PDA

View Full Version : Putting a "band-aid" on an attraction


Imagineer1981
05-21-2008, 02:36 PM
I started thinking about how attractions have evolved over the years. Some have been updated, others completely redone, and others are replaced. For me some were done really well, like HM and POTC with updates, but there are a few that I think were just "band-aids" like Grand Fiesta Tour and the current Journey into Imagination. Instead of completely starting over with a fresh new idea, it feels like Disney took the cheap and easy road and just put a "band-aid" on them. The worst for me is GFT as they really just changed the movies and called it a new ride...blah!:ill:

DisneyWizard
05-21-2008, 04:00 PM
I thought El Rio and HM were done very well. I don't really consider the JIYI a band-aid...more of a tragedy.

Imagineer1981
05-21-2008, 05:03 PM
sorry, I have to disagree, I think El Rio was a terrible update. I love the idea of using donald, but they needed to gut the attraction and remake it, not just stick donald in on videos..seemed like a cheap attempt at something that could have been great...especially the last room w/ Mexico City...blah!:sick:

Mrs.Mickey
05-21-2008, 08:47 PM
Grand fiesta is a joke! I never liked el rio that much but just seemed that they decieded to go cheap and call something a new ride when it wasnt

Polynesian Dweller
05-21-2008, 09:03 PM
You have to be careful about laying all the blame on Disney. Disney can only spend as much as the sponsor is willing to do. If the sponsor doesn't want to put up enough of a share to make a $30mil ride viable then it won't happen. At the same time, the sponsor may insist on an update and name change to their ride. So, the planning will then be a compromise between what should be done and the funding available.

For example, it was long thought that the Canada film was out of date, which as a Canadian I can say it definitely was. The film was not redone until Canadian sponsors came up with funding to make it worthwhile, then it occured. The same will have happened at Mexico and with the sponsor of JIYI.

Not saying that the updates were great, they weren't, its just we should be careful not to blame Disney solely for this as long as they have sponsors and sponsor agreement contracts they have to abide by. They likely couldn't do what they wanted to do.

Tink#64
05-22-2008, 12:17 AM
I thought El Rio and HM were done very well. I don't really consider the JIYI a band-aid...more of a tragedy.


OK, I know I'm about to be blasted, but here goes! :blush: We like the new & improved El Rio much better than the old, gosh it was so boring, DH was the only one that ever wanted to ride this one! The only part that I used to like was where you circle around the restaurant! Now I think it's cute, could it be better? I'm sure. HM, gosh, I can't say that I saw that much difference, of course we already loved this ride, so no problem there! JIYI w/ Figment, we LOVE this attraction! Of course, in our defense, we've never experienced the original! We love this, it's so silly & cute & there's never a wait, we must ride this several times each trip! :blush:

But we loved the refurb of POTC! We didn't get to ride this when we were there in '06, that was during the rehab, so when we were there last month we had to ride it a couple of times! Of course I'm a huge Johnny Depp fan, so that helps! But we did like the changes that we noticed & I don't think it took anything away from the original , & we already loved it, so I was a little worried that the commercialism might have a negative affect on this attraction. But not for us! :thumbsup:

Von-Drake
05-22-2008, 07:32 AM
JIYI is not as mad as the second version of the ride (that was a tragedy). The current is not too bad, but not as good as the first. As long as they have figment we will continue to ride. My son loves Figment, and he makes him laugh so much.

HM and POTC excellent remakes. GFT... well that is tough, because I am a big Donald fan, but I do believe they could have done a better job and change more than just the videos (which they either need to re-shoot the videos, or update/clean the screens. The videos look so bad.

Ian
05-22-2008, 08:55 AM
You have to be careful about laying all the blame on Disney. Disney can only spend as much as the sponsor is willing to do.Actually, they can spend whatever they'd like. They just choose to try to find partners to bear the burden of the costs then they fit whatever work can be done within the confines of the sponsor's budget.

But if they really wanted to, they could pony up their own dough, too.

Anyway, I think Gran Fiesta Tour is really weak. It's probably one of the worst attraction makeovers WDI has done. The whole thing has no cohesive feel to it, the storyline is blurry and vague, and the Donald, Jose, and Panchito footage looks like it was just slapped down on top of the existing attraction. Very poorly done, IMO.

I love the Haunted Mansion updates and I can live with the Pirates ones, although I'm not as big a fan of those as I am the HM ones.

JIYI is really bad when compared to the original, but not quite as terrible when compared to the interim one. At the end of the day, though, it's still pretty bad.

But come on ... no one has mentioned the absolute worst attraction redo in history. The disaster now known as "Stitch's Great Escape"!

Polynesian Dweller
05-22-2008, 09:53 AM
But come on ... no one has mentioned the absolute worst attraction redo in history. The disaster now known as "Stitch's Great Escape"!
Got to agree with you there! Stich really is poor and does show lack of Imagineering.

I'm interested in your comments about Disney being able to spend what they want. When the Canadian pavillion film was being re-done there were articles in several local papers here in Ontario. Those articles indicated that until the Canadian government agreed to a new film and financing found by Canadian government and others a new film was out of the question. They then went through a history of several years of effort to put that all together. It certainly implied that the film, and consequently the image of Canada shown, could not be redone until agreement with our government was in place. That's where I got my comments from.

If that's accurate, and I would be interested in something definitve that it isn't, then I would expect that all countries would want to control their image as would corporate sponsors.

