tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post116450095282171398..comments2024-02-08T07:33:49.907-08:00Comments on Re-Imagineering: The Myth of StoryMr Bankshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12952506736745891323noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-50548545120698320662007-04-05T11:39:00.000-07:002007-04-05T11:39:00.000-07:00THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU.I have said for year...THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU.<BR/><BR/>I have said for years -- both as a fan, and professionally, that telling a LINEAR story in the often limited timeline of a theme park attraction is IMPOSSIBLE.<BR/><BR/>Plot INFORMS DESIGN in attractions, but doesn't DRIVE it. Context and character is much more important. Story brands that people already know -- from movies, cartoons, books, whatever -- are very useful in creating an emotional jumping-off point that can be explored in NON-NARRATIVE, EXPERIENTIAL WAYS at an attraction.<BR/><BR/>That's the whole purpose of an attraction, after all -- to give you an experience that's NOT a movie or a cartoon. It's inherantly about *breaking* that format and creating emotion through tactile and environmental means. The art of story and cinematic/theatrical language certainly come into play, but the constraints of linear narrative can actually work against you in most cases.davecobbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13123362076224533350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-64310186124658578282007-02-22T13:13:00.000-08:002007-02-22T13:13:00.000-08:00Hey Tim,Not contradictory at all but complementary...Hey Tim,<BR/><BR/>Not contradictory at all but complementary! The classic Disney attractions were informed by some of the best visual storytellers on the planet, thus a very beautifully choreographed VISUAL story unfolded before your eyes; a story we ourselves write as opposed to have thrust on us.<BR/><BR/>But the early E-tickets were also NOT narratives in the classic sense where, say, a Pirate, a fish, a little girl, a dinosaur or an alien, goes missing and you're tasked with the job of finding them.<BR/><BR/>These early veterans of visual story telling were smart enough to know when to dispense with the burden of plodding narrative and instead immerse the audience in a series of cleverly unfolding personal experiences.Mr Bankshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12952506736745891323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-48815486986129669542007-02-22T12:40:00.000-08:002007-02-22T12:40:00.000-08:00This is completely contradictory to something post...This is completely contradictory to something posted elsewhere on here. That classic attractions were simply themed and lacked that three part story. The two signature classic Disney attractions are Pirates and Haunted Mansion. A previous article effectively outlined this contradiction. Pirates is a 3 part plot like many of the newer attractions ending in the climactic burning of the city. Haunted Mansion is another 3 part plot where the presence of the ghosts is felt at the beginning, the begin to materialize in the middle, and then they're in full force in the graveyard. I do think that some of the new rides concentrate too much on the story where something subtler (like Expedition Everest) is more routed in classic Disney, but to say that older attractions lacked "story" is simply not true.Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09160672240701158843noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1169146752426329792007-01-18T10:59:00.000-08:002007-01-18T10:59:00.000-08:00I also agree regarding the story on the safari "ri...I also agree regarding the story on the safari "ride". The fakery of the elephant story was in direct contrast to the efforts taken to create a real safari environment and authentic surroundings for the animals. The wonder of seeing them was enough, and the "story" pulled me so far out of what I'd been enjoying, it was actually quite upsetting. I'd rather take Dinosaur, knowing that it's 100% fake, rather than the safari with a made-up story-- it feels like it's meant to cut the ride short.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165882969707696042006-12-11T16:22:00.000-08:002006-12-11T16:22:00.000-08:00I know I'm coming into this discussion way late, b...I know I'm coming into this discussion way late, but I wanted to add my 2 cents...<BR/><BR/>I'll just first say that I've always disliked the term "story rides" since it didn't quite fit PotC and HM. I started calling them "experience rides" about 10 years ago - I don't think I had every seen Marc Davis' quote, but it's kind of cool to know we were on the same wavelength there...