that exciting.

I highly recommend taking a look at 'what could have been' with this ride concept video that was released by Disney some years ago.
There is another version of this video with Tony narrating the experience, pointing out some of the features, but i can't seem to find it online at the moment.

This is the proposed ride concept, seen from the perspective of the Guests riding.
Take a look....and then decide for yourself which version YOU would have rather experienced.



-

 

[Damon7777]

Ding, ding, ding! We have a

No, we would have had a huge loser.
So you are one of those who champions quantity over quality.
Not me.....I want good things, not many things.

 

[disney4life2008]

The Little Mermaid is one of my "rest rides", where instead of just chilling on a bench somewhere, I can be entertained for typically a fairly short wait (or an easy FP grab, if I have one available). Sort of like Nemo in EPCOT (Little Mermaid being the complete superior of the two). I love the music, and by no means is it a bad ride, but it's kind of "eh". We are spoiled with so many great dark rides that have been there for decades (PotC, HM, even Jungle Cruise, while not a dark ride, is unique). Little Mermaid just falls so severely short of so many other rides for the price and space they used. It's not horrible (unlike the atrocious Little Mermaid show, but that's for another thread...), and we usually hit it a few times every trip, but it's nothing you'll remember for the rest of your lives, either.

Aww
You need a rest from the entrance to the ride itself lol

 

[disney4life2008]

A lot of the 'hate' is for some of us, the version(s) that were built ended up being a complete disappointment when compared to the original concept presented by Tony Baxter some years ago.
Now THAT version was awesome....and was going to be something far more interesting and have a truly magical element to it, not to mention have a cohesive retelling of the story.

The ride system was to be a bit more fun ( similar to 'Peter Pan's Flight' ), effects would create the illusion of you actually going 'under the sea', more sets and AAs present, and special lighting ( not just black light effects ).
Ursula's ocean battle was to have been a climatic and cool element, but it was cut due to budget as well as some concerns about children finding it too scary.
Thus we have the 'neutered' version today where scenes just jump ahead to....nothing really all that exciting.

I highly recommend taking a look at 'what could have been' with this ride concept video that was released by Disney some years ago.
There is another version of this video with Tony narrating the experience, pointing out some of the features, but i can't seem to find it online at the moment.

This is the proposed ride concept, seen from the perspective of the Guests riding.
Take a look....and then decide for yourself which version YOU would have rather experienced.



-

Nice but the waits would be horrible

 

[TwilightZone]

Well there's a few reasons why I like it less than other dark rides (though I don't hate it)
. It's just the musical segments from the movie. No shark chase, no ursula fight, no triton being angry at ariel, nothing.
. The animatronics. even though they are new and high tech, they look cheap. Even my sister, who is the biggest little mermaid fan I know and is a casual theme park goer notices this, she was even the one to bring it up first, not me! That's a bad sign.
. Unlike the other book report rides it's forgettable. I can remember what happened on monster's inc, on pinocchio, and on peter pan, not so much for ariel.

 

[LUVofDIS]

We ride it every time we visit the park. I think the idea was nice but there was no follow through.

The queue is a great idea, but the scenes are too small and can be hard to see. I took pictures the last time and understood them better after viewing the images when I got home. Scuttle is entertaining and interacts with you a little. I love walking through the queue, I seem to notice something different each time.

I like boarding the clam and entering the ship, and the feeling while the clam is turning and dropping into the sea reminds me when I enter the water while sitting on the railing of a boat and falling backwards when SCUBA diving. I love that feeling, it feels like yo are realing entering the water.

After that, I enjoy the music and even like when the rides stops for a few moments to enjoy the music longer. The scenes are colorful and vibrant and cool to see, but the action leaves little to desire. The ride ends abruptly and after the wedding scene you are dumped off into a very bland exit.

Disney seemed to cut a lot of corners on this ride and it could have been so much better. I enjoy it for what it is, but its nowhere near being a great ride experience, but than again not all rides can be. I actually like the Tea Cups better, but there is a personal reason for that.

