Monsters, Inc. attraction to get more fine-tuning - Orlando Sentinel

[crazy4wdw]

Humor put on hold
Monsters, Inc. attraction to get more fine-tuning

Scott Powers | Sentinel Staff Writer
Posted December 28, 2006

A comedy club show based on the popular Monsters, Inc. movie apparently isn't quite ready for the big time.

Walt Disney World has confirmed that the opening of its next big attraction -- The Monsters, Inc. The Laugh Floor Comedy Club show -- will be delayed a few months so that Walt Disney Imagineering can make adjustments now that test audiences got to try it out earlier this month.

The Magic Kingdom attraction draws on characters from the 2001 Pixar Animation movie, Monsters, Inc., and uses new technology to give audiences an interactive, sometimes improvisational, robotic comedy show. The attraction was built into the old Timekeeper location in Tomorrowland.

The Laugh Floor Comedy Club was slated to have passholder previews, then a grand opening, in January. But now those won't happen until sometime in the spring, said Disney spokesman Jacob DiPietre.

The delay will give staff members a chance for more training in the complex technology being used, and writers a chance to re-script parts of the show based on audience feedback, he said.

DiPietre would not elaborate on what script changes would be made or why. However, audiences reportedly have been lukewarm to the humor.

Chris Eliopoulos, who was in one test audience, said he thought the overall structure was sound and the crowd found the technology exciting, but the humor was a bit flat and the jokes didn't hit their marks. However, Eliopoulos, 39, of New Jersey, himself a humor writer and cartoonist, respectfully pointed out that humor is hard work.

"Humor that is funny for all ages is even harder," he conceded.

The Laugh Floor Comedy Club is one of three attractions that Disney World expected to open in short order during the early part of the Year of a Million Dreams promotion that began in October. At Epcot, a ride called The Seas with Nemo and Friends opened in November. At Disney's Animal Kingdom, a stage show called Finding Nemo -- The Musical had a soft opening this month and prepares for an official premiere in January.

Scott Powers can be reached at spowers@orlandosentinel.com or 407-420-5441.

 

[rantnnravin]

i guess the adage: "if you build crap they will come" doesn't always work after all...

 

[I'mNoPrince]

I wouldn't say crap now. Crush in Epcot is still one of the biggest draws there are.Always a hugh line.

I'm glad they are now taking these things upon themself to improve something before it opens to the public then to just release it and let it fly. This is the entire idea of softopenings and previews.

 

[patsal]

I'm one to usually get excited about new attractions, but form the get go couldn't get the fit for this, let alone get past the idea of mediocre. I guess it is like spinners, one (Dumbo) can be magical and fulfill a fantasy while three is just filler (Magic Carpets and Triceritops) allthe same experience, technology, etc. While Turtle Talk is a great fit and an enjoyable little attraction at Living Seas, we don't need a similiar thing at MK and it would be nice to try to find a fit for Tomorrow Land--Monsters will be out of place at best.
I used to think they were building for audiences that may differ from my likes so no biggie, there was plenty for me to do, but with this I just feel like cheap filler is everywhere.

 

[rantnnravin]

This is the entire idea of softopenings and previews.

didn't they have soft openings for Stitch?

 

[I'mNoPrince]

didn't they have soft openings for Stitch?

Yes and even though maybe not on the boards or even with Diehard Disney Stitch has a hugh following so you know those were the ones that went down just for a chance to get in on the soft opening and most likely gave it great reviews.

I don't think MInc has that type of following or we would see them taking over more of the World like Stitch.

 

[Kitty-chan]

I caught a soft opening last week and would have to agree that the show needs more work, both in terms of content and technology (looks like they need to tweak the rendering in some way). I'm glad they're giving it more time. I'd say with a bit more work it'll be a hit with the 7-10 crowd.

 

[MJMcBride]

I'm willing to give anything a shot and I think Turtle Talk is fantastic/inventive, but this is now cause for concern.

 

[Michael623]

I also caught a sneak peek a couple of weeks ago. It has the potential to be a decent show but I can see why they weren't ready to go with it the way it is now. The fact that there are seats inside now makes it about 1000 times better than The Time Keeper.

 

[Another Voice]

The "rumors" are that the problems with the show are much deeper than just changing a few jokes. It's said that the show's current characters will be scrapped in favor of ones that featured more in the movie. There might be more of a plot in place of the three "stand-up" routinues. The idea that guests could text-message in their own jokes turned out to be a complete disaster - but it's a big hit with Iger because of the all the "high techie" stuff he thinks he understands. Guest interaction is a huge problem - people were expecting either a "stage show" or an interveiw like 'Crush'. And the, as always, coming up with jokes that are appropriate for all ages and that are funny to people from a lot of different places is extremly hard.