<BR/><BR/>Anyway, my first point here is that I think the change is not so much "Walt's Guys vs. Eisner's Guys". I think it is more the retirement of Walt's Guys and hiring of the "professional" imagineers to replace them. Walt's guys were pretty much ex-animators - and short-subject animators at that. They knew how to make entertaining 5 to 10 minute films, and thus knew how to make entertaining 5 to 10 minute rides. The newer "professional" imagineers are engineers or screenwriters or whatever, but they don't have that same short-story-telling experience that Marc and company had.<BR/><BR/>(Oh, and BTW, films don't automatically tell stories either - they can be just experiences too. Anyone remember the old CGI "Mind's Eye" films from the early 90's. All graphics, no plot at all , but fascinating all the same.)<BR/><BR/>My other point is that a good story takes a reasonable amount of time to put together and tell. Every wonder why there aren't any 30 minute drama shows on TV? It's hard to tell a good, engrossing story in less than an hour - even if we already know the characters! Now, try to cram that in a 20-minute or even 10-minute theme park ride. It might work if you have characters everyone knows (which is why Indy works better than Dinosaur, for example) and even then you need a pre-show.<BR/><BR/>So IMHO telling a real "story" is very difficult in a short theme park ride, but doing a good short-subject is a better approach.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165634322804088282006-12-08T19:18:00.000-08:002006-12-08T19:18:00.000-08:00A very interesting article, but as much as I agree...A very interesting article, but as much as I agree that the plot lines in some attractions are over the top or perhaps even insulting (Kilimanjaro Safari, Kali River) they work just fine in others (Everest, Spalsh Mountain). <BR/><BR/>I like the TTA in WDW not because its a great experience, but its an amuzing way to kill time while waiting for my FastPass time on Space Mountain or Buzz. Plus on a hot day, its great to be on an attraction where you get a breeze.<BR/><BR/>I hate to say it, but the best thing I like about Its a Small World at Disneyland is 13 minutes of air conditioning on a very hot day in a park that has few spaces to sit down and cool off. <BR/><BR/>If you ran the original Jungle Cruise today, I think the lines would be very short. I go back not because of plastic hippos and butterflys but because I love the spiel of the skipper and the occasional surprise of a new joke or exceptional delivery. <BR/><BR/>Space Mountain has a thin story (rocket trip to outer space), the Rockin' Roller Coaster has much more story and I like both attractions. I frankly didn't like the Paris edition of the Rockin' Roller Coaster which chopped the story and just went with a bunch of show lighting and no scenery. I think the Anahiem version of Space is a better coaster because the sound track provides for a more immersive experience. Spiderman over at Universal is both immersive and thrilling with a plot and has incredible return value. I could do without the horrible lead-in plot of being sent out in the "Scoop" though.<BR/><BR/>For all of you who don't like story attractions, I assume you'd rip out most of the Fanstasyland dark rides which are generally retelling the story of the movie. Most of these were created on Walt's watch. I would have preferred the Toyko Pooh ride in both US parks, but frankly I think Pooh had a little more going for it than Mr. Toad's 100% plywood scenery. <BR/><BR/>So yes, I like immersive experiences, and I like stories both in Disney attractions. I dislike preachy or non-sensical story lines (let's see, we'll help chase the desperate poachers who are armed with machine guns and we're armed with SLR cameras). Superstar limo has a stupid plot and dialog. DCA's Paradise Pier neither immerses you in a new world, nor has much of any story. The cheesy Dinosaur carnival at AK has the same problem. I can go to a cheesy carnival about an hour from home for $20. I don't need to fly to WDW and pay $60-70 for the same experience. <BR/><BR/>So an attraction can be good with or without a specific plot. A bad or boring plot, horrible dialog or a non-immersive environment produces a really bad ride not worthy of being in a Disney park.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165631130482982512006-12-08T18:25:00.000-08:002006-12-08T18:25:00.000-08:00Instead of "All about the story," it should be "al...Instead of "All about the story," it should be "all about the fun."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165601051886407732006-12-08T10:04:00.000-08:002006-12-08T10:04:00.000-08:00I'm coming late to this party, and strangevoices ...I'm coming late to this party, and strangevoices has already made most of the points I wanted to, but I just wanted to throw my support behind the gist of this article.<BR/><BR/>As has been mentioned, Pirates and the Mansion have such incredible repeat value because your attention is not being grabbed by any specific element. You are free to look in all directions and be entertained. This also prevents the Imagineers from being lazy...if the experience needs to be viable when looking in any direction, it means the environment has to be completely fleshed out.