 

[DuckTalesWooHoo1987]

I feel like it's pretty much right on par with Frozen honestly. I just feel like Frozen is sort of a stop gap ride that Disney threw together to try and give people more Frozen when the whole Frozen fad at Disneyworld was at its absolute apex. I mean Frozen has a slightly more "thrilling" aspect to it but it's basically sorta the same to me. Just my two cents. I'm fine with the Little Mermaid ride and I'm fine with Frozen. I just don't think either of them are all that mind blowing and really they're not meant to be. My little girl is probably the true "target audience" for both rides and she loves both rides. I guess from Disney's perspective that makes them both worthwhile projects.

 

[ELG13]

It's one of our favorite rides for the little kids and it's my favorite Disney movie. The queue is amazing and I think the ride is beautiful..but....I always said it should have been a water ride. Yes I know technically you are under the water, but I feel like it needs SOMETHING below you...just a black mat seems lazy and like one of the missed opportunities. Or it should have been darker so you don't notice it. That part to me feels like a cheap fair ride. They definitely have some missed opportunities along the ride but we still love it!

 

[ELG13]

A lot of the 'hate' is for some of us, the version(s) that were built ended up being a complete disappointment when compared to the original concept presented by Tony Baxter some years ago.
Now THAT version was awesome....and was going to be something far more interesting and have a truly magical element to it, not to mention have a cohesive retelling of the story.

The ride system was to be a bit more fun ( similar to 'Peter Pan's Flight' ), effects would create the illusion of you actually going 'under the sea', more sets and AAs present, and special lighting ( not just black light effects ).
Ursula's ocean battle was to have been a climatic and cool element, but it was cut due to budget as well as some concerns about children finding it too scary.
Thus we have the 'neutered' version today where scenes just jump ahead to....nothing really all that exciting.

I highly recommend taking a look at 'what could have been' with this ride concept video that was released by Disney some years ago.
There is another version of this video with Tony narrating the experience, pointing out some of the features, but i can't seem to find it online at the moment.

This is the proposed ride concept, seen from the perspective of the Guests riding.
Take a look....and then decide for yourself which version YOU would have rather experienced.



-

This was amazing! I do see the scary points having 2 small kids...but those few parts could have easily been made less scary. My whole issue with the ride is the actual ride...just going along the track...and that version totally solves that problem. More like Peter pan...yes! Would have made it amazing.

 

[Gelatoni]

Who hates the ride? I like it!

 

[Imagineer Finlay]

I think it's like Na'vi River Journey, is you accept it for what it is, a secondary extra attraction (in relation to SDMT) you enjoy more.

 

[justintheharris]

My bigger issue with the ride is not that it’s necessarily bad but it’s the same issue I have with the Seven Dwarfs Mine Train. New Fantasyland was Disney’s response to Harry Potter over at Universal and Disney hyped the rides WAAAAY too much. Notice how much queue you walk through to get on the little mermaid? And even if there’s not a single soul in line, you’re still walking through 10 miles of queue? That’s because Disney hyped it and pretended it would be as well liked, popular and family oriented as the Wizarding World. If the attraction was built in the mid 2000s or even if I could disconnect it from Harry Potter in my mind, I’d say it’s a fairly good dark ride. When I’m stuck seeing it in the context of Disney’s hype and the Wizarding World, I begin to not really like it. Seven Dwarfs Mine Train is in this same boat except worse because it actually still has ridiculous lines and very often I hear people say “is that it?” As we pull back into the station.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Overall, we just find it a little boring.

 

[Kram Sacul]

They couldn’t even get Ariel’s face right. No red lipstick. The queue is nicer than most of the ride.

 

[KINGLOUIS1993]

Good queue but a poorly executed ride, misses out some key parts of the story. If you are under 11/12 it is probably good but after that I think it isn't WDW's best.

I am just going to throw this out there in general, Fantasyland bores me and is my least favorite part of MK. (Waiting for abuse)

 

[Disney4family]

I hate the amount of Guests who take flash photography and ruin the attraction for the rest of us.

 

[geekza]

Thanks for everyone's response to this. There have been some very valid points made that help me understand some folks' issues with the ride.

Overall, I still think it's a perfectly pleasant ride, though I totally agree that there is room for improvement. Some things wouldn't even take much outlay of capital to make at least a noticeable improvement over the current attraction.

