-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Y'all should ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
whylightbulb
Well-Known Member
Wow let me make sure I have the acronym correct - by DLP you saying Disneyland Paris right? You are saying that the DLP version of Pirates is inferior to WDW's version? This absolutely boggles my mind. I'll admit that DLP's maintenance is pretty bad but as far as the actual content and quality of the ride this makes absolutely no sense. DLP has absolutely everything WDW has plus a whole lot more!
Starting from the amazing fort exterior, to the caves and scenes within the queue, to the beautiful indoor for outdoor loading area and restaurant, to the A-100 swordfighting pirates, to the scenes before the ship battle, to all the scenes after the burning town, DLP Pirates is about double what WDW is. By what measure is WDW better?
whylightbulb
Well-Known Member
Yes Shanghai is getting Pirates 3.0. This is a very different take on the ride with a new ride system and a focus more on the movies and the supernatural elements. That and the indoor stunt show will be one of the true highlights in any Disney park.
GLaDOS
Well-Known Member
DLP's Pirates outmatches all the others in the world. In fact, I'd venture to say it's easily one of the best attractions on the planet.
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
Yep I am saying that. I just found WDW's to be better; to be honest I found pretty much everything at DLP inferior to WDW, the experience as a whole was just something of a disappointment. The queue and facade was nice but so is WDW's and the swordfighting pirates were broken when I rode it which was a bit of a disappointment. I like the flow of POTC at WDW so the extra scenes didn't really do much for me. I really didn't like my week at DLP and found the parks there to be disappointing so that might be something to do with it but at the end of the day it's all just a matter of personal taste, if we all had the same opinion on everything the forum would be a pretty boring place.
whylightbulb
Well-Known Member
Well like I said, I agree with you in terms of overall maintenance, and it is cerainly a shame that the swordfight wasn't working for you, but I'm having trouble wrapping my head around the statement that WDW is superior when DLP has everything it has anyway. Even if you didn't like any of the extra scenes you still have all the other scenes that WDW has which makes for a much longer ride.
My same confusion goes for Big Thunder. You are also saying WDW's version is superior to DLP for that one and that's just plain crazy talk LOL.
I also agree that the forums would be boring if everyone had the same opinions that is why I'm engaging in this discussion right now.
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
I can't help but find DLP Pirates ride superior to WDW's.
Other than that, I get what you are saying. WDW is more magical, the MK beats DLP. I even think Caribbean Plaza is more beautiful than the DLP Pirates area. I think it has to do with basic design sensibilities. The MK is pristine, there is no rundown fortress, no shipwrecks, but a pristine fortress, with fountains (*cough*), alleys with flowers, no deliberate paint missing. DLP is designed as a rundown fortress, with stones crumbling, paint peeling, it is a walk amidst a ruin, a dirty pirate's hideout instead of a gorgeous Caribbean town.
Walt - I know his name is overused - Walt was a genius in at least one respect: in an understanding of guest/spectator experience. He understood the effect a beautiful, pristine environment has on people.
They may be older, they may be less elaborate, but the pristine New Orleans and Caribbean areas are more magical, work on a more emotional level than the elaborate, themed-to-the-hilt, most-piraty-of-all, Pirate area of DLP.
(On a related side-note, I think this same basic design problem plagues many areas of DAK, and even the Hollywood Tower Hotel, and, although beautifully crafted, parts of the FLE.)
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
Awesome analogy.
Who cares about stinking brand new state-of-the-art Japanese miracle cars. Give me a fifties gas guzzler any time of day. They are not 57 years old, they are a classic!
Wish WDW would've understood the raw emotional power that Toad, Horizons, Imagination have over their audiences. We didn't need them replaced by flashy new fads. We wanted classics, like Disneyland.
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
Overall I just found WDW superior; we had some issues with CM rudeness at DLP, we had some problems with dining there, our hotel wasn't great. When you add all of the things that went wrong together, it made for a pretty unpleasent week at DLP. If we were to go again and had an amazing time then maybe my opinion would change but it just wasn't a good experience. Personally I preferred WDW's POTC; I know a lot of people consider DLP's to be superior but I just didn't.
Big Thunder was down when we were there so I'm not saying that at all because I didn't get to ride it; it looked good though. I did like DLP's Space Mountain and Indiana Jones and Crush's Coaster at the Studios Park was fun.
ChrisM
Well-Known Member
That's a real shame. BTM in DLP is exceptional. (Or was...I haven't been there in 14 years.)
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
Maybe I need to go back to Paris and do POTC again. I was disappointed about the sword-fighting pirates, a friend was there about week after us and said they were working so we must have caught them on a bad day. Maybe I'm blinded by WDW nostalgia but I obviously missed something in Paris (besides the sword fighters).
FrankLapidus
Well-Known Member
Is is significantly different to WDW's version? I'd heard a lot of good things about Paris' Big Thunder so I was really disappointed to miss out on it.
