Are the Disney Rides a Classic or just Old?

[peachygreen]

I would hate to see all the rides go to 3D/4D. I know am not alone in my inability to see 3D effects. Its not just cost that fills up the 2D showings of 3D movies. I can handle 3D in very small doses (like Muppets or Philharmagic but I don't see 3D, I see 2 separate images. I have to close one eye to see and even then it is slightly blurry. Plus a lot of small kids can't/won't wear 3D glasses and quite frankly most of the rides in Fantasyland are geared to young kids. My 2 year old doesn't get the concept of keeping 3D glasses on to see the effects but she loves the real 3D of actual animtronics.

I would love to see new things added. I'm all for updating things. There are things they could do to some of the clasic rides to make them feel fresh without taking the clasic feel away from them.

I'm excited that they are going to be redoing the queue for Peter Pan. It needs it. I'm getting spoiled by the elaborate queue areas and the winding back and forth of PP doesn't add up. IT will be nice to see that expanded. but the ride fits. The queue remodels are adding to the theming around the park.

I would love to see some of the shows change/update and I go every 3-4 years. I can't imagine how tired some of the shows must feel if you go more frequenty. Muppets needs a make over. They could do so much there. Indiana Jones needs an update (again so much potential for change and moderization)

I am nervous about trying the new Star Tours with 3D. I am not sure I will try it. I probably will, but I will save it as my last ride before a midday break incase the 3D and ride motions really make me sick. I hate 3D overlays that much. THe last time I went to Universal, by the end of the evening it felt like I was skipping every other ride when I realized it was 3D because I was so sick from it.

I would much rather add real rides than motion simualtors too. It works hand and hand with the 3D issues even if it isn't 3D. My eyes don't process images on a screen the same way they process images in real life and if the movie and the motion are off in the slightest it can really mess up my head.

I also love that the bulk of the rides have height limits that my not so tall almost 7 year old can ride. That is not the case at a lot of amusement parks. My almost 7 year old can only not ride 2 rides. My almost 2-1/2 year old can't ride any of the height limit rides, but there is still more than enough to keep her entertained. I just looked it up at IOA. I counted 15 rides. Of those 15 rides my 7 year old is too short for 4 of them and my 2-1/2 year old is too short for all but 4 of them (maybe 5 - she may just be 34" tall now she is not 36" tall). I want to go to see Harry Potter but my oldest can't experience 2/3 of the rides and my youngest couldn't do any of the rides. It will be a few years before we get to experience it. I'm afraid to know how long it will be before both girls are at least 48". The 7 year old is just over 44". So I hope Disney continues do design rides for all ages and thrillers for those in the 40 to 44 inch range like that do now.

 

[WedgieSock]

So you truely believe your children and their children will want to see IASW and Peter Pan as it sits today?

Yes. My dd11 is a tech freak - has every tech gadget there is, loves to explore new software and makes a lot of short movies using special effects. Its her thing.

And yet at Disney her fav rides were POTC, HM, PP and The Land.

 

[nansmama]

I am nervous about trying the new Star Tours with 3D. I am not sure I will try it. I probably will, but I will save it as my last ride before a midday break incase the 3D and ride motions really make me sick. I hate 3D overlays that much. THe last time I went to Universal, by the end of the evening it felt like I was skipping every other ride when I realized it was 3D because I was so sick from it.

You might be okay with it. My 16yo ds hates most 3D stuff, but he likes the new Star Tours. Last time we went to DHS, that was pretty much the only ride he wanted to do.

 

[ttintagel]

My 2 year old doesn't get the concept of keeping 3D glasses on to see the effects but she loves the real 3D of actual animtronics.

This X 100. In my opinion, 3-D movies are a cheapout, quick, gimmicky way to do what Disney rides have been doing for 50-odd years.

 

[fflmaster]

I understand it seems I am in the minority.

Do I feel that the "classic" disney RIDES should be compared to the mona lisa, david or some of the great literary works of our time. NO!
Would you compare the record player or cd player to the works of michelanglo? I wouldn't.

Do I feel that they are classic. Not really. Technology to me is never classic. It is a mechanism used by people and should be improved over time. I don't think I would say we should improve the works of Hans Christian Anderson, Dante or Homer. However, I do think we should improve the work done by the Wright Brothers and create better flying machines.

Do I want all thrill rides with 3D? ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Do I believe in the end Disney will eventually discontinue rides like Peter Pan for updated new technology rides? Yes.

Do I believe our children and grand children will want more? Yes.