• Static fish - I don't have a huge problem with some static fish. Lots of dark rides have static elements, especially when a room has to be filled with lots of things. I don't know of a single dark ride in Disney's history that didn't include some static show elements. In the case of the Under the Sea scene, there are so many fish that it wouldn't be practical to have every fish move. However, as was mentioned elsewhere in this thread, lighting can work wonders. Gobos have been around for almost a hundred years and are still widely used in the Theatre and in film. A few lighting instruments, some with rotating gobos, can simulate the look of underwater sunlight really well and at minimal expense. They already use them extensively in the ride. I just think some adjustments to draw the eye away from the static fish on the walls would help. Lighting is a wonderful tool for directing an audience's attention to what you want them to see and covering up what you don't want them to see. Outside of a fairly-expensive installation of a moving fish mechanism, it's about all that can be done.
• The ride needs a climax. This wouldn't be cheap, but it would, I think, make a huge difference. The current space utilized for the scene with Ursula "raising the roof" in the background while the Ariel silhouette swallows Tinkerbell and Eric finally gives into his parents' wishes and awkwardly kisses Ariel whilst secretly picturing a burly sailor in order to get through it (That's what it looks like to me, though It's probably just my imagination attempting to make the current show scene seem more interesting than it is.) has enough space that it could be replaced with a respectable scene of the climax of the film. It could still be followed by a smaller screen of the kiss and the last show scene kept as it is.

As for the AA figures looking unrealistic... I don't know what to say to this. Aside from the last Eric and Ariel figures, which are off-model and are stiff, the AA figures look like three-dimensional realizations of the original drawings. I'd much rather have the type of characters that are coming out of Imagineering these days than the past when they tried to go semi-realistic with some of the representations. The Mickey Mouse Revue was an example of scary human AA figures.

Eek!

 

[brb1006]

Thanks for everyone's response to this. There have been some very valid points made that help me understand some folks' issues with the ride.

Overall, I still think it's a perfectly pleasant ride, though I totally agree that there is room for improvement. Some things wouldn't even take much outlay of capital to make at least a noticeable improvement over the current attraction.

• Static fish - I don't have a huge problem with some static fish. Lots of dark rides have static elements, especially when a room has to be filled with lots of things. I don't know of a single dark ride in Disney's history that didn't include some static show elements. In the case of the Under the Sea scene, there are so many fish that it wouldn't be practical to have every fish move. However, as was mentioned elsewhere in this thread, lighting can work wonders. Gobos have been around for almost a hundred years and are still widely used in the Theatre and in film. A few lighting instruments, some with rotating gobos, can simulate the look of underwater sunlight really well and at minimal expense. They already use them extensively in the ride. I just think some adjustments to draw the eye away from the static fish on the walls would help. Lighting is a wonderful tool for directing an audience's attention to what you want them to see and covering up what you don't want them to see. Outside of a fairly-expensive installation of a moving fish mechanism, it's about all that can be done.
• The ride needs a climax. This wouldn't be cheap, but it would, I think, make a huge difference. The current space utilized for the scene with Ursula "raising the roof" in the background while the Ariel silhouette swallows Tinkerbell and Eric finally gives into his parents' wishes and awkwardly kisses Ariel whilst secretly picturing a burly sailor in order to get through it (That's what it looks like to me, though It's probably just my imagination attempting to make the current show scene seem more interesting than it is.) has enough space that it could be replaced with a respectable scene of the climax of the film. It could still be followed by a smaller screen of the kiss and the last show scene kept as it is.

As for the AA figures looking unrealistic... I don't know what to say to this. Aside from the last Eric and Ariel figures, which are off-model and are stiff, the AA figures look like three-dimensional realizations of the original drawings. I'd much rather have the type of characters that are coming out of Imagineering these days than the past when they tried to go semi-realistic with some of the representations. The Mickey Mouse Revue was an example of scary human AA figures.

View attachment 287861

Eek!

The Mickey Mouse Revue human AA's looked good for 1971.

 

[SuperStretccch]

I think it's mainly because the effects and AA aren't up to the usual Disney standard, especially for a ride made in 2012. Not only that, but it was the only brand-new ride we got in New Fantasyland besides SDMT.

Personally, I find the ride okay, and I do it everytime I go because there's almost never a wait, unless it's a busy day. I would probably be more disappointed with it if I had to wait 40 minutes, as opposed to 5-10.