Next year, not only the whole resort turns twenty, but also the Walt Disney Studios Park celebrates its tenth anniversary.
When the park opened most Disney Parks fans were disappointed and I have to admit I didn't like the park, too, when I first visited in 2006. I have been to DLRP before, but WDS wasn't open yet. The park was small, you have done all attraction within a few hours and the theming was and is still bad, at least in my opinion.
In 2008 we visited Walt Disney World and I really enjoyed Disney's Hollywood Studios a lot. The park is very well themed and the attractions, a mix of thrill rides, shows, exhibitions, musicals and dark rides, were great. After that I was even more disappointed with the sister park in France.
In the same year we returned to DLRP and I don't know why, but I really enjoyed WDS. With the addition of TOT, Hollywood Blvd. and Crush's Coaster, the park had some lovely areas, although it is still far away from the theming found in DHS in Florida. The attractions found in both parks are better in Paris than Orlando, I think that's because, they are newer. In addition WDS features one of the best Disney attractions: Cinemagique!
Although WDS is still small and needs more theming, the park has very good attractions which are really worth to do.
In my opinion the park isn't already a "real" Disney park, but until TSPL opened, it was on the way to become one. I don't want to start a new discussion about the recent additions, but I still think it ruined the Studios theme, since according to some Imagineers, the park was designed to resemble a Movie Studio.
There are still a lot of people who hate the park, but over the last ten years WDS improved and now I really like to spend my time there. Of course it is not as beautiful as DLP and lacks attractions, restaurants, shops and more theming, but with the addition of the rumoured Ratatouille ride including a shop and a restaurant, the park is on a good way.
So what do you think about Walt Disney Studios? Do you hate the park or do you think the park deserves to use the name "Walt Disney"? What would you want to see in the future?
In one word; Meh.
It's not bad but the fact that if I were to go back to DLP I wouldn't devote any more than three-quarters of a day to it says a lot. As for future additions, unfortunately Toy Story Playland continues what was set up with Toon Studio, which personally I don't like.
I'd like the park to go a similar way to Universal Orlando, where instead of being a "real studio" you, as Universal put it, "ride the movies", giving a much more artistic license.
Anyway, I think this could be an interesting topic.
Hmmm, with the age of my kids, we can actually spend a full day and another half enjoying the place. While WDSP is not the greatest park ever, to me, it has always been better than the sister park in Florida in so many ways. What is painful is that although ToT and the additions over the years have made it look better, they have cut the entertainment. When WDSP first opened, it was FULL of entertainment. I remember one day alone seeing 8 different muscial groups and 3 streetmousphere groups. It was a real Disney park in that guise, something that had been lacking from DLP since aboue 1996. And for that I fell in love. I have been in real TV/film studios in the US and UK, and WDSP was well themed, in that it looked like a Studio. And that was the problem for so many.
It has always been the most civilised place to meet characters too. So I have a lot of love for the place (we can easily spend an hour as a family in the Art of Animation - drawing zoetropes is one of my daughter's favourite things in the whole resort). Cinemagique and Moteurs Action I think are 2 of the best things Disney has ever produced outside of a MK style park, and our version of Tower of Terror and RNR Coaster beat Fla IMHO (as does the tram tour).
What the park needs is a body of water somewhere, an evening show, a family dark ride, and a good highly themed table service restaurant to round it out IMHO, then it would be really great.
Stitch Live and Playhouse Disney are better than the Disney Channel Tour, and I prefer Stitch Live to Turtle Talk. I actually really like Armageddon (though I was annoyed they did it in French the other week when 90% said they were English speakers - it is designed to be bilingual - I can speak French, but my family cannot, if we were in the minority, fine, but we weren't). And Animagique was cute.
Let us not talk about the post ToT additions however.
I really like the studios and really like to spend the day there. I personally I have never understood how people say you can do all the attractions in half a day, if you run round like a maniac rushing everything you probably could, but if you do that no wonder you don't enjoy the park.