What I want more is updating the rest of the park similiar to what they did in Fantasyland. The pictures are beautiful from what I have seen.

Of course this is all mute. Disney has much more work to do in Epcot and HS in my opinion. I will talk about that later in another thread.

 

[King Triton]

I'm still not over Epcot removing Horizons and World of Motion. That was the charm of Epcot.

 

[Prock]

Peter Pan is the best example of an old/ classic ride. The ride is a classic and will always be part of MK, but that thing is OLD and you can't possibly deny it, just look at how worn down it looks. I'm not sure if everyone is aware of this but that ride has never undergone a major refurbishment. It hasnt even been connected to the power system at MK, it's run by its own generator, which is getting older by the day.
The problem with disney is that they let things become classics, Walt never wanted that to happen in the parks, he wanted them to always be changing and evolving. I was really encouraged by the replacing of magic memories and you, it's really the first time WDW changed something before it became a classic, which they didn't do with wishes and will receive a ton of flak over when it is eventually replaced, which lets be honest it needs to be..

 

[wishing4PA]

I think a big part of Disney parks' popularity is that a toddler and their grandma can enjoy the same ride at the same time. If you try to turn EVERYTHING in the parks "immersive" or 4D or whatever, there will be nothing left for families to do together. Not everything NEEDS to be super ultra current modern hightech. People do still go to state fairs in large numbers and enjoy plain old ferris wheels. I agree that Disney should always be pushing the barrier in regards to theming their attractions, and that SOME of the NEW rides should use new technology. Incredible theming is their niche the way megacoasters are for Six Flags. But I think it would be a mistake to try to retro-modernize every current attraction. I don't go on Small World to see crap flying at my face, I go on it because it's cute and kitschy.

Good idea: Updating the animatronics in Pirates to move more smoothly. Adding a little more detail to some of the sets.
Bad idea: Trying to make Pirates "edgy" by turning it into a 3D/4D "experience."

I haven't read every single post on this thread, but this one sums up some of my feeling pretty well.
I go to Disney World for fun. Fun I know I can enjoy with my DD & DH (when I can drag him in there) - or all the DNs. I don't go there to experience "thrills" and/or get scared out of my wits. So far, I've been comfortable trying almost any new Disney ride, knowing it will be essentially safe and not too crazy. Even ToT, that I've never been on (yet) doesn't scare me that much, because it is at Disney. I know I *could* go on it and be safe, if they let any kid past (what's it's height requirement again?) some number of inches get on it, then I could manage too. It's all a very safe, relaxing feeling.
I don't get that feeling at normal "amusement parks" or fairs.
Now, updating some attractions and animatronics, that's fine.
But sticking in big un-themed roller coasters to be viewed from all over the parks, and me having to double check does this or that one have a lot of loops or do anything too wild and/or terrifying, or having a bunch of scary characters pop out at me from 3D screens just to be edgy would not draw me back to the parks.

 

[Lehuaann]

I'm still not over Epcot removing Horizons and World of Motion. That was the charm of Epcot.

I wish I had the opportunity to experience some of these older attractions.




As for others suggesting more of the original rides become 3D, 4D - omg, NO, PLEASE!!

Not all of us old fogies can handle these types. And my poor husband already suffers from vertigo as it is. We enjoy a little slow pace every now and then.

What I DO wish is that they would change up rides - like put POTC back to the original way (yes, even with the men chasing the ladies ). Then switch it up with adding it back to current with Jack, etc.

 

[JimmyV]

I think a big part of Disney parks' popularity is that a toddler and their grandma can enjoy the same ride at the same time.

I agree, but one has to bear in mind that 100 years from now, the grandma is going to be someone who was born in 2050, and the toddler is going to have been born in 2108. Today's grandma harkens back to her "good old days" when cotton candy was a new fad and the Tilt-O-Whirl had not yet been invented. Horses were still jumping from platforms into pools in Atlantic City and the Ringling Circus was the Biggest Show On Earth. So there is a natural tendency to long for a simpler time. But when "grandma" grew up between 2050 and 2100, those won't be her memories or her nostalgia. To her, Soarin' will be the simpler time and Kali Rapids will be the good old days. (Assuming that those rides even survive over the next 60 years.) That is not to say that everything has to morph into a virtual reality attraction. But it probably means that the grandma in 2112 (unintended, but welcomed RUSH reference), will likely not have the same affinity for IASW as today's grandma. Much like today's grandma might not have any interest in an electric car. But I promise you that by 2112, grandma will be driving one, because there won't be a single gas-powered car on the road.

