Home

[-breeno-]

So let´s judge after we know what they will do and not before we know nothing more then a name and [strike:1p5oxxgr]three[/strike:1p5oxxgr] two attractions. This "I don´t know what they exactly do but they do the wrong thing" makes me a bit sad.

Exactly Riebi, we still know very little about this project, the fun starts when the concept art is released :mrgreen:

Oh and i think there will be three attractions, just one won't be a music express

[RnRCj]

I know what you're saying but think back when you were younger, you didn't care if the colour of your toys matched with it's surroundings, you didn't care if things look out of place, you just wanted to play with your toys, right?  This is what Toy Story Land will be like, it's suppose to have bright, non matching colours and all over the place, like ever kid's bedroom.

And how exactly is that a good thing? We DO care about colours, and things should never look out of place in a Disney park. Why on earth would we want our park looking like a 3 year-old had designed it?

Like i said the idea of "3 rides on a flat piece of land with a few random toys dotted around" is good because it's suppose to be like a kid's bedroom, which is what a kids room it like, there isn't any nice plants or water falls or fountains in a kid's bedroom.  I don't know about you but when i was a kid all what was on the floor was my toys and as you said other random toys dotted about the place

But why theme an area to something that looks bad? It's like Paradise Pier which is themed to an amusement park. :roll: It's just an excuse for not theming too well.

Yes but first of all these aren't suppose to be hugh e-tickets  Also if you look at your list you haven't listed one DLRP attraction as "looking awful", and only three in ever Disney attraction as "looking awful", so if WDI have managed to only design 3 bad looking "hugh" attractions i'd be very confident TSPL will look good

It seems you didn't understand what I meant. I know these aren't e-tickets, and that's what worries me. If we were promised e-ticket style theming then I wouldn't be so worried, but because these are probably c/d-tickets, then that is worrying. Like I said, look at those other c/d-ticket attractions like Jumping Jellyfish or Primeval Whirl - they are huge rides and they look dreadful. :sick:

No, I didn't list any rides from DLRP. Why? Because DLRP doesn't have any massive flat rides yet. Also, the 3 "awful" rides I listed were just the first 3 that came to my head. There might be some more that I've forgotten, but Disney haven't made many huge rides that aren't e-tickets.

I'm just saying that most of the huge c/d-ticket rides that currently exist look terrible.

Also i'm not having a go at RnRCj  Just want to get my view through

I know I know! :lol: I'm not having a go at anyone either, even though it may seem like it!  

Sorry...but has anyone seen a imagineering masterplan/concept art or are we talking about some bubbles?

If we see a concept art and it looks horrible we can judge that hard but with nothing then our own imagination it seems a bit hard. Calm down a bit boys and girls!
 
The discussion could be:

Is toy story the right theming
Is a characters theming the right thing
Do WDS needs such a small rides addition
Is it the right place
....but this "They do absolute the wrong thing" without seeing any concept art, masterplans or else isn´t very target-oriented. Sure they must create a proper surroundings. A high theme standard. A nice landscape. But nobody said that they won´t do that. It seems to be unbelievable that they do it? well, it seems to be unbelievable to build a park like Disneyland once  
So let´s judge after we know what they will do and not before we know nothing more then a name and [strike:23r9omej]three[/strike:23r9omej] two attractions. This "I don´t know what they exactly do but they do the wrong thing" makes me a bit sad.

I think we do have enough information to make an opinion actually. Come on, we already know what type of rides will be included and we also know what the theme will be.

My main problem is the Toy Story theme because there's already so much of it, and it's a hard film to create any immersive environments from. Most of Toy Story is set inside a normal looking house - something we've all seen and experienced before. When I go to Disney park, I like to be taken into a completely new world; not back to the house where I've just came from.

I think you are right. Toy Story is one of the weakest Pixar films when it comes to creating immersive environments in the themeparks. For example A Bugs Life, Monsters Inc, Cars, Finding Nemo and Wall-E are set against a background thats a world on its own and recognisable aswell. I would rather see them building Flik's Flyers surrounded by greenery or Jumping Jellyfish with a Little Mermaid theme like in Tokyo then three rather unthemed (?) Toy Story rides. Wrong theme, wrong rides. Ofcourse we can't judge on how they will theme it, we have to wait on the concept arts for that. I hope I will be proven wrong, I truly do, but just as many other doubters I think its rather difficult to theme these kind of flatrides the Disney way. Its not about decorating here, its about theming.