For thrills its a great park with RnR, ToT and Crush (RC maybe? Can't comment there as I haven't been since TSPL was added)
For shows its brilliant, Moteurs action is one of my favourite shows, Animagique is really nice and Cinemagique is brilliant.
Then you have the parade, Armageddon, tram tour, Stitch, TSPL, Cars, Animation, Carpets, theres really is bundles at the Studios now. :)
I also just really like the atmosphere of walking through Studio 1, gives you that Disney feeling that your at DLP and about to have a great day :D/
Oh and I love that little caravan restaurant at the back by Moteurs, really nice and cosy in there.
So yeah Studio's gets a big :thumbs: from me!
And the Studios had a fantastic jazz band on the other week. When was the last time you saw a fantastic large music group at DLP?
I have never seen any live bands in the parks.
Quote from: "spicy"I really like the studios and really like to spend the day there. I personally I have never understood how people say you can do all the attractions in half a day, if you run round like a maniac rushing everything you probably could, but if you do that no wonder you don't enjoy the park.
In 2006 we did all attractions except the former Television Tour in half a day. We have been there in April and the crowds were low and back then there were only a few rides. And you are right, I didn't enjoy the park a lot and so we just rushed through the park. There was no greenery, just a few buildings, no shops and WDS didn't feel like a Disney park to me.
But in 2008 it changed and now we like to spend some time there, although we have never spent the whole day there. We always hop between the parks. The walking distance is a huge advantage of DLRP.
I do like the park - what is has is great. The entrance courtyard, Studio One, Hollywood Blvd., Tower of Terror and the Toon Studio Expansion (incl. Toy Story Playland) all have thumbs up from me (albeit Toon Studios needs some sort of sign that its still a working studio area eg A place the toons go to work).
In terms of size, I dont mind it being small at all, in fact I think it works better as a smaller park, but they really need to beef it up a bit, cram it with a few rides and better themeing before expanding or building second-class rides. All it needs it themeing. And greenery.
If you keep your eyes up (away from the tarmac) it isnt bad at all - just needs a wee bit filling inbetween what it has. Ok - a lot of filling. PUMP IN THAT FILLING, EURODISNEY.
Quote from: "Columbiad"In terms of size, I dont mind it being small at all, in fact I think it works better as a smaller park, but they really need to beef it up a bit, cram it with a few rides and better themeing before expanding or building second-class rides. All it needs it themeing. And greenery.
DHS is also a smaller park, and there we did nearly all attraction in less than a day and still had time to go to another park. What do you mean with second-class rides? I consider carnival rides like the ones in TSPL as second class rides. Totally agree that WDS needs more greenery, a nicer theming and a lake. I would prefere a lake at the end of an expanded Hollywood Blvd. In addition the park desperately needs a first class ride, like a heavily themed family dark ride. For me the new Little Mermaid attraction at DCA would be such an attraction. Hopefully Ratatouille will be such a ride.
Quote from: "dagobert"What do you mean with second-class rides? I consider carnival rides like the ones in TSPL as second class rides.... In addition the park desperately needs a first class ride, like a heavily themed family dark ride.
Yeah - whislt the TSPL rides add some fun and greenery and colour to the park, it can't be denied that they are basic rides. But I think the park needs both amazing rides (like dark rides) and not-so-amazing rides. The park needs some filler.
Ratatouille will hopefully be a fantastic addition. Whilst I'm jumping for joy at the possibilty of its addition, I can't help feeling the other areas of the park need a bit of TLC first, before they carry on plussung Toon Studio.
I'd love to see some substantial facade's for Rock and Rollercoaster, or Armageddon, or Moteurs...Action!. Or to see Production Courtyard given a Theatre makeover or a 1960s Television studios feel.