If you try to turn EVERYTHING in the parks "immersive" or 4D or whatever, there will be nothing left for families to do together. Not everything NEEDS to be super ultra current modern hightech.

I agree wholeheartedly that not every ride should be immersive or 4D. But not because people in 2112 won't like that. But because it would be boring. If virtual reality attractions were "all that", then Pirates would have no line, and the line to get into Disney Quest would stretch all the way back to the DHS entrance road. When you look at the AA upgrade at the new LIttle Mermaid ride and the characters in Enchanted Tales With Belle, you quickly realize how lame Peter Pan and IASW have become. Disney should not be striving for a "Virtual Small World". That already exists at DQ. But upgrading to state of the art AA would certainly go a long way to hold the attention of a child who will be born 25 years from now.

People do still go to state fairs in large numbers and enjoy plain old ferris wheels.

True. But they don't spend $4,000 for a weeklong vacation there to ride ferris wheels and Tilt-O-Whirls. Much more is needed if you are going to drain thousands of dollars from the pockets of people 100 years from now who grew up in high-tech world.

I agree that Disney should always be pushing the barrier in regards to theming their attractions, and that SOME of the NEW rides should use new technology. Incredible theming is their niche the way megacoasters are for Six Flags. But I think it would be a mistake to try to retro-modernize every current attraction. I don't go on Small World to see crap flying at my face, I go on it because it's cute and kitschy.

I agree with 100% of this. But "cute and kitschy" does not have to be synonomous with "faded and creaky". CoP is cute and kitchy. But even in its old state, it is lightyears ahead of IASW.

Good idea: Updating the animatronics in Pirates to move more smoothly. Adding a little more detail to some of the sets.
Bad idea: Trying to make Pirates "edgy" by turning it into a 3D/4D "experience."

Again, I agree 100%.

I think that one of the problems that most people have when they look into the future is that they tend to look only into their own future. What should happen over the next 10 years that I can experience? But a corporation like Disney has to look much further down the road. It can take a generation just to get something from the brainstorming stage to the operational stage. So if something takes 20 years to accomplish, you have to think waaaay out there to ensure that it isn't outdated on arrival. Again, I use the example of the transition over to electric cars. Ask most car buyers today if they are going to buy one and the vast majority will say no. But ask those same people if they believe that 100 years from now, gas powered cars will still be on the road, and they will tell you no. So at some point, a radical changeover has to occur, even if that radical changeover occurs slowly. So too with WDW. 100 years from now, Peter Pan won't be running at WDW. It just won't. At least, not in its current form. So at some point, it will either have to undergo massive transformation or elimination. No one here wants to see that happen in their lifetime, but it must if it is still going to be a viable attraction 50 years from now. That is what Walt intended when he spoke of the ever-changing nature of WDW.

 

[PeterPanic]

I wish I had the opportunity to experience some of these older attractions.

What I DO wish is that they would change up rides - like put POTC back to the original way (yes, even with the men chasing the ladies ). Then switch it up with adding it back to current with Jack, etc.

I am going to be honest here, and probably incur the wrath of many, but even though I loved Horizons, and World of Motion and even, Journey into imagination, when you think about the fact that when you include Space Ship Earth to the scenario there were four attractions that in one way or the other were copies of each other. It was the case of having to many Omni rides and not much else.

Toward the end, Horizons got to looking and feeling old and tired. Pretty much the only thing that most people remember about it vividly is the orange smell in the section with the orange groves. World of Motion was a fun ride with comical things, but again was just a ride through. Journey was fascinating in the first part but after that was just another ride through.

I don't really miss Horizons and think the Mission Space is more fun and interactive (fake interaction, but still). I do miss World of Motion but I also like Test Track too. Imagination was butchered and even though I wasn't that enthralled by the parts after Dreamfinder, it was arms and legs ahead of anything that they have put in it's place. Space Ship Earth has had it's ups and downs in the form of popularity over the years. It seems to have had a recent resurgence of popularity, but this to shall pass. The thing with SSE is that the building was designed to hold the ride and it will be a tough call to find something that will fit in there without disturbing the integrity of the building itself. It's still fun and I always ride it at least once a visit but usually multiple times.

There are some very good videos with full ride depictions. Some are very good others are old technology and pretty dark and grainy but you can get the idea of what is happening. Check out http://www.martinsvids.net/ for the best ones I've seen.