<BR/><BR/>When your attention is being drawn to specific elements, it actually encourages the Imagineers to tone down the rest of the set, in the interest of focusing attention. It actually discourages the creation of full, immersive sets.<BR/><BR/>The worst sort of forced story elements are those that involve the dreaded "oh my, something has gone wrong!" plots which are interesting once and only once.<BR/><BR/>To use an example from this thread, <I>Magic Journeys</I> provided a full on adventure, whereas in <I>HISTA</I> it's explained that all the fun is actually an accident.<BR/><BR/>This basic problem of immersion is also evident when you compare the original Figment Imagination ride (which encourages you to use your own brain because it's fun and it advances society) with the new versions, in which the premise is that imagination is something to be inflicted upon the guest without any effort on their part.<BR/><BR/>The showstopper of the Energy pavilion is not Ellen's annoying yapping or the linear story which is boring upon repeat viewings, but the dinosaur environment, which is there for no other reason than to create an experience.Captain Schnemohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15112333068173312142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165279354264419242006-12-04T16:42:00.000-08:002006-12-04T16:42:00.000-08:00To the poisons: DCA doesn't story-tell AT ALL. Wit...To the poisons: DCA doesn't story-tell AT ALL. With the exception of the movies (two 3D and one standard), Monsters Inc, and MAYBE Tower of Terror, it doesn't tell any stories. Because DCA is more of a clean AMUSEMENT park and NOT a THEME park. It was built as a reaction to Magic Mountain and Knott's move toward thrills.<BR/>Although, I believe that DCA has GREAT potential, IF they would invest the money.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165199954577419952006-12-03T18:39:00.000-08:002006-12-03T18:39:00.000-08:00Ian: "Walt and his cronies" followed by a defense ...Ian: "Walt and his cronies" followed by a defense of poor widdle WDI getting "attacked." Okay, guess we know where you stand then.<BR/><BR/>Ted: "how do you explain most of DCA?" I explain it by saying it SUCKS, in part because of ham-handed and unnecessary "storytelling."<BR/><BR/>Jason: "I just don't see Winnie the Pooh as a glaring example of why we all have to "fight" for a better WDI. They are doing a pretty damn good job of entertaining millions of people and things like this get a little too trivial for my liking." Yeah, I know, just look at those huge lines outside Pooh! And boy they sure did need Fastpass for that, right?<BR/><BR/>"I am just sick of people pointing out what is so terribly wrong with Disney's newer rides." Then perhaps you belong on a different blog? Say, one that isn't devoted to an honest evaluation of how WDI is messing up and how to make it better? If you want rose-colored glasses, you've come to the wrong place.<BR/><BR/>Merlin: "Bottom-line thinking gets you DCA and Winnie-the-Pooh." EXACTLY. Thank you.<BR/><BR/>Floyd: "Just for the record, we were scolded by Walt in a "Jungle Book" story meeting back in 1966. Can you guess what Walt said? "You guys worry too much about the story!" ::genuflects:: Thank you for this input here, truly.<BR/><BR/>Strangevoices: "Just the very simple addition of the few Sparrow animatronics suddenly put a focus on a specific storyline. You no longer were participating, you were watching. Your attention had to focus on the story - you lost that control."<BR/><BR/>You said it perfectly. <BR/><BR/>People seem to be confusing the point of the post: Story ELEMENTS are great... an overdone STORY being told AT the audience takes it from a first-person immersion to a third-person passive role. THAT is the difference. And that is where WDI is messing up.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Geoff: "I'm waiting for them to add a Eddie Murphy Audio-Animatron to The Haunted Mansion" Yeah, I'm actually surprised they didn't...<BR/><BR/>"Theres not a whole lot of new rides for the Parents and children to enjoy together." Which, IIRC, is the entire POINT of Disneyland and why the park was created -- the ultimate FAMILY experience, designed to keep the family together throughout the park, with something for everyone to enjoy on all the rides.<BR/><BR/>Starman: "stories are cheap (you can put one in a paperback novel), but immersive environments are difficult and expensive. So it's not surprising that the accountants push story - it's a cheap way to fill a ride - you can do it with cardboard cutouts and statues instead of full motion animatronics and great scenic design" Ohhhhh did you hit on something here! Brilliant!!<BR/><BR/>Okay, that's long enough. 