DznyRktekt
Well-Known Member
I believe the majority of the ride is on the island. The train loads and unloads in Frontierland and travels to the island via chunnel. Really a fun ride, especially hearing the "wildest ride in the wilderness" bit in French.
ChrisM
Well-Known Member
Yep. The ride under the lake is wild and then *bam* you are on the island.
If you want to know all about the different Big Thunder Mountains I can strongly recommend this wonderful video: http://www.martinsvids.net/?p=226 I think @marni1971 would agree.
It is. ... It may well be better than the original. But it is a near perfect attraction ... neglect, though, is another matter. It wasn't looking great when I was there in May. I've heard things have improved, however.
That's a shame. It's also very different than my experiences (and I have had dozens of visits ti DLP over the last decade).
I do hear a lot of that from UKers (most who would rather visit FL to begin with due to weather and currency issues and no language barrier, although I've never found this to be a problem and I barely know French) and other Europeans. I am convinced many (not saying you personally) just don't like the French culture or people.
As bad as some issues were on my last DLP visit (and some were VERY bad -- maintenance wise), I'd always take a day at DLP over the MK. Always.
RandySavage
Well-Known Member
I appreciate your postings - especially your great "mk is not cartoon kingdom" one, but I disagree here. I think 'theatrical dilapidated' (did I coin a term?) is a very effective design technique, used brilliantly by WDI in many places, including the ones you mentioned (PotC Paris, Animal Kingdom) and huge portion of DisneySea. Personally, I think overly-pristine or lack-of-aging can be a design weakness in many places.
Aged Italian-Themed Hotel
Pristine Italian-Themed Hotel
But getting back to a reason I think some criticism is being leveled at Paris' PotC: my experience in Paris is that the weather, light and upkeep (typically much worse than in the U.S.) can have a profound effect on one's experience. On a purely-design level (in great weather, light, upkeep & staffing), DLP is unsurpassed as MK-styles go, but I can see how grey, cold weather, unintentional (non-theatrical) aging and dilapidation, maintenance neglect, etc., can make it feel less appealing to some.
I would disagree that DLP's Big Thunder is clearly superior to WDW's -- it's certainly not a foregone conclusion, in the way that DLP's PotC is clearly superior to WDW's.
DLP's Big Thunder is certainly the most sophisticated version from a design standpoint. I love the darker color palette of the trains, which makes them feel more like the actual mine trains they purport to be, rather than the kiddy-toy trains of the other versions. And the design aesthetic of both the trains and the structures on the island (e.g., the Big Thunder Mining Company buildings that are the backdrop for the water splash/photo portion of the ride) harmonize perfectly with the other parts of Thunder Mesa, the fictional town that provides the backstory for Frontierland. DLP's Big Thunder looks like an honest-to-goodness grown-up version of the old standby, which is refreshing and inspiring.
Moreover, the decision to place Big Thunder on an island was a bold one that more than pays off in terms of actual ride experience: the parts of the ride that take place in the pitch-black tunnels under the river are genuinely thrilling, giving riders the sensation that they are truly barreling out of control into the unknown.
But some of the same choices that I admire as a function of design don't work quite as well in practice -- sometimes things that work on an intellectual level are correspondingly less effective on an emotional one. The somber hues and demeanor of Phantom Manor are completely appropriate given the nature of the attraction, but the "grown-up" color scheme of Big Thunder tends to work against itself, given the gloomy and chilly weather DLP encounters for a good portion of the year. In this regard, something that is closer to the traditional WDW, DL, or TDL versions of the ride would lend one of the primary "weenies" of DLP's Frontierland even more "pop" to focus attention in its part of the park, rather than fading into an indeterminate grey background.
And, while we're talking of "pop" -- apart from the tunnels under the river, the coaster itself just doesn't have any. I don't know what minute changes Vekoma made while engineering the track and layout in DLP, but much of the "zing" that is the hallmark of a good mine train (and certainly of the other three Big Thunders) is simply missing from DLP's Big Thunder. I noticed this during my first visit to DLP in the '90s, and was hoping that it was just a trick of memory. But a more recent trip -- during which I rode Big Thunder many, many times over several days, with multiple rides in the front, middle, and back of the train -- left me with exactly the same feeling: despite having a similar layout, with similar turns and drops, the coaster itself just feels neutered when compared to the other versions. It's like someone let all the air out of the ride -- leaving a soulless middle with no zip... bookended by an exciting beginning and ending.
DLP's Big Thunder is a beautiful, inspired product -- much like the rest of the park in which it appears. But although there are many wonderful things about the attraction that elevate it above the other Big Thunders around the world, the fact that the coaster aspect of the attraction is largely cold and flat has to count against it somewhat, given that it is -- at bottom -- a roller coaster.
Couple these weaknesses with the fact that WDW's Big Thunder has the unique Tumbleweed scene and entertaining trick track, and a reasonable argument can be made that WDW's Big Thunder is, as an entire package considered in its specific context, at least as good as DLP's (at least when all the effects are working at the former location!).