I agree, especially with that last sentence. So many people mistake decorating for theming. I would me much more optimistic if this project were our own version of A Bug's Land or Mermaid Lagoon, even though those are still not the best Disney areas ever created. Toy Story is just filled with plastic and cheap-ness, and I'm just afraid that we'll be getting that in our park too.

(Wow, such a long post! )

[davewasbaloo]

I agree, especially with that last sentence. So many people mistake decorating for theming. I would me much more optimistic if this project were our own version of A Bug's Land or Mermaid Lagoon, even though those are still not the best Disney areas ever created. Toy Story is just filled with plastic and cheap-ness, and I'm just afraid that we'll be getting that in our park too.

Well if we look at the theming of Pizza Planet and Buzz in Discoveryland, the work of Chester and Hesters, Mermaid Lagoon, Paradise Pier (including the redo) and Flik's, and then the theming of Toy Story Midway Mania, I think there is enough evidence to justify my enormous amount of apprehension for this project.

The one thing WDSP does not need are rubbish carny rides. Heck, I even think Crush was a HUGE mistake at WDSP.

[Maarten]

Like i said the idea of "3 rides on a flat piece of land with a few random toys dotted around" is good because it's suppose to be like a kid's bedroom, which is what a kids room it like, there isn't any nice plants or water falls or fountains in a kid's bedroom.

If they would like to recreate Andy's room as a filmset (like Flying Carpets for example), then they need more then just some randomly placed toys. But like I said, lets wait and see until they release some concept arts.

Sure they must create a proper surroundings. A high theme standard. A nice landscape. But nobody said that they won´t do that. It seems to be unbelievable that they do it? well, it seems to be unbelievable to build a park like Disneyland once :wink:

Although Disneyland Paris is a beautiful park, it wasn't unbelievable Disney created a park like that. Maybe unusual is a better word. Back then Disney had a trackrecord for always pushing the envelope. It was more unbelievable they created a park like Walt Disney Studios or Disney's California Adventure. Thats the kind of Disney we are talking about nowadays, not Disney during the 80s. And although Disney has learned its lessons in the past few years (look at all these placemakings both in California and Paris), I wouldn't be surprised if Toy Storyland turns out to be very minimal. Especially since they seem to have a very small budget and an approach like these additions are a quick fix. I think thats the main concern of most nay-sayers. Ofcourse these flatrides don't have to be themed to e-ticket standards, but if you look at Dumbo, Teacups, Cars Race Rally etc you have to notice that they are not just randomly placed without a fitting landscape. Hopefully the Imagineers will keep that in mind and blow us away (its not a lost case for me). But once again let's wait and see. I hope I will be proven wrong, but like a few others I have my reservations about Toy Storyland.

By the way, if we are not allowed to expres our doubts without concept arts, whats the point of a discussion board then? Disney doesn't have the habit to release concept arts every few weeks you know... :wink:  

[RnRCj]

A member on the "SouthParks" forum posted this:

Fun Fact: The army men paratroopers will be the relocated 'Jumpin Jellyfish' from Disneys California Adventure. Scheduled for removal in the next year or so.

//http://www.southparks.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=162&view=findpost&p=153627

I don't recall hearing about Jumpin' Jellyfish being removed, so is this really true?

[davewasbaloo]

A member on the "SouthParks" forum posted this:

Fun Fact: The army men paratroopers will be the relocated 'Jumpin Jellyfish' from Disneys California Adventure. Scheduled for removal in the next year or so.

//http://www.southparks.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=162&view=findpost&p=153627

I don't recall hearing about Jumpin' Jellyfish being removed, so is this really true?

It is quite likely, given it does not appear in the Blue Sky Cellar Disney plans at DCA. And as someone who has been on them at DCA, we do not want them in the Studios. The lines will be crazy and even my 3 and 5 yo were bored.

No thanks, no matter the theme (anyone who has ever been to Legoland, it is not much different than the one you control yourself).

[Hathaway Browne]

A member on the "SouthParks" forum posted this:

Fun Fact: The army men paratroopers will be the relocated 'Jumpin Jellyfish' from Disneys California Adventure. Scheduled for removal in the next year or so.