In relation to the second part..switching animatronic shows is pretty intense so I wouldn't count on that happening ever. I think Disney has done a pretty good job with adjusting for the sometimes foolish, all the time silly, pressure of political correctness. And have managed to "upgrade" the shows just enough to have softened the imagined "offensiveness" of it and still maintained the show without hurting it. The recent changes to CBJ without bowing to the pressure of incredibly distorted opinions on what was offensive and what wasn't is a tribute to the willingness of Disney, at times, to keep the show in the lighthearted manner that it was intended.

 

[hookedonears]

Peter Pan is the best example of an old/ classic ride. The ride is a classic and will always be part of MK, but that thing is OLD and you can't possibly deny it, just look at how worn down it looks. I'm not sure if everyone is aware of this but that ride has never undergone a major refurbishment. It hasnt even been connected to the power system at MK, it's run by its own generator, which is getting older by the day.
The problem with disney is that they let things become classics, Walt never wanted that to happen in the parks, he wanted them to always be changing and evolving. I was really encouraged by the replacing of magic memories and you, it's really the first time WDW changed something before it became a classic, which they didn't do with wishes and will receive a ton of flak over when it is eventually replaced, which lets be honest it needs to be..

All attractions need to be cleaned up every once in a while. I expect Peter Pan will go down for a lengthy refurb. at some point as well. They should have timed it with the opening of the Fantasyland expansion, but nobody asked me. Peter Pan is a great classic attraction. There's a difference between a great classic attraction and one that's just a classic. Snow White was a classic and charming attraction, but it wasn't great. Mr. Toad's was a classic and charming attraction, but it wasn't great. You'd have riots down Main St. if they changed Peter Pan. It's simple technology that will last forever. What they should really do is take it down for a period of time prior to opening of the 7 dwarfs ride and then open them up together. That would really bring in the big crowds.

 

[ttintagel]

Horizons was a classic case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Some judiciously-applied maintenance and updating would have made it just as relevant to today's audiences as it was to 1983's, but management decided to just let it run into the ground and then junk it.

 

[nebo]

Today's grandma harkens back to her "good old days" when cotton candy was a new fad and the Tilt-O-Whirl had not yet been invented. Horses were still jumping from platforms into pools in Atlantic City and the Ringling Circus was the Biggest Show On Earth. So there is a natural tendency to long for a simpler time.]

how old do you think we grandmas are???????
tilt o whirls not invented yet??? this is hilarious!

how about roller coasters going upside down being the new thing?

 

[smidgy]

ok, so nebo should have said "how old do you think we grandpasare? ( posted under wrong name.)

 

[JimmyV]

how old do you think we grandmas are???????

I was using 1945 as my baseline. That would make grandma 67. Certainly not a stretch. Most Tilt-O-Whirls in the US were manufactured and installed in the 1940's and 1950's, although earlier, more primitive models did exist during the depression. But who went to amusement parks during the depression?

As for rollercoasters going upside down, they actually pre-date the Tilt-O-Whirl by almost 100 years, believe it or not. Some earliest versions date back to the mid-to-late 1800's!

 

[smidgy]

I was using 1945 as my baseline. That would make grandma 67. Certainly not a stretch. Most Tilt-O-Whirls in the US were manufactured and installed in the 1940's and 1950's, although earlier, more primitive models did exist during the depression. But who went to amusement parks during the depression?

As for rollercoasters going upside down, they actually pre-date the Tilt-O-Whirl by almost 100 years, believe it or not. Some earliest versions date back to the mid-to-late 1800's!

so you meant to say GREAT-grandmas.

 

[GreenCntryGirl]

how old do you think we grandmas are???????
tilt o whirls not invented yet??? this is hilarious!

how about roller coasters going upside down being the new thing?

Yeah. I'm 45 and my oldest granddaughter just turned 7. I was born in '67.

 

[PeterPanic]

I"m mid 60's and the very first ride I can remember riding as a small kid was the Tilt-a-whirl. In fact they had to stop it because I was too small (didn't have minimums yet) and I kept bumping my head on the metal instead of the padding.

Born in 1948 and even though I am a grandfather 4 times over...the oldest will be a teenager come February, I ride everything and love it all, from Peter Pan to RnRC and ToT.

Just because I was born while Truman was President, doesn't make me old and breakable.

 

[JimmyV]

Just because I was born while Truman was President, doesn't make me old and breakable.

. That's what I'm talkin' about. This notion of grandma holding hands with a toddler wanting only to ride rides that "both can ride" is a fading vision that will be all but gone once grandparents are of the generation that grew up with Space Mountain and ToT. And if smidgy is the norm, we are already there. (Though I still think that PeterPanic is more the typical demographic, meaning no offense whatsoever to 45 year old grandparents).