Quote from: "Columbiad"Yeah - whislt the TSPL rides add some fun and greenery and colour to the park, it can't be denied that they are basic rides. But I think the park needs both amazing rides (like dark rides) and not-so-amazing rides. The park needs some filler.
Ratatouille will hopefully be a fantastic addition. Whilst I'm jumping for joy at the possibilty of its addition, I can't help feeling the other areas of the park need a bit of TLC first, before they carry on plussung Toon Studio.
I'd love to see some substantial facade's for Rock and Rollercoaster, or Armageddon, or Moteurs...Action!. Or to see Production Courtyard given a Theatre makeover or a 1960s Television studios feel.
I totally agree with you that the park needs TLC and I can't wait to see the Theatre makeover for Production Courtyard. Nevertheless I think at the moment it is more important that WDS gets a family dark ride. After Ratatouille the focus should be on transforming Prodcution Courtyard and Backlot. Honestly I like the Backlot area, except the exterior of RnRC, because it looks a lot like a movie studio I have visited in Germany a few years ago.
Too much concrete, I wish they would put a nice little lake in or something! I'm also not too amused with Toy Story Playland...Well, Walt IS pointing you in the direction of the other park!
^It looks like a movie studio? I think that Disney have achieved what they set out to do then..?
The problem is, that people that pay much money won´t see a real movie studio. They want a studio of dreams. I worked a long period in a real movie and TV studio. It wasn´t nice/yellow/green. Studios are concret fields where everything is just one thing: handy. Big routes, big doors much technical support. Nothing you want to see.
For me WDS made a big step over the last year. They had much investments. We have to see that while we are complaining that TWDC forget Paris.
The point is: To switch a real studio into a studio of dreams is a long process. For me they are now maybe near their starting point. WDS in 2011 could be the park that they needed nearly 10 years before, with some additional theming in some areas.
Quote from: "Riebi"The problem is, that people that pay much money won´t see a real movie studio. They want a studio of dreams. I worked a long period in a real movie and TV studio. It wasn´t nice/yellow/green. Studios are concret fields where everything is just one thing: handy. Big routes, big doors much technical support. Nothing you want to see.
For me WDS made a big step over the last year. They had much investments. We have to see that while we are complaining that TWDC forget Paris.
The point is: To switch a real studio into a studio of dreams is a long process. For me they are now maybe near their starting point. WDS in 2011 could be the park that they needed nearly 10 years before, with some additional theming in some areas.
I think that's the point! WDS will never be a real working studio, like the Universal Studios in Hollywood. There the themepark is just adjacent to a real movie studio. In Florida Disney tried to create a real movie studio inside a themepark, but now it is closed. The same in Paris with WD Feature Animation. Maybe it would really be better to create a studio of dreams, like Riebi called it. DHS is also dedicated to the Hollywood that never was and always will be.
I agree with all of you! I think that the park gets a lot of stick (especially on another forum), but the attractions mostly are excellent and front lot must be one of the best entrances to any park in the world. I do find it frustrating that the greening and theming of the original areas could be done relatively cheaply and quickly (just look at how Hollywood Boulevard and the Paris street arrived) but we still have these expanses of dull concrete and tarmac.
I do like WDSP. I think that first of all, is a very nice place for the little ones (Art of Disney, Cinemagique, TSPD, Animagique, Cars Qquatre, Flying Carpets, Playhouse, Slinky Dog, Stitch Live, TSP playground, etc.).
I also used to like the street happenings ie HSM, stand shows, etc. They were giving a happy and "cheer up" atmosphere.
There are few notes however that I would like to mention:
1. needs more and better food and drink choises (ie, in my opinion, Restaurant en Coulisse is the ugliest and unhealthiest place in DLRP)
2. needs more street shows (there are a lot of empty space areas which need to feel up with some kind of happenings or something else)
3. I think that Monsters Street Academy is the stupidest think in DLRP and "out of season" at 2011!
4. a dark ride is a very good idea and something that is missing from WDSP (waiting for Ratatouille hopefully)
5. half of the tram tour is quite borring, needs few more interesting things and Disney has many-many things to show, after so many movies
I had the opportunity at 1990 to spend a day at Universal Studios in LA, and I can still remember so many things that I had to do and to see.