//http://www.southparks.org/index.php?s=&showtopic=162&view=findpost&p=153627

I don't recall hearing about Jumpin' Jellyfish being removed, so is this really true?

It is quite likely, given it does not appear in the Blue Sky Cellar Disney plans at DCA. And as someone who has been on them at DCA, we do not want them in the Studios. The lines will be crazy and even my 3 and 5 yo were bored.

No thanks, no matter the theme (anyone who has ever been to Legoland, it is not much different than the one you control yourself).

Jumpin' Jellyfish is staying put for the time being - budget restraints.

[Anthony]

Just a few things to clarify:

It is quite likely, given it does not appear in the Blue Sky Cellar Disney plans at DCA. And as someone who has been on them at DCA, we do not want them in the Studios. The lines will be crazy and even my 3 and 5 yo were bored.

As I've said before, according to the original proposal, the WDS version would have six towers in a circle, not just two as at DCA. Triple the capacity. As for it being "boring", themeing it instead to that famous Army Men shot from Toy Story is very different from a generic jellyfish theme.

Like i said the idea of "3 rides on a flat piece of land with a few random toys dotted around" is good because it's suppose to be like a kid's bedroom, which is what a kids room it like, there isn't any nice plants or water falls or fountains in a kid's bedroom.

Wait wait wait. It's definitely not a bedroom or any kind of environment like that -- the story of the land as far as we know is that you're walking into Andy's back yard, his garden, shrunk to the size of a toy. All his toys are thrown around amongst the plants and some of them you can ride. I can't imagine it would be open and flat, but very green and interesting to walk around.

Unlike the current park, you wouldn't be able to see the entire thing in a simple glimpse. It should also be a very welcome bit of natural environment in what is currently a too-obviously concrete, man-made park.

That's exactly what I'm worried about - bright orange track ruining the WDS skyline. Then of course there's the bright green paratower just to make it even more ghastly.

I must have missed the concept art that confirms these colours? Don't make up things to get annoyed about!

Will the toystory playland be a land by it's own, or will it be attached to toon studio? Although I'm not sure what to expect from this project, I think it will work out well

It will be part of Toon Studio, like Storybook Land in Fantasyland. And I'd bet my final Disney Dollar on Toon Studio NEVER being renamed to Pixar Studio. It just won't happen.

Of course masterplans for WDS do exist! But like most things at WDI, they seem to be constantly changing.

By the way, if we are not allowed to expres our doubts without concept arts, whats the point of a discussion board then? Disney doesn't have the habit to release concept arts every few weeks you know... :wink:  

Absolutely right. A whole forum of "i'll wait and see" wouldn't be much fun, but equally it's a good thing to look at each project objectively and see what it'll add to the park.

One of the most important things with this will be whether they push to include things like a shop, an eating place of some kind (NOT A VAN!!) and extra toilets. If anything the downfall of the first Toon Studio extension was that they seemed to squeeze their budget for the rides so much that nothing was left for the park infrastructure.

The worst thing would be if they think they can get away with saving the full restaurant for Ratatouille in 2012 or whenever, and just giving Toon Studio a few more hot dog vans until then. Then, knowing DLRP's luck, budgets would be cut, Ratatouille wouldn't get a restaurant and the land would be stuck with nothing. The park has bigger things to worry about than if a hot wheels track would ruin its "skyline".

[RnRCj]

I'll try and keep this reply short(er).

As I've said before, according to the original proposal, the WDS version would have six towers in a circle, not just two as at DCA. Triple the capacity. As for it being "boring", themeing it instead to that famous Army Men shot from Toy Story is very different from a generic jellyfish theme.

6 towers? It just gets better doesn't it. :roll: As for it's theme, I'm not sure. I can't really remember the "famous Army Men shot" - I may have to watch it again tonight so I can recap!

Unlike the current park, you wouldn't be able to see the entire thing in a simple glimpse. It should also be a very welcome bit of natural environment in what is currently a too-obviously concrete, man-made park.

Oh yes, I am looking forward to the fact that WDS will no longer be a load of attractions along one strip of pathway! I'm only hoping that it's not "just" trees and rides that will be in this new area. We need immersive themes!

