Iger Planning to Kill Imagineering?

[dbm20th]

Disney World in 2006 is not something Walt would ever want his name attached to. Nor would Roy want to attach his name to it.

So consider it a little respect for the Man.

Then I guess I really love a place that Walt and Roy wouldn't want their names attached to, though I think that's not accurate. I'm good with that. And I am sure I am not alone

 

[YoHo]

I love WDW too, or at least what's left of Walt's vision.


There are also hundreds of other places in the world that I "love" that wouldn't be satisfactory for Walt.

 

[Another Voice]

Then I guess I really love a place that Walt and Roy wouldn't want their names attached to...

Walt (and Roy) understood the power of a good brand name. They were more than happy to use "Disney" for that purpose. They grew up in the age of Warner Brothers Movie Studio, of Boeing Aircraft, of Kraft Foods, etc.

At the same time, all indiciations are that Walt didn't want the parks themselves to be personal momuments. That's why he left instruction there were to be no statues of him. Walt Disney World - a name he never used for the Florida Project - was probably going a bit to far for him. He understood the collaborative process that made it possible. Putting his fill name on it was taking too much credit.

That being said, however, I can imagine that the first thing Walt will do after being thawed is the rent a bulldozer and head to Orlando.

 

[ChrisFL]

Sigh......


When Disney World first opened up, there were no plans to build a Pirates. It was going to have Western River Expedition.

So many guests crowded town hall asking where "That Pirates Ride is?" That Disney Dropped everything and rushed the crappy Florida version of the ride into the park.

THAT my friends is an attraction that get's people off their butts and through the turnstyles.

People in Southern California weren't clogging Town Hall begging for the ToT.

In fact, there were plenty of people out here who didn't know it existed, because they don't give a hoot about Florida when they have The park that Walt built in their back yard.


Tower's a good ride, but it's not a masterpiece of imagineering. The thrill is in the drops at the end. Of course, given the crap that's come after it, I can see how TOT might be considered better then it really is.

so if it isn't a 15 minute ride with 200+ AA figures it's not worthy?

 

[YoHo]

sigh.

That's hardly the point.

If it's not a ride that captures the imagination and fully emerses you the way pirates does, then it's not the kind of attraction we're talking about.

We've already established that ToT can't draw people on it's own. So, there is no question that it's not as good as Pirates, which can.

 

[peter11435]

So, there is no question that it's not as good as Pirates, which can.

It can. How can you be so sure of that.

 

[YoHo]

Did you read my Earlier post, I say it can, because it frickin did.

 

[ChrisFL]

sigh.

That's hardly the point.

If it's not a ride that captures the imagination and fully emerses you the way pirates does, then it's not the kind of attraction we're talking about.

We've already established that ToT can't draw people on it's own. So, there is no question that it's not as good as Pirates, which can.

IMO the GOOD ToT can draw people on it's own, not the half-*** job done at DCA.

 

[MJMcBride]

, Disney World in 2006 is not something Walt would ever want his name attached to. Nor would Roy want to attach his name to it.

How the heck could even know that? I think he would so there.

 

[peter11435]

Did you read my Earlier post, I say it can, because it frickin did.

Yeah, 30 freakin' years ago.

 

[YoHo]

How the heck could even know that? I think he would so there.

Because I can read, both what Walt has said and wrote along with what others have said and written about him and I can talk with people who worked for him and worked with the people that designed WDW and I can therefore have a good idea about what Walt's vision was for his theme parks (I'm not talking E.P.C.O.T. here) and from all that, it's very clear that in particular since the late 80s, the additions to Disney's themeparks have largely not been in keeping with how Walt would have wanted them added to.

 

[YoHo]

Yeah, 30 freakin' years ago.

sigh, I'll say this for you dude, you may constantly miss the point in a conversation, but at least you miss it in a consistant fashion.

Who the heck cares that it was 30 years ago (before you were born). That has absolutly nothing to do with frickin anything.

 

[DVCconvert]

sigh, I'll say this for you dude, you may constantly miss the point in a conversation, but at least you miss it in a consistant fashion.

At least he's not alone!

and I can therefore have a good idea about what Walt's vision was for his theme parks

We - the ignorant masses - are SO lucky to have you!!!!

 

[peter11435]

Who the heck cares that it was 30 years ago (before you were born). That has absolutly nothing to do with frickin anything.

Actually the fact that it was 30 years ago is very important. Unlike yourself most people in this world do not live in the past. What was popular and brought in guests in the 1960's and 70's is not the same as what does it today.

 

[YoHo]

Actually the fact that it was 30 years ago is very important. Unlike yourself most people in this world do not live in the past. What was popular and brought in guests in the 1960's and 70's is not the same as what does it today.

Peter, have I ever told you that you're the wind beneath my wings?

I said this:

If it's not a ride that captures the imagination and fully emerses you the way pirates does, then it's not the kind of attraction we're talking about.

ToT is not that type of attraction, Indy is, Splash mountain is (despite it's retarded location.)

Indiana Jones and the Temple of the Forbidden eye had lines running all the way to the Main Street train station when it opened. ToT never had lines like that ever. Pirates generated lines like that too for the rehab. So in fact what was popular 35 years ago IS still super popular today.