8-)The Polsonshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04419628721431937773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165111962027583942006-12-02T18:12:00.000-08:002006-12-02T18:12:00.000-08:00This thread has made me think very deeply, and I t...This thread has made me think very deeply, and I thank you all for the very insightful comments. I'd like to make two more points if I could.<BR/><BR/>One is, when you think back in your memories, what means more to you - stories or immersive environment? For example, when I think of stories of my grandmother, they are almost in black and white - I remember the events, but they have no depth. But when I think of something immersive (like the smells and sights in her pantry) I get a glorious world of feelings and emotions a simple story would never stir up in me.<BR/><BR/>Two is that stories are cheap (you can put one in a paperback novel), but immersive environments are difficult and expensive. So it's not surprising that the accountants push story - it's a cheap way to fill a ride - you can do it with cardboard cutouts and statues instead of full motion animatronics and great scenic design.<BR/><BR/>A great example of this is the original Imagination Ride in Epcot (fully immersive - a truly wondrous environment) - and the latest incarnation - (it tells a story, but is a shadow of it's former self).<BR/><BR/>I remember a giant book of horror stories being pushed open by something unseen, with puffs of smoke and eerie lights behind the cover. Now all we get are metal doors with geeky-sounding names painted on them - maybe good for a chuckle the first time you see them, but clearly devoid of any feeling.<BR/><BR/>I go to Disney parks because of how they make me feel. Get rid of the skunk - I want to smell the roses again...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165110279829487602006-12-02T17:44:00.000-08:002006-12-02T17:44:00.000-08:00How right you are Strangevoices..whereas I know I ...How right you are Strangevoices..<BR/><BR/>whereas I know I am not old enough to have some of the life experiences that have provided some people with their inherent wisdom, heck i didn't even know what "e-ticket, c-ticket, etc." was until a few days ago, but what I lack in life experience, i hope i make up in wisdom..<BR/><BR/>Two major things I see with the parks as they are now, <BR/>1)theres not a whole lot of new rides for the Parents and children to enjoy together..take "It's tough to be a Bug" when I saw that two weeks ago there was alot of crying kids being carried out of the theatre because they were scared (thats not fun)<BR/>the Pooh ride is mainly only fun (I'm discussing the WDW version) <BR/><BR/>2)The whole "Fastpass" system. Now i know we aren't discussing this directly, but this system for some rides is pointless, and for other rides, it is not only annoying but also tends to make the ride que longer. For Instance, Dinosaur in Animal Kingdom, is one ride where this systme has gone wrong, the ride's regular que wasn't terribley long so we decided in that over the fastpass, by the time they finished continuously letting the fastpassers in(they have a set wait time for letting them in and then stopping them) the ride que went from what would have been maybe a 30 minute wait to a 2 hour wait...thats ridiculous, and theres things that don't necessarily need the fastpass, "Spaceship Earth" for instance does not require this fastpass system, because the line is contantly moving, and never is a long wait even at the worst of times...<BR/><BR/>Now where these are not the worst things wrong with the parks, they are some things that need to be fixed over time or the quality of entertainment at the parks will continue to decline. <BR/><BR/>to the topic at hand however, Plot and story are necessary, like someone said on Dinosaur it adds to the suspense of the ride, Mission Space it adds to the intreague(sp?) of the "mission" but on other rides PoC for instance it has gone too far and has destroyed the rides, original premise, I'm waiting for them to add a Eddie Murphy Audio-Animatron to The Haunted Mansion, at the rate that Disney's going, that might not be too far off. Though i will admit i did sword dance with a cast member in front of PoC (hey I'm still only 22, so I can still play like the big kid I am :-P ) <BR/><BR/>Though I want to continue to enjoy the Disney Parks, I wonder if I will continue to enjoy them, when I am my parents age and I'm taking my kids to see WDW..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165081406288034772006-12-02T09:43:00.000-08:002006-12-02T09:43:00.000-08:00It's not so much a matter of whether or not a stor...It's not so much a matter of whether or not a story exists, but how it works in a medium such as a dark ride. Traditional media, such as TV or movies, are essentially linear, 2 dimensional stories. You need a very structured story line to hold it together. You also need it to hold the audience's focus - after all there is no surrounding environment.