As a bottom line, in my opinion, I have the feeling that WDSP is a very nice place for all of us but not yet completed!
Agree with you all. Wds needs a lot of help. But slowly, we are coming close to getting a park which really deserves the Disney name. If only our second gate got a £1 billion reboot
Just like Parc Disneyland has an advantage being in Europe, in the homeland of the tales that inspired so many Walt Disney films, Walt Disney Studios has a massive advantage in that it can offer the glitz and glamour of show-biz Americana that would seem so vibrant and fresh to Europeans. In this way, I think WDS has an oppertunity to become not only a working studio or peice of ideallic Hollywood, but a slice of America, much like DCA. Like an America away from America.
I'll keep this short. In a nut shell, it has improved a lot, however its a bit of a mess really, with the 'Studios' theme being forgotten in recent additions, such as Toon Studio and TSPL.
But it is becoming more of a day out, rather than a few hours. I LOVE; Animagique, Cinemagique, RnRC, Tower of Terror, Crush, Animation Academy and Studio 1.
But the park IS let down by below par attractions, such as Tram Tour and Armageddon.
Ok, here's mine. When we first visited in 2006 I could probably sum up our experience following something like
1) wonder and excitement, entering the park, beautiful plaza, statues etc and lots of expectations for whats inside
2) puzzled, walking through Studio 1 felt more like entering an indoor market, although we really didn't spend enough time looking for the detail we had expected more of a mainstreet experience here.
3) gradual disappointment, as we realise as the day goes on that this is not another DLP but a collection of experiences some great (Motuers in particular), some not. (We didn't make the most of it though and crazily missed Animagique until 2 trips later, it's now a must for us every year).
Now we can easily spend a day in the park and it offers far better range of attractions for a family with children, I was pleasantly surprised by Stich, Playhouse and Slinky. It's still always feels a bit of a let down for me and needs more atmosphere, landscaping, lake, night show, and entertainment plus another E-ticket would do it for me (not much to ask hey!). I'm not as concerned with theme here as some will be because I think it was broken from the very start so I think a different, perhaps more creative take on theme could work if its delivered with integrity. Saying that, DLP is the only real point of comparison for us apart from UK parks and I'd still choose WDI over a Merlin park anyday (don't get me wrong Chessington and Legoland are a great day out with the kids)
I'd choose WDI over Merlin Park that's for sure. I view the Studios as a work in progress, I've always liked it and view it as a positive step forward for the resort, although not all of the rides are for me. It's not on the scale of other Disney parks at the moment, but it's got to make financial sense. And if you've followed the history of EuroDisney as I have you'll know what I mean by that. Disneyland Park is the main draw and probably always will be as with other Disney Resorts.
however, it is ridiculous that they built a theme park without a single body of water. this is practically unheard of.
They could do with a £1 billion investment, like with California Adventure.
Studio 1 could do with a redesign in my opinion. If they spent twice as much on the interior as they did originally, I bet it could be a great attraction! :D
Yes but that was my point, there wasn't £1 billion to spend on it in the first place and there isn't now. EuroDisney had to raise the money from shareholders and banks, the company had a budget to stick to when they built it. But over time the park will grow, with or without a body of water. Disneyland Paris isn't short of water, Lake Disney.
however, every disney park has a central place, and at the moment, if wdi was given the park, they have said they would put in a lake
in some ways, you feel sorry for eurodisney. they got given a project by disney that was too big, an original second gate design which would have cost almost as much as dlp, and in the end were kind of left to sink by disney
I don't mind having a lake in the Studios, that's OK with me if WDI want to put one in. I didn't know they had said that, but I'm sure they've got plans for the future. I don't think Euro Disney has been left to sink though, and they can always plus the Studios over time now that it's open. Was the studios ever designed to have a lake in it, I've never seen any art work of WDS with a lake? Not that we can always go by that. Disney would have to expand the park a lot to make room for a lake.
