Iger Planning to Kill Imagineering?

[MJMcBride]

'Everest' will be a walk-on by next summer and become the 'Body Wars' of Animal Kingdom (a thrill ride of last resort 'cause everyone's bored).

That is blantantly unfair. I haven't been on it and could argue that one. The Tower is still big at WDW. I thought Califonia Adventure as awhole is a walk on.

 

[YoHo]

Lets put it another way,

When they put the Electric light parade in California adventure, people actually started going over to see it, because they loved the parade soooo much.

If they built pirates in DCA, people would go to DCA to ride it, because Pirates is one of the best rides.

ToT had about a month of long lines and then nothing. Ergo, Tower is not as good.

 

[MJMcBride]

Then why does the ToT at WDW continue to draw?

Maybe its just the whacky people who live in Cali. That would explain it, right?

 

[ChrisFL]

Then why does the ToT at WDW continue to draw?

Maybe its just the whacky people who live in Cali. That would explain it, right?

MGM is a better park overall than DCA? People buy park hoppers more at WDW than DLR since DCA isn't very good? I don't know but I wouldn't be surprised if those werent big factors

 

[YoHo]

MGM IS a slightly better park and WDW guests generally go for longer and generally get park hoppers so it's less of an issue in Florida.

 

[Another Voice]

Then why does the ToT at WDW continue to draw?

Because a ride that's "just good enough" to draw people already in the park is a different beast than a ride that can draw people to the park in the first place.

DCA's 'Tower', like Epcot's 'Mission: Mars' wasn't designed just as an expansion to their parks, they were designed to bring in new guests and to increase overall attendance - just like 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of the Forbidden Eye' did at Disneyland. But both have failed miserably in their jobs.

Getting people out of their homes to a movie theater or a theme park isn’t easy. Disney® has forgotten that fact. They think people naturally go to WDW or D/L like lemmings on the migration. So Disney has gotten use to doing things on the cheap – smaller, less elaborate, dumbed down and unambitious.

The public is smarter than that. They know a roller coaster bought from a catalog isn’t worth the trip no matter how plates of phony Yeti poo you put in the line. People are holding on to their money to be truly amazed and truly dazzled. All Disney wants to offer is a bunch of marketing hype.

 

[peter11435]

'Everest' will be a walk-on by next summer and become the 'Body Wars' of Animal Kingdom (a thrill ride of last resort 'cause everyone's bored).

Yeah sure. I say we continue this conversation a year from now.

 

[Another Voice]

No, actually we had the conversation from last year, the one where "people" were saying that 'Mission: Space' was the greatest ride ever built and throngs of happy people couldn't wait to ride it again, and again, and again.

My, what a difference a year makes.

 

[peter11435]

No, actually we had the conversation from last year, the one where "people" were saying that 'Mission: Space' was the greatest ride ever built and throngs of happy people couldn't wait to ride it again, and again, and again.

My, what a difference a year makes.

You can't compare M:S and Everest.

 

[barreloflaughs]

You can't compare M:S and Everest.

Yeah, AV...what has gotten into you? Haven't you read the damned FAQ??!!

From the FAQ:

Q: Can I compare M:S with Everest?
A: No, of course not. That would be silly. Now sit down and be quiet!

If you'd like a list of multi-million dollar "E" ticket Walt Disney World attractions that you ARE allowed to compare, please contact me offline.

barrel

 

[MJMcBride]

I can buy that the Tower of Terror by itself can't save a crappy park (DCA) but I will not agree that it isn't a great ride. Many people consider it one of the best if not the best at WDW. As for comparing Mission Space with Everest, I think we have to see about that. From a personal point of view, I did not blink when they added M:S, but am really looking forward to Everest. And I don't think one single ride would ever get me off my rear and hike it down to WDW.

 

[Another Voice]

You can't compare M:S and Everest.

Really, what can one say.

As for comparing Mission Space with Everest,…

I’m not comparing “good ride, bad ride”. I’m saying both attractions were built with the exact same business purpose – the drive up overall attendance at their parks. It doesn’t matter if your or I like the ride, the issue is about how well it performs for the business.

‘Mission: Space’ failed at its job. It’s not driving attendance at Epcot. I believe this is because the attraction is poorly designed – a poor design caused by the company choosing to ignore all the lessons it has learned in the last fifty years. Disney is more than capable of creating a “park making” attraction, but the company will not take the risk nor invest the resources to make it happen. The company does not respect its customers – all of you guys – enough to run the business in a matter that’s best for the theme park business.

I see ‘Expedition: Everest’ following the same design philosophy and I expect it to end up with the same results.

 

[ChrisFL]

I can buy that the Tower of Terror by itself can't save a crappy park (DCA) but I will not agree that it isn't a great ride. Many people consider it one of the best if not the best at WDW. As for comparing Mission Space with Everest, I think we have to see about that. From a personal point of view, I did not blink when they added M:S, but am really looking forward to Everest. And I don't think one single ride would ever get me off my rear and hike it down to WDW.

Yet the DCA version of ToT isn't very good compared to the WDW version.

 

[peter11435]

Really, what can one say.


I’m not comparing “good ride, bad ride”. I’m saying both attractions were built with the exact same business purpose – the drive up overall attendance at their parks. It doesn’t matter if your or I like the ride, the issue is about how well it performs for the business.

‘Mission: Space’ failed at its job. It’s not driving attendance at Epcot. I believe this is because the attraction is poorly designed – a poor design caused by the company choosing to ignore all the lessons it has learned in the last fifty years. Disney is more than capable of creating a “park making” attraction, but the company will not take the risk nor invest the resources to make it happen. The company does not respect its customers – all of you guys – enough to run the business in a matter that’s best for the theme park business.

I see ‘Expedition: Everest’ following the same design philosophy and I expect it to end up with the same results.

Just because the two were built with the exact same business purpose does not mean they will have the same results.

 

[MJMcBride]

Yet the DCA version of ToT isn't very good compared to the WDW version.

Why? I haven't been on the DCA version.

 

[dbm20th]

I don't care about DCA. Never been there, and can't imagine I would ever go. But ToT in MGM is an amazing attraction, no matter what spin you need to have to make a point. It still draws huge lines, and most certainly added a whole new excitment level to MGM when it opened, that has not gone away. By all accounts, Everest is doing the same thing. M:S did not, but then again the ride took a pounding in the press in the years to follow, something Everest has not had.

 

[ChrisFL]

Why? I haven't been on the DCA version.

It's about 1/2 the budget of the WDW version, there's no theming outside of the hotel at all, no garden area with the creepy vines everywhere, the inside queue is the same.

There is an un-themed hallway before the elevator you get into. The ride is much shorter, there is no "next dimension" where the vehicle moves forward. You see one brief room with a mirror effect before you see the main room with the 4 ghosts then it starts to drop you. Plus the on-ride narration is completely different and IMO doesn't sound like Rod Serling at all (compared to the WDW version)

 

[YoHo]

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.

 

[yalegracey]

Why can't anybody say WALT Disney World

 

[YoHo]

I CAN say Walt Disney World. I just don't.

Mainly I'm just a lazy typist, but also, 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.