<BR/><BR/>Rides are very different in that respect. Instead of being a third person watching the movie, you are a character within the world the story has created. The best rides are those that are most able to immerse yourself in that world. In some ways this explains why the TTA in Walt Disney World is still so loved even though there is nothing to it - it immerses the guest into a world of the future. <BR/><BR/>The difference between a ride with too much story versus a good back story is the storyline itself. If the storyline is too structured, then the guest becomes passive - they are observing, and not part of that environment. Again, some of the best rides don't have that element to them - they provide a story outline, they provide a basic plot structure and key points in that plot, but they leave the storyline open enough that the guest is now involved in that setting. Ultimately they are deciding how they participate in that environment, as a character, as an observer, etc.<BR/><BR/>A great example is the new Pirates in WDW (I have not seen the California version). The old Pirates was an environment. Once you went down the drop, you ended up in a world where Pirates were attacking a village. The storyline was light, and as a guest you could connect with that world. You may have thought you were one of the pirrates having a good time, perhaps an villager esacaping. Or maybe just an innocent bystander. But you got to choose your focus. There were things around you, you were immersed. <BR/><BR/>The new ride dropped the level of the background music and sounds. Just the very simple addition of the few Sparrow animatronics suddenly put a focus on a specific storyline. You no longer were participating, you were watching. Your attention had to focus on the story - you lost that control. Sure some of the effects hit you at a deeper level physically - they create more immediate and intenese reactions, but they change your involvement in the ride to one of reaction, and not involvement.<BR/><BR/>Not every ride has hit this point yet. But they slowly seem to be heading in that direction. What I am worried about most is how this may play out in the non-ride areas - if infact the urge to create storyline overlays might start expressing itself in some of the World Showcase countries, perhaps, changing them from a place of exploration to one of passiv viewership.<BR/><BR/><BR/>As an aside, addressing the why people have to be critical of what WDW is doing, I guess I see it quite differently. I think that by just accepting what is wrong is the very same as promotig regression. As you see it as negative, many of us see it as an attempt to focus on improvement and how to do things even better.<BR/><BR/>I, for one, don't believe that Disney is as strong as it was at one point, and don't believe that it has the same reputation - or interest - as it once did. How many of us have heard a friend or collegue express that Disney is for kids, or is too pushy, or too fake? While our first reaction is to dismiss those people as unimaginative or critical, we should really try to understand why they feel the way they do. Ultimately Disney doesn't make it's money just on fans - it makes it's money by drawing everyone to it's gates. We need to lok at how we can better attract a wide range of audiences, and not just fans.StrangeVoiceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06461535206083562899noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165038722092476282006-12-01T21:52:00.000-08:002006-12-01T21:52:00.000-08:00Just for the record, we were scolded by Walt in a ...Just for the record, we were scolded by Walt in a "Jungle Book" story meeting back in 1966.<BR/><BR/>Can you guess what Walt said? "You guys worry too much about the story!"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165028500526504372006-12-01T19:01:00.000-08:002006-12-01T19:01:00.000-08:00I didn't think the WDW version was very good eithe...I didn't think the WDW version was very good either - - but it had the bouncing Tigger cars gimmick and it was in Fantasyland, anyway. Otherwise another flat cheapie ride by. But since WDW is full of that sort of iffy attaction, it feels more at home... <BR/><BR/>The original Disneyland deserves Tokyo's plush Pooh - - in Fantasyland, please.Merlin Joneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13397520005969644808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165015743127772442006-12-01T15:29:00.000-08:002006-12-01T15:29:00.000-08:00It's the difference between being told a story and...It's the difference between being told a story and dreaming it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1165003418552633722006-12-01T12:03:00.000-08:002006-12-01T12:03:00.000-08:00a statue of Michael Eisner belongs in front of Sle...<I>a statue of Michael Eisner belongs in front of Sleeping Beauty's castle.</I><BR/><BR/>Thanks, Mr. Banks, that was an image I didn't need.<BR/><BR/>The last time I rode Winnie the Pooh at Disneyland, I thought the loud music and loud, clashing colors would likely frighten its target audience. <I>I</I> certainly came out of it with a headache both times I rode. The little bee tiles at the edge of the load/unload area are the most charming thing about the whole attraction.