Quote from: "ed-uk"Was the studios ever designed to have a lake in it, I've never seen any art work of WDS with a lake? Not that we can always go by that. Disney would have to expand the park a lot to make room for a lake.
I think Disney MGM Studios Europe featured a body of water. I read somewhere about a New York City Waterfront and there was a smaller lake behind Studio 1, but I can't find the concept art anymore.
Since WDS was built as cheap as possible, I can imagine that a lake wasn't planed for the park. At least a fountain was planed for WDS, but it was cancelled:
(//http://www.photosmagiques.com/wdsfans/specials/lost_projects/images/lost_lionking.jpg)
Photo from WDSFans
I really hope that WDS will get a lake, because it will open up the whole park. I prefere a lake behind an extended Hollywood Blvd.
MGM Studios would have been bigger for sure. I think it was ment to be a working film studios with an animation department as well as a theme park.
i meant to say that when it was going to be MGM studios
I walked the minatures of MGM Studios in 1992, it was not much larger or different than what we got. There is a lake and some facades missing, but the other buildings were real soundstages and animation studios. To be honest folks, WDSP when it opened (other than some visuals, and Moteurs Action instead of the Indiana Jones Stunt Show), was not hugely different than what was in the original masterplan.
In my opinion it is good that they changed the name from Disney MGM Studios Europe to Walt Disney Studios Park. I also like the name Disney's Hollywood Studios better than Disney MGM Studios.
Did TWDC really plan to build a real studio with a park in Paris? I know that WDFA France should have moved to the park, but that never happened and then the animastion studio in France was closed. Is DHS still used for movie productions?
Disney used to record TV shows at Disney MGM in Florida and they had an animation department there I believe, but they closed the animation department and I'm not sure if they still record TV shows now it's DHS. I think originally there was going to be an animation department at DIsney MGM Europe? In the end WDS just got the television building/tour.
Correct. MGM in Florida (and Universal Studios in Florida) were designed to be real TV & Film studios with theme park attachements. Neither worked - the local skills were not good enough compared to California or other international locals, the theme park ops (noise) interfered with movie making, and it was not cheap enough. Some things were shot at MGM such as the Mickey Mouse Club with Brittany Spears, Justine Timberlake et al; Star Search, and a few other things, but not great. The animation studios did well though, working on Mulan, Brother Bear, and many others.
In Paris, the plan was to duplicate, but they learned some hard lessons in Florida, and by the time WDSP opened, they had killed off feature animation pretty much (though in the early 90's they were worried if animation Paris would move as they had a great facility not far from the Champs Elyesee). So what opened was a Disney Channel studio, and that was it.
But when it comes to real Movie magic, no one will ever beat Universal Studios in California (though the Warner Bros. walking tour is great too).
Was the "Golden Girls" and "Home Improvements" recorded at Disney MGM Florida? I think Universal Studios in Holywood was the original Studios Tour.
Golden Girls were mainly filmed in California and then the set was moved (like Dinotopia in WDSP), though techincally they did a couple in Florida so they were not lying, similar for Home Improvements (again, most were filmed in California).
Oh, yep, Universal Studios in California was the original tour, over 100 years old - used to provide a box lunch while people watched the silent movies being filmed. Though the concept of the trams, shows and attractions as a part of the experience was really of the late 60's-early 70's. I remember when the Jaws part of the tour and the Bionic Man stunt show were a really big deal!
It's good to know that WDS isn't hugely different from Disney MGM Europe and the original masterplan.
Yep, there was once a thought that there would be a Great Movie Ride and a Sci Fi Dine in, sorry, I should have said these were also missing. But they were both taken off plan very quickly anyway as by 1993, they already had concerns about attendance droping in the Great Movie ride in Florida.