Mousemates
05-22-2008, 10:55 AM
Not to be overly disagreeable with anyone, but my DD's (15) favorite ride in Epcot is not Soarin, MS, or TestTrack...but JIYI. She loves Figment and loves the ride. We're all wired a little different. One mans trash (cheap band-aid on a bad attraction) is obviously another mans (or teenage girl's) treasure. The mouse :smickey: has something for everyone.

Ian
05-22-2008, 11:16 AM
I'm interested in your comments about Disney being able to spend what they want. When the Canadian pavillion film was being re-done there were articles in several local papers here in Ontario. Those articles indicated that until the Canadian government agreed to a new film and financing found by Canadian government and others a new film was out of the question. They then went through a history of several years of effort to put that all together. It certainly implied that the film, and consequently the image of Canada shown, could not be redone until agreement with our government was in place. That's where I got my comments from.You're absolutely correct that, for the Epcot pavilions, that there has to be sign-off for any changes from the government sponsoring the pavilion.

What I was saying was that Disney could spend over and above whatever amount the sponsor ponied up if they chose.

In other words, say Canada approves a change, gets $10 million in financing together, and Disney comes up with a plan that Canada loves but it costs $20 million.

Disney can either scale back to the $10 million budget or kick in the extra $10 million themselves.

This is all speculation on my part, though. I'm not 100% sure this is the way it works, outside of the approval portion.

Septbride2002
05-22-2008, 12:32 PM
I never did the original Alien Encounter - had no desire to - when they redid it to Stitch I was more interested as we loved Stitich - however the ride stinks. Can't compare it to the original - but this ride is just no fun - you just sit there and smell stinky air - I can do that on a bus at home.

El Rio doesn't bother me - is it a huge update - no it isn't. But it made it more interesting for my little one.

The Haunted Mansion updates are AWESOME! I love them.

POC - the updates don't bother me. In fact I like them.

Never saw the original Figment - and the current Figment is fun for our family.

The latest update - Spaceship Earth - we all like it. We like the new scenes, the lighting is better, the color is better. We like the interactive computer stuff and thought it was fun to do. The only thing I didn't like was the new narration - give me back Jeremy Irons sexy voice!

~Amanda

Polynesian Dweller
05-22-2008, 12:59 PM
What I was saying was that Disney could spend over and above whatever amount the sponsor ponied up if they chose.
...
This is all speculation on my part, though. I'm not 100% sure this is the way it works, outside of the approval portion.

That's probably the part we, outside of Disney, can't really know. That really gets into the heart of the contracts. If they are based on each party having to put up a percentage, say 50-50, then Disney would not be in a position to arbitrarily spend more. That would be contractually obliging the other party to pay more. Yes, there could be an agreement suspending the cost sharing poriton but that really would open up all kinds of issues. Companies rarely do that because it can have potential consequences later with another project.

Without knowing, I guess it could really be either way. But we can't necessarily put all the blame on Disney for some of the poor attraction updates.

Ian
05-22-2008, 01:16 PM
That's probably the part we, outside of Disney, can't really know. That really gets into the heart of the contracts. If they are based on each party having to put up a percentage, say 50-50, then Disney would not be in a position to arbitrarily spend more. That would be contractually obliging the other party to pay more. Yes, there could be an agreement suspending the cost sharing poriton but that really would open up all kinds of issues. Companies rarely do that because it can have potential consequences later with another project.

Without knowing, I guess it could really be either way. But we can't necessarily put all the blame on Disney for some of the poor attraction updates.I agree with what you said. Without being intimately familiar with the nature of the agreements, you can't say for sure where or how the budgets for the attractions are determined.

Imagineer1981
05-23-2008, 10:25 AM
Sponsers, no sponsers, whatever! that should make no difference. Ask yourself this, if Walt Disney was faced with "the sponser wants it to be this way" and he knew it wasn't the best Disney could do...I would be willing to bet 100 billion dollars Walt would find a way to do it right, even if it costs 10x as much.

indytraveler
05-23-2008, 01:45 PM
The latest update - Spaceship Earth - we all like it. We like the new scenes, the lighting is better, the color is better. We like the interactive computer stuff and thought it was fun to do. The only thing I didn't like was the new narration - give me back Jeremy Irons sexy voice!

~Amanda

I'm glad someone mentioned this one. Going next month and wasn't sure if this was going to be better or not.

I agree with HM, and POTC. Both were done well. IASM was also good, fresh coat of paint helped alot.

My Country Bears aren't doing so well and they need an updated version. Don't replace please.

tjstrike
05-24-2008, 01:13 AM
Definetaly plenty of rides that need a good refurb. Can someone confirm that Space mountain looks really run down when you see it from the inside with the lights on ? Somebody was telling me that a maint. person at WDW told them that.

Ladyvader
05-24-2008, 02:31 PM
Journey Into your Imagination was so wonderful when it was the first one. The second one was an embarrassment for sure, the third is a really nice attraction. And the reason being because it brought Figment back. It has many flaws but after seeing the second one the attraction rocks!
As for Gran Fiesta Tour. I like parts of it. I love that the Three Caballeros have been added, they fit perfectly. I do think it is a good improvement on a aging attraction. But have to agree it is lacking in a few places.

laughingplace<3
05-24-2008, 03:01 PM
What about Tiki Room, under new management? :secret:

Ladyvader
05-25-2008, 12:20 AM
I liked the original Tiki birds so much better. But people were leaving in droves. It just never had the following that the DL Tikis have.