<BR/><BR/>Winnie the Pooh at WDW, on the other hand, was a nice little C-ticket I enjoyed very much. Other than softening the music and the colors, I'm not quite sure what the explicit changes were, but I found the overall ride experience had been much improved in the cloning process. Now, if we can just get rid of that awful little playground across the way...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1164992353265264702006-12-01T08:59:00.000-08:002006-12-01T08:59:00.000-08:00To Merlin Jones:AMEN. You said it better than I co...To Merlin Jones:<BR/><BR/>AMEN. You said it better than I could.<BR/><BR/>In addition, let's not forget that Winnie the Pooh, an English bear from the English countryside, belongs in Frontierland as much as a statue of Michael Eisner belongs in front of Sleeping Beauty's castle.<BR/><BR/>And let us not forget that the Winnie the Pooh ride is yet another trend to replace older E-Ticket attractions with C attractions.<BR/><BR/>And let us not forget that Winnie the Pooh at Disneyland was driven by marketing and accounting rather than the out-of-the-box think tank that is WDI at its best.<BR/><BR/>To be fair, Disneyland's Winnie the Pooh ride would have made for fabulous window displays along main street. <BR/><BR/>Now, back to being a proud 'traditionalist dweeb geek'. With Merlin at the fore, I'm in great company.Mr Bankshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12952506736745891323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1164989372101267562006-12-01T08:09:00.000-08:002006-12-01T08:09:00.000-08:00>>If Winnie the Pooh sucks so much, or if WDI suck...>>If Winnie the Pooh sucks so much, or if WDI sucks so much then what are your ideas to change it?<<<BR/><BR/>Well, there is perfectly good example of a cool Winnie-the-Pooh ride in Tokyo VS Anaheim, so you could start with that. <BR/><BR/>But if you were to take the Disneyland version alone, here are some ideas to improve it right off the top, since you asked: 1) Vehicles that make some sense in the environment or have an element of the plausible impossible - not just the impossible (or in this case, ridiculous). 2) A more immersive, clear, intruguing and clever visual layout. 3) Better effects that truly bring the moments to life and surprise and bring wonder to the rider - that fully transport one to the 100 Acre Wood of popular imagination. 3) Full motion characters instead of statues - characters that express personality and life. 4) Better art direction that refelects the early films and books. 5) More charm and whimsy and imagination. 6) A tone that delights all ages, not just the tiniest of tots.<BR/><BR/>There are plenty of people with great ideas out there... but you need a management that appreciates the difference and is prepared to empower that vision. Bottom-line thinking gets you DCA and Winnie-the-Pooh. It doesn't matter who has the jobs if no one in management will help them to succeed.<BR/><BR/>>>Do you not think that audiences have changed in the last 50 years? Obviously you are a traditionalist, but i'm sure you still spend lots of money going to the Disney parks and buying all their merch and at the end of the day that is what Disney sees from you, not your blog efforts.<<<BR/><BR/>It always amuses me that the biggest insult WDC management apologists can muster is to use reductive terms like "Traditionalist," "Purist," "Fan," "Disneyana Fan," or "Geek" or "Dweeb" in their tired attempts at facillitation for stale corporate thinking. By now I think people like this would have noticed that most "geeks" in and out of the Company who have a passion for the works of Walt Disney could care less about these silly labels - some even wear them proudly. They care about the ideas and the art, not just the politics. And these are the types of people who have always created magic at Pixar, WDFA and WDI. Still do.<BR/><BR/>It's never been about "old" and "new." It doesn't matter how old the thing is, but how it plays with the guests. By and large, Walt's stuff still plays better and lasts longer. What can we learn from that rich tradition that we can enhance, apply and take forward with new technology and fresh ideas and themes? That's the WED challenge.<BR/><BR/>Stale is stale, boring is boring, fun is fun - and inspiration is timeless. With or without a plot, backstory, wisecracks or secret language.Merlin Joneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13397520005969644808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1164961025141193532006-12-01T00:17:00.000-08:002006-12-01T00:17:00.000-08:00Imagineering, like any true art form, is not a tan...Imagineering, like any true art form, is not a tangible definable thing, with hard and fast rules. Consequently it's difficult to say "this is how you do it" or "don't do this". Perhaps that's been my problem with a lot of articles on this blog; it's interesting to make broad generalizations or ask philosophical questions about past decisions, but you can never truly say "this was the only way for this attraction to be done" or "this is how things must be designed". No two Imagineers would do something the same way. So this article kinda falls in the same category- trying to nail down one of those semi essential rules.