I would have liked the Great Movie ride, that was one of my favourites.
Quote from: "ed-uk"I would have liked the Great Movie ride, that was one of my favourites.
Totally agree. The Great Movie Ride is wonderful and I would like to see it in Paris, too. The Chinese Theatre could be placed behind the lake of an extended Hollywood Blvd. I think they should use the Omnimover system instead of the ride system in Florida. I'm not sure if Disney owns the rights to use the MGM movies in the attraction in Europe as well. But Disney has produced so many great movies under the Touchstone, Miramax and Disney labels that there shouldn't be a problem to find some good movies for the ride.
Me too, though we got Cinemagique as a replacement, and I think that is awesome too. They were worried about language issues on the Gt Movie Ride (though I suppose headphones could have solved that problem).
Quote from: "davewasbaloo"Me too, though we got Cinemagique as a replacement, and I think that is awesome too. They were worried about language issues on the Gt Movie Ride (though I suppose headphones could have solved that problem).
I didn't know that Cinemagique is a replacement for GMR. Cinemagique is indeed awesome. One of our favorites. Headphones would solve the problem, Disney did the same with AODA.
Ya, but if AODA failed, it was a lot cheaper and easier to rip out or retool than an AA laden attraction. remember, when DLP was in planning stages, we did not have many mega coasters like we have now. At the time, the Auctioneer in the PotC was the same cost as the whole Vekoma Corckscrew coaster many European parks were installing.
Of course it is cheaper to change an attraction that doesn't use AAs, but I think GMR would be popular in Paris, too. At the moment the is no AA in Paris. I don't consider the gulls in Crush's Coaster AAs. Will Ratatouille feature AAs, or just projections.
Well, I have not seen much of the detail, but my understanding is things our size might be AA, the larger things film. Though there is one set of plans that may make it 100% film based (and seeing Toy Story Midway Mania, that would not surprise me - both Lego and Disney have a precident of mainly film on a ride attraction, and with the popularity of Spiderman and Harry Potter in IOA, it would not surprise me to see a mix).
Good to hear that there will be AAs. I'm always amazed by that technology. Unfortunately WDI doesn't build them anymore.
Sadly, there is a view that AA's do not impress people much anymore. I am not sure where that is coming from, because I think they are the outstanding features of Disney attractions. But when things like Slinky Dog and the Parachutes seem to please the masses in Paris, the top brass wonder why bother with the more expensive AA attractions (especially when things like Phantom Manor is rarely sited by people as a top fav, or when the Buzz AA is largely ignored by people as they rush past to get on the ride).
Quote from: "davewasbaloo"Sadly, there is a view that AA's do not impress people much anymore. I am not sure where that is coming from, because I think they are the outstanding features of Disney attractions. But when things like Slinky Dog and the Parachutes seem to please the masses in Paris, the top brass wonder why bother with the more expensive AA attractions (especially when things like Phantom Manor is rarely sited by people as a top fav, or when the Buzz AA is largely ignored by people as they rush past to get on the ride).
It would really be interesting why AAs don't impress anymore. MAybe because many people consider them old fashioned and not modern technology, although it is.
I don't know what it is? But Disney currently are spending $1.5 billion on the Next Gen programme, with the blueprint being about interactivity. Hmmmmm, personally I would prefer state of the art AA attractions. But I am in the minority so it seems.
I actually really love the studios and although my five year old daughter doesn't seem to realise how good it is for her experience at DLP (she calls it the "brown park" :D ) we've had a wonderful time spending lots of time with the characters there, we love all the shows with very little queue time, I love the scenery - I LOVE that park!
For me, in all honesty what would make it better is if they got rid of a few if not all the rides and make more movie sets and scenery, little touches that could only be in DLP.