But you just keep on imagining that's not true.

 

[Another Voice]

What was popular and brought in guests in the 1960's and 70's is not the same as what does it today.

Yet the ancient 30 year old ruins of the Magic Kingdom draw twice as many people as the shiny oh-so-hip Animal Kingdom...

Imgaine that. Timeless quality is more important than cheap fads and PowerPoint presentations.

There might be a lesson in there.

 

[Sarangel]

What was popular and brought in guests in the 1960's and 70's is not the same as what does it today.

So, those lines down to City Hall when they re-opened Pirates with the refurbishement were 30 year old lines? Pirates remains one of the most popular rides in Disneyland - all you have to do is look up the hourly capacity and multiply that out to the number of riders per day.

The point here is that it is possible to design rides that remain popular after the initial novelty wears off. Most of the current Disney rides do not have that quality (I'm suspending judgement on E:E, because I haven't ridden it yet).

 

[MJMcBride]

So, those lines down to City Hall when they re-opened Pirates with the refurbishement were 30 year old lines? Pirates remains one of the most popular rides in Disneyland - all you have to do is look up the hourly capacity and multiply that out to the number of riders per day.

The point here is that it is possible to design rides that remain popular after the initial novelty wears off. Most of the current Disney rides do not have that quality (I'm suspending judgement on E:E, because I haven't ridden it yet).

First let me say, I do not necessarily agree with Peter11435 on this point. But this is not fair either. Pirates packed them in because it was a relaunch/redo. I have been on it many times where you can walk right in. Many wanted to see the "new" parts of the ride. Having said Pirates and HM maybe my two favorite rides in all of WDW.

I also think some rides at WDW that have come down the pike have withstood the test of time. Kilimanjaroo still draws crowds. Tower of Terror does at MGM (I don't know whats going on at DCA as I've never been). I'll wager Soarin' will. Maybe Everest too. So might Mickey's Phillaramagic. Fantasmic will be popular for many years to come.

I will continue to believe that, yes, recently Disney has not always hit the mark and have missed the mark more than they used to. But they still do occassionally- at least- put out a great, imaginative attraction.

 

[Another Voice]

Again - how much of a ride's popularity is because of the show itself, and how much is because "we're already here, let's go on this one". The concept of good enough has a couple of different levels.

Dozens and dozens of better animal parks have rides similar to Kilimanjaroo. There's not a single element in the entire show that truly's unique, nothing that gets people to say "I've never seen that before" or "that's impossible - how did they do that". It lacks the "magic" of real Disney attraction: Kilimanjaroo appears exactly what it is, a bus ride around some cages. But the public expects Disney to present them "dreams made real": haunted houses and rocket trips and flying with a beloved character from childhood. All Kilimanjaroo offers is a really bad episode of the Kraft Brothers ("Com'on Martin - let's go save Li'l Red!!")

'Soarin' - gee, 'Star Tours' was popular for a long time. But it's a walk on now. All rides that are basically movies grow old very fast. Already the ride's popularity is slipping at California Adventure - and it's not like there's a lot of competion in the park either. 'Soaring' lacks a couple elements that would have made it better attraction. There should have been a real show there. At the moment it's a movie theater with a gimmick. They don't even bother to hide the fact that's it's a theater.

But most of all, it lacks the emotional kick in the gut that the best Disney attractions have. It's the "I've always wanted to do this!" antcipation and then delivering on that promise. You feel like you've gone through a haunted house when you exit the Mansion. You mind tells you that it's only an amusement park ride - but the your hair really stand up on end, those special effects are so believable that it's easier to believe in real ghosts...it all just seems so real yet there no way it possibly can be.

Or the 'Indiana Jones' Temple ride. It feels exactly what it would feel like to be in an Indiana Jones movie - the speed, the noise, the confusion, the over-the-top effects ("is that three story high skull really spitting flames at us?"), the phyisical thrashing and the "ohmygod - it's THE BOULDER!" moment that makes everyone scream even after ten years.

To do that takes a lot of skill, a lot of talent, and even more than that in hard work. Disney knows this, they know the was to make a great attration. They just aren't willing to put that effort these days. 'Tower' isn't fully developed enough to be much more than a facny drop ride, 'Soaring' is an IMAX theater with fancy chairs, and if one more movie spits water at me, I'm swearing off 3D films forever.

 

[YoHo]

GAH, I'm sick and tired of the
"I sometimes can walk write on to Pirates defense." Uttering that phrase should get you banned. Explaining why it's wrongheaded should be in the DIS faq.

The Haunted Mansion and Pirates have the highest hourly capacity of any attractions Disney has EVER made.

The Hourly capacity of Pirates maxes out at 3400 guests per hour with an average around 2700.

Disney attractions average somewhere around 1800. So Pirates can shove a whole lot more people through the ride and that means that you simply won't ever stand in line as long for pirates as you would for a slower moving ride.

So, please don't use the anecdotal evidence without actually knowing how the attractions work.


No specific offense intended to you MJMcbride.You're not the first on this board to fail to think this one through.