<BR/><BR/>Going on the previously established definitions of story and plot, I'm finding that while story can make for a fun attraction, it gets older faster. Now for the average guest that may take 5 or 10 years. For a frequent park guest (AP) an attraction can lose it's luster in 2 or 3 years. I absolutely loved the Indiana Jones attraction when it first opened- it was the future of Attractions as far as I was concerned. Now, I could care less about it. I find myself getting agitated just thinking going about it and I've discovered it's all the story elements that bother me. I find myself wishing that the queue was less elaborate, and that there was no filmstrip. The ride itself is fun, but I find that I just want the experience. I want to ride in the jeep and go through the temple but I don't want to think about the plot. It sounds rediculous and mind you I'm only concious of it after much much introspection. But it's like after seeing the same movie over and over again (even if it's your favorite movie) you just can't stand to watch it again. you like it, but your brain just doesn't want that input anymore because it's saturated. Whereas attractions like the Haunted Mansion are less proactive with input. Stuff is certainly there for you to absorb and being slower it's much easier to take in scenery etc...but you are not force fed information and there's nothing to keep track of. You simply take in what you choose to take in. How many times have we heard that you can ride pirates and HM 20 times and still find something new. Not necessarily a new figure or a new prop, but certainly you come to appreciate overall design or color or whatever as your observations evolve. With Indy and obviously the filmed attractions (Muppets, HISTA, and even Star Tours) there's only so much to take in. Once you've seen it, tehre's nothing else to get. That doesn't mean they are bad attractions, they just don't affect guests the same way.<BR/><BR/>So basically I guess my point is, the story attractions are very rigid, they leave less room for your own interpretation. The plot (I almost want to say "theme") attractions put you into the environment and stuff is happening around you, but you get to choose what you focus on.<BR/><BR/>If I were less tired I'd write a really lengthy comparison of the Domestic Haunted mansions vs. Phantom Manor...Eric Scaleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12149591952925380521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1164959782869479892006-11-30T23:56:00.000-08:002006-11-30T23:56:00.000-08:00Mr B - This is a terrific blog and I love that you...Mr B - This is a terrific blog and I love that you are "fighting for WDI" or whatever, and that's great, but this particular post just rubs me the wrong way. I guess i'll bow down to your almighty Pixar-ness sword and declare defeat. By all means, I'd love to hear your rebuttle. I just don't see Winnie the Pooh as a glaring example of why we all have to "fight" for a better WDI. They are doing a pretty damn good job of entertaining millions of people and things like this get a little too trivial for my liking.<BR/><BR/>I am just sick of people pointing out what is so terribly wrong with Disney's newer rides when it is obvious that WDI trying to evolve and stay fresh, no matter how much say the pencil pushers have. <BR/><BR/>All of the latest attractions and shows have been superb, innovative and well put together. Complaining that the safari has a "gleeful" storyline just seems like a trivial thing to complain about. I don't know how bitter someone has to be to not enjoy Winnie the Pooh, it's easy to be critical I guess. <BR/><BR/>-JasonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1164955572626723182006-11-30T22:46:00.000-08:002006-11-30T22:46:00.000-08:00Wow, Jason! You bring up so many points that are s...Wow, Jason! You bring up so many points that are so ripe for rebuttal that I don't even know where to begin.<BR/><BR/>So I won't begin.