The biggest problem is that they're stretching the gimmack too far. Talking to a cartoon character is really amazing the first couple times, but the novelty of the technology wears off quickly. Crush is an interesting character that's funny by nature, none of the 'Monsters, Inc.' characters are all that interesting. Their world certainly is, but it's hard to imagine having a prolonged conversation with Mike or Sully. It'd rather take a tour of Monstropolis.

 

[sPaRkLeSpAz]

[= I think that it will be pretty interesting. Well, I hope so anyway.

 

[Jason71]

Crush is an interesting character that's funny by nature, none of the 'Monsters, Inc.' characters are all that interesting. Their world certainly is, but it's hard to imagine having a prolonged conversation with Mike or Sully. It'd rather take a tour of Monstropolis.

You definitely have a point. What makes MI funny is that it takes characters who are essentially 9-5ers who would be at home in Office Space and places them in a fantastic world. They are not as amusing on their own as Crush, or Dorey, or Mater, to name three.

Re: coming up with jokes on-the-fly. Did they end up hiring from the Adventurer's Club as rumored? If there is anyone who could do it, I would think it would be that cast. Even running through the "initiation ceremony" they've done multiple times a night for a decade, as often as not they can still find ways to make it fresh and funny.

 

[MJMcBride]

The biggest problem is that they're stretching the gimmack too far. Talking to a cartoon character is really amazing the first couple times, but the novelty of the technology wears off quickly. Crush is an interesting character that's funny by nature, none of the 'Monsters, Inc.' characters are all that interesting. Their world certainly is, but it's hard to imagine having a prolonged conversation with Mike or Sully. It'd rather take a tour of Monstropolis.

I don't agree with you thats its a gimmick. Its great tech when used right. By calling it a gimmick, you make it seem that it will wear off. I agree that Crush is the "right kind of guy" for this tech and I think the attraction has lasting power based on the right use here. I also agree that Monsters Inc very well may not be the right use.

 

[Another Voice]

Its great tech when used right.

That’s the point. Any technology used for just a single purpose or just to show itself off is a gimmick and grows old quickly.

The very first motion pictures were nothing by twenty clips of crowded streets, trains arriving at a station, of people just walking. At first people were simply thrilled by watching pictures that moved. But that “gimmick” grew old very quickly. Pretty show people actually had to use the technology for something.

Disney is making a mistake in thinking that “talking to cartoon characters” is interesting all by itself. But Crush was a big hit, so Disney spun up the Wheel O’Synergy to determine the next line of plush and DVDs to hock. We got Monsters, Inc. for commercial instead of artistic reasons.

Yes, at first it’s really amazing to watch an animated figure respond to you – but that grows older faster than watching movies of trains. ‘Crush’ is popular not because of the technology, but because the technology allows us to experience a character we all like. Fifty years ago the technology allowed us to fly with Dumbo, thirty years ago it let us join in a pirate adventure – these rides remain popular today because of the characters involved, not the technology.

No one wants to see a Vegas lounge act performed by Mike or Shully – we don’t like those characters for their stand-up comedy skills. We want to see characters we like doing the things we like, not watch a skin thrown over the latest technical fad. There are a thousand better uses – better shows – that Disney could have come up with.

But they didn’t start with “show” first. They started with the shop at the exit once again.

 

[MJMcBride]

I just didn't like the term "gimmick". It makes it seem like its short lived and I think that tech when used right has staying power. Other than that I agree with you. It was more terminology then anything

 

[Kitty-chan]

If they significantly improve the writing, this thing could work. Once again, I'm thinking about the 7-10 crowd in particular, who don't necessarily tire of hearing the same jokes over and over (my DS10 is inexplicably, obsessively fond of Ellen's Energy Adventure because of the video portions, which he finds hilarious -- he's constantly reminding me that there's no eating, smoking, or flash photography in Ellen's dream).

Scrapping the first and third characters makes sense to me, though for some reason I don't understand the third character got big cheers at my test screening, when the CMs asked for opinions. The second character (two-headed monster) worked a bit better IMHO.

The incorporation of text messaging may be important from an experimental point of view . . . if they figure out how to do it. I'm not sure I see a good way to make it work. Interesting point above about Iger pushing for it. What does it mean to do interactive entertainment that incorporates mobile wireless devices of various sorts? I'm not sure that enough is understood about that yet (it's not hard technically, it's hard conceptually, it's hard content-wise).

And seriously, they gotta do something about the technical problems with the visuals. If the main screen looks cheaply rendered (regardless of what the cause is), it's not gonna be up to Disney technical quality. It needs to look at least as good as Crush.

 

[YoHo]

I just didn't like the term "gimmick". It makes it seem like its short lived and I think that tech when used right has staying power. Other than that I agree with you. It was more terminology then anything

The POINT is that Technology itself has no staying power. It's the story that does or does not have staying power and the story in this case seems criminally stupid.

 

[MJMcBride]

The POINT is that Technology itself has no staying power. It's the story that does or does not have staying power and the story in this case seems criminally stupid.

I will weight to save judgment until I actually see it or at least have some foundation from a fair number of people.