I would love to go and see a replica of the Bank's nursery in Mary Poppins or even shop in Al's Toy Barn. Cinemagique should be the feather in the Studios cap but I ignored the attraction several times over before going to see it because DLP was ridiculously busy and the queue times were outrageous. Animagique is another attraction which is criminally underplayed.
There are some great attractions in the studios that you don't even know are there. One of the biggest problems with Disneyland Paris fullstop is the lack of nice rides for young and old to enjoy. Snow White, Pinoccio and Peter Pan are too dark for my little girl and what the studios allow is for young and old to go to show and enjoy it universally. There's not much that does that in DLP. You can go on a ride like Aladdin's Carpet Ride anywhere but you won't find Stitch Live! or Animagique at your local carnival.
So in conclusion I really like the Studios but would like more of the same (except for the rides thanks!).
I was surprised by Studios Park when we went in March 2011, I'd heard a lot of people saying it was poor and not worth going to, I can only think that perhaps they'd been before it was expanded and newer stuff was added.
Don't want to be controversial, but after 5 days, I think we all actually liked Studios Park a little MORE than Disneyland Park - or at least as much. After three days out of season we'd done nearly every ride and show once, so we talked about which things we'd like to do again. We did the Studio Tram Tour 5 times, Stitch Live & Slinky Dog 3 times, Animagique & Cinemagique twice, and the drawing lessons after the Toon Studio tour thing 5 times (great, free souvenir!).
The Playhouse Disney show, Moteurs Action, Tower of Terror and Crush's Coaster were all loved by our family, and personally, I think walking through Lot one is probably my favourite themed shopping area. The Earful tower, mickey statues etc are lovely theming touches, as are the panavision cameras and lights around the place, and all of the theming in Toy Story Playground (queing in slinky dog's game box was a favourite, as were the brio wooden railway pieces being made into benches and the "peeling" stickers on the hotwheels tracks). Oh, and only the wife braved the Aerosmith coaster, but she enjoyed it!
We also had a lot more success interacting with cast members in the Studios Park as it was less crowded, and the stars & cars parade was pretty cool, you're closer to the characters so can interact more with them (shout their name and they can hear and see you, as they are lower down and closer).
If it wasn't for Star Tours and the Buzz Light Year Laser Blast in Discoveryland our kids would have preferred Studios Park hands down. I look forward to this park expanding and having new stuff added as time goes by - as long as they don't change it too much!
Quote from: "dagobert"It would really be interesting why AAs don't impress anymore. MAybe because many people consider them old fashioned and not modern technology, although it is.
I think the probably isn't that they aren't new technology it just depends how good they are. The new Jack Sparrow AA for example is brilliant. Some of the existing ones in PotC are frankly awful. I'm glad they've currently removed the sword fighting pirates because they were getting worse and worse until they looked ridiculous.
I do wonder about the maintenance cost for AA stuff too. How long can they keep going before they need serious refurb and how much does it cost? Particularly if you want really top quality stuff. That might put them off using too much of it.
I think really good AA looks great and at the same time I think a ride like Crush copes excellently without it (unless you count Bruce - he's sort of AA I suppose although simplistic enough), and the projections of Nemo and Squirt are perfect for that ride. It seems to be so very dependent on what they're creating and what the source material is.
Overall I was underwhelmed with most of the AAs in the two parks, which was a surprise, I was expecting to enjoy them, always been a fan of animatronics in 80s & 90s films, perhaps I expected too much. Most of the ones in Snow White, Peter Pan, Pinocchio etc would have been just as cool as models if they were static. I liked the models, just found the very basic movement distracting.
The Buzz Lightyear one in Laser Blast however was very impressive, probably the best I've seen. C3PO & the fixing droids in Star Tours were brilliant as well. The dragon under the castle was very cool, wish it'd have moved a little more though. Everything in Phantom Manor was cool. Unfortunately in "It's a Small World" many seemed to be broken or stuck, though overall I enjoyed the theme and message of the ride. Pirates of the Caribbean was closed for refurb when we were there.