<BR/><BR/>If you delight in the new Winnie the Pooh attraction at Disneyland and squeel with glee when you realize the baby elephant is safe after your African Safari then more power to you. <BR/><BR/>For the rest of us fighting for a more empowered WDI, time to get back to work.Mr Bankshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12952506736745891323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1164954326102284622006-11-30T22:25:00.001-08:002006-11-30T22:25:00.001-08:00Chesirekatz, so you are saying that audiences shou...Chesirekatz, so you are saying that audiences should not be given the respect that they can actually think and put in some mental effort to follow a storyline? Audiences just want a dumbed down experience? Do you not think that audiences have changed in the last 50 years? <BR/><BR/>Obviously you are a traditionalist, but i'm sure you still spend lots of money going to the Disney parks and buying all their merch and at the end of the day that is what Disney sees from you, not your blog efforts. <BR/><BR/>I can also point out things that are "wrong" with new rides - that is easy. But I can also point out things that were wrong with old classic rides too. <BR/><BR/>Does the fact that the Safari has a "rescue" plotline REALLY take away from all the fun you are having at WDW?? really? is it really the end of the world? is it REALLY the worst thing that could happen to a ride like that? Don't you realize that the point to the safari is to teach people about the dangers of poaching? They want you to care about these animals, not just look at them. <BR/><BR/>I can't see how Winnie the Pooh is a terrible ride, Ted. It doesn't have a storyline, per se but it has a linear progression that even a 5 year old can follow. It's a fun and silly ride and that is what it should be, sure a more obvious storyline might help a brain like yours follow along, but until then you'll just have to ride it with a frown. <BR/><BR/>There are too many harsh critics that just say things for the sake of saying them. This stubborn attitude towards every new ride is getting old. If Winnie the Pooh sucks so much, or if WDI sucks so much then what are your ideas to change it? What are you doing about it? Are YOU working towards becoming an Imagineer? Or are you just going to complain on the internet? <BR/><BR/>This article raises some interesting points for sure, and I think all sides have some good arguments for sure, but the whole WDI today vs WDI yesterday is getting old and I have yet to see a really strong argument that proves WDI is going down the tubes, everything has been trivial opinions from obsessed supergeeks. <BR/><BR/>-JasonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1164954302311924822006-11-30T22:25:00.000-08:002006-11-30T22:25:00.000-08:00Chesirekatz, so you are saying that audiences shou...Chesirekatz, so you are saying that audiences should not be given the respect that they can actually think and put in some mental effort to follow a storyline? Audiences just want a dumbed down experience? Do you not think that audiences have changed in the last 50 years? <BR/><BR/>Obviously you are a traditionalist, but i'm sure you still spend lots of money going to the Disney parks and buying all their merch and at the end of the day that is what Disney sees from you, not your blog efforts. <BR/><BR/>I can also point out things that are "wrong" with new rides - that is easy. But I can also point out things that were wrong with old classic rides too. <BR/><BR/>Does the fact that the Safari has a "rescue" plotline REALLY take away from all the fun you are having at WDW?? really? is it really the end of the world? is it REALLY the worst thing that could happen to a ride like that? Don't you realize that the point to the safari is to teach people about the dangers of poaching? They want you to care about these animals, not just look at them. <BR/><BR/>I can't see how Winnie the Pooh is a terrible ride, Ted. It doesn't have a storyline, per se but it has a linear progression that even a 5 year old can follow. It's a fun and silly ride and that is what it should be, sure a more obvious storyline might help a brain like yours follow along, but until then you'll just have to ride it with a frown. <BR/><BR/>There are too many harsh critics that just say things for the sake of saying them. This stubborn attitude towards every new ride is getting old. If Winnie the Pooh sucks so much, or if WDI sucks so much then what are your ideas to change it? What are you doing about it? Are YOU working towards becoming an Imagineer? Or are you just going to complain on the internet? <BR/><BR/>This article raises some interesting points for sure, and I think all sides have some good arguments for sure, but the whole WDI today vs WDI yesterday is getting old and I have yet to see a really strong argument that proves WDI is going down the tubes, everything has been trivial opinions from obsessed supergeeks. <BR/><BR/>-JasonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22576594.post-1164951612958062522006-11-30T21:40:00.000-08:002006-11-30T21:40:00.000-08:00I gotta say I disagree. Yes. HM and Pirates and ...I gotta say I disagree. Yes. HM and Pirates and Small World have minimal plots (though Small World clearly is a traveloge finishing up in the grand "we are the world" finale). But rides like Star Tours Peter Pan and Splash have story-like elements. Much of Epcot's Futureworld also has narrative. Indy, a ride almost EVERYONE agrees at the time was cutting edge has a strong storyline and plot.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com