I must have missed the concept art that confirms these colours? Don't make up things to get annoyed about!

You didn't see the concept art?!

CLICK!

One of the most important things with this will be whether they push to include things like a shop, an eating place of some kind (NOT A VAN!!) and extra toilets. If anything the downfall of the first Toon Studio extension was that they seemed to squeeze their budget for the rides so much that nothing was left for the park infrastructure.

The worst thing would be if they think they can get away with saving the full restaurant for Ratatouille in 2012 or whenever, and just giving Toon Studio a few more hot dog vans until then. Then, knowing DLRP's luck, budgets would be cut, Ratatouille wouldn't get a restaurant and the land would be stuck with nothing.

I agree about a restaurant. In fact, I would actually be pleased to see a restaurant in this new area! Though, if there was going to be one, I think we would have heard something by now...?

The park has bigger things to worry about than if a hot wheels track would ruin its "skyline".

They still need to worry about that though. Everything in this new area should be taken into account and thought through thoroughly (try saying that three times). We've just had the amazing Hollywood Boulevard, and right next door to TSPL will be the very detailed and well themed Cars attraction, so this needs to be as good, if not better than those.

[Willow]

Adz (the member who posted the information on Southparks about moving Jumpin' Jellyfish) is constantly posting rumours which never appear, a very poor source of information for Merlin attractions so I doubt he has any "sources" in Paris, I'd wait for someone reliable to mention it before I believe it.

Could we be hearing more information at the Shareholders meeting in February? Would seem like a good time to officially confirm everything.

[experiment627]

Could we be hearing more information at the Shareholders meeting in February? Would seem like a good time to officially confirm everything.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I remember correctly, the only attraction ever that got announced during the annual shareholders meeting, was HISTA back in 1998... so better not hold your breath.

[lil-shawn]

maybe they announce the new attraction in jannuary 28. when the first quartal financial report gets officially, lets wait and see if they will tell us...

[Yesitsme]

Just a few things to clarify:
Wait wait wait. It's definitely not a bedroom or any kind of environment like that -- the story of the land as far as we know is that you're walking into Andy's back yard, his garden, shrunk to the size of a toy. All his toys are thrown around amongst the plants and some of them you can ride. I can't imagine it would be open and flat, but very green and interesting to walk around.

Unlike the current park, you wouldn't be able to see the entire thing in a simple glimpse. It should also be a very welcome bit of natural environment in what is currently a too-obviously concrete, man-made park.

I quite like the 'Andy's Backyard' theme, this means it may very well be like the HISTK Playground but with rides!

I have to admit though that the ride which I am most nervous about is the Army men, 6 towers? sounds like a bit of a blot on the landscape to me, I hope they are not very tall.

[RnRCj]

UPDATE

meeko120103 on the dlp.info forums has posted a very detailed description of Toy Story Playland:

CLICK

Doesn't sound good at all. In fact, it sounds WORSE than I thought it would be.

35 metres for the halfpipe?! HUGE mistake right there. A combination between toons and MEGA thrills are in no way acceptable. So much for Disneyland being a family theme park.

The Paratower, again is a big mistake. It's just too big and sounds awfully toony.

Slinky Dog could be okay, not great, but nothing more than okay.

I am VERY disappointed with the Imagineers on this one. The whole area just sounds messy and ugly. Honestly, in the back of mind I DID have a little bit of hope that this project could turn out okay. That's all been lost now.

I'd be shocked if some of you guys reply thinking this is all good news.

[The Butlin Boy]

I'd be shocked if some of you guys reply thinking this is all good news.

 :mrgreen:

You're gonna hate me for this, but I still have hope for this project. I think that Imagineering can pull this off, and it does sound like a good step forward for the Studios. To me, it sounds like a place that you'd have great fun walking through, where you'd feel like an excited child again, just what the Studios needs. Therefore I'm still looking forward to seeing how this'll turn out

But you still have to keep in mind, that even this description is still a rumour, anyone could have written it! And even if it is based on concept art, these thing can change hugely in a small space of time, you only have to look over the concept art for the Toon Studio to see that :wink:

The Paratower, again is a big mistake. It's just too big and sounds awfully toony.

I hate to say it RnRCj, but they don't call it the Toon Studio for nothing :wink: