Hey, since they're the target market for this attraction, I think it's fair to put the focus on that slice of the market.
Also, regarding your point about parent's having to belatedly tell their kids the classic story of 1937's Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, to that point I say, shame on the parents. If, as a parent, you are spending the time and money to go to the Magic Kingdom, a park brimming with rich stories and nostalgia, and you have not taken the time to introduce your children to the classics upon which the park is founded, then, again, I say, shame on you!!! WDI cannot be blamed for parental negligence.
Lastly, you waited 60 minutes to ride a roller coaster??? Robert, I hope you did not have your Follow Me I Know What I'm Doing t-shirt on! Yikes! ;)
Still, the theming was well done and it was fun, but too short.
Some people just want to have a good time, not get the full blown propaganda.
My daughter's 5 year old son was tall enough for Space Mtn, Big Thunder and Splash Mtn. He loved all three of those, so I think the Dwarves mine train may have been a little slow (and brief) for his liking (especially when factoring in the long waits).
But I digress... We went over and looked at the 7 D ride from several different vantage points. It did strike me as very beautiful, but its perceived brevity took away some of the appeal. I certainly credit Disney for a creating a unique coaster attraction that appeals to families and very young children. But based on what I saw plus the POV videos, it did not strike me as a must ride kind of attraction.
@Apple "Sub par animation movie"?!? Blasphemy. Without Snow White we would not have the animated movies you like today. Heck, we wouldn't even have Disneyland and DisneyWorld without the bank Walt made off Snow White. Gotta give credit where credit is due.
Interesting tidbit about the 1937 classic. Adjusted for inflation it is #10 on the list of top domestic box office grosses with $867M and change. By comparison, Frozen, the top grossing film of 2013, made $390M domestic. Snow White was huge in its day. HUGE.
That's what led me down the thought process that lead to this review. I think that the beauty of the ride is leading people to judge its length by dark ride standards, rather than a coaster standard. And that the suggestion of the coming conflict with the witch, left unshown, is adding to the feeling that this ride is abridged.
I think people eventually will get over the first issue, as more and more people get used to the ride. And that Disney can solve the second simply by taking out the witch animatronic. Just wrap this thing up as a single chapter in the Snow White tale, with no suggestion of the chapter yet to come. It would help this attraction to feel more complete unto itself. Consider it addition by subtraction.
Finally, if the opening of this ride encourages Disney to see the need for another SW7D theatrical rerelease, then, by that fact alone, I'd call it a delightful success.
But you said parents must educate their kids before going on the rides as if the rides are NOT immersive. They don't always tell a story and that's a fact.
And the truth is Disney rides are immersive while NOT having a narrative.
But Mine Train is going to inspire a lot of kids to ask, "what's that old lady doing there?" The focus goes to the witch at the end, diminishing your memory of the rest of the ride.
Why is it necessary to solve a problem that doesn't need to be solved? In the original Snow White dark ride, there was no true ending. After the dwarves confront the witch, the ride ends with "they lived happily ever after". Who exactly? You saw Snow White once and you didn't see the prince.
I know people want a more complete story, but this just doesn't happen.
The original rides like the one in the Imagination building is neutered. The original ride introduced Dreamfinder and Figment but the current ride doesn't and is a mess. The Pirates got Depped taking away from the openness of the scenes you see killing an original ride in the process to cash in on the success of the movies.
The new original ride are neutered in the development process as we can see in AK. There is a ride trough the Himalayas, there could be a Yeti, O dear there is a Yeti, we got away from the Yeti. Or we are on a boat ride in the Jungle, bad company cuts the jungle and create a mud slide, woei that mudslide was fun, thank you bad company. If you think that are great stories then you must find professional help. Sure Disney Immaginering can still make and amazing original ride but that only happens overseas these days because the American public is happy with everything you trow at them.
The same happened to the 7D ride. The original design had more dark ride scene's but they where cut (I'm sure it's because all those guests coming to WDW don't generate enough cash) and we get a half ass ride that could have been a classic like Splash Mountain but is a nice looking but story wise a messy ride only because it was cut. That shows Disney isn't about telling story's anymore (the once you make up or the recreation of the movies) but about cold hard cash only when it comes to Florida.
Overall, we're getting some pretty harsh judgement from several folks who have not even experienced the new attraction yet. It seems to me that if people are going into this family coaster with such negative preconceived notions they are headed for a self fulfilled prophecy. Personally, I say, give it a chance. As Robert already stated, the new coaster is quite fun and imminently repeatable. Who knows, those of you who are being negative before the fact might like the 7D ride, if you give it a chance.
Just because you think I might do it the "right way" does not make any sense of your argument. It is absurd that you now argue there is no point.
Wow, to keep on piling the straw man. People aren't giving it a chance??? You have nothing to worry about with 60 minute waits.
My point is simply that visitors will get much more out of a story rich park like Magic Kngdom if they already have some familiarity with the stories. And to Robert's point specifically, I merely suggested that very few people who visit the Disney parks have not seen the classic film that basically got the ball rolling. So those folks he overheard in line, in my humble opinion, are the exception, not the rule.
And my comment about people not giving the new coaster a chance was directed at the negative comments of several folks who have not yet ridden. To the many stalwart Disney fans who are braving the 60+ minute waits I have directed no feedback except to Robert who, as a theme park insider, should have found a way to ride without the excessive wait.
"I say, shame on you!!! WDI cannot be blamed for parental negligence"
What's this all about?
Robert is the source of some of the negative comments. So what? He gave his review and some agreed. It is not necessary to dispute it without riding it yourself (you haven't).
My comment was a light hearted response directed at Robert's article, not at you personally.
Lastly, I did not dispute Robert's review at all. I merely commented on the relevancy of the film Snow White to which I feel I have every right to comment.
Thus far, you say you don't know why I wrote my posts. Despite that, you certainly respond and prove you know nothing.
Have a nice day!
I have no idea I am doing that since I was disputing your words. This has nothing to do with your motives or character, which I don't have a clue.
I keep trying to clarify the discussion, but it keeps getting worse.
As for what I've seen/read/heard about it, it does appear to me like they really missed out on an opportunity for something really great.
I agree with the general consensus that it doesn't know if it's a roller coaster or a dark ride, and the witch at the end really changes the aftertaste of the ride, so to speak. My food analogy (lame, I know) is just finishing a delicious dessert dish, and then eating a small bite of garlic mashed potatoes. As great as the dessert was, you can't help but have the mashed potato taste in your mouth at the end of the day. The witch visual will stay with guests longer than Disney might have wanted.
It seems like a really beautiful, technologically advanced ride with a lot of time and money invested, but a real lack of focus.
I wouldn't be surprised to see some high level Cast Member turnover at Disney coming in the not-to-distant future if things continue down the current path.
It happened back in the mid 70's and early 80's when Disney actually was competing heavenly with parks owned by Marriott and Six Flags, which at the time had theming on par if not better than Disney. The purse strings are opening up and while the theme park crowd hasn't been wowed yet, I'd not be too concerned by what Disney has yet to accomplish.
Is Disney losing the thrill crowd? They never had it. Is Disney losing the themed entertainment crowd? Maybe, but if so, it is not reflected on the bottom line. From all accounts Disney needs to maintain the course they are currently pursuing: slowly but steadily building high quality attractions, shows, restaurants, and parks that bring in the lucrative whole family market. Would we as enthusiasts like to see Disney do more on the ride side of the equation? Absolutely. However, the enthusiast crowd is a niche crowd and not one to which Disney traditionally caters.
In my opinion, we're going to have to wait for Iger to step down then hope against hope we get a replacement that is more focused on the parks and expanding the parks than on the holistic expansion of the company in general. As long as Iger runs the show expansion has to be measured across all Disney divisions rather than in a simple count of new attractions.
This is clearly not the question here, it's that the god of story telling baked an half ass story in their ride and a lot of people are disappointed about that as Robert explains from many of the comments in the attraction review on this site. It's probably not up to the standard Disney set for itself. But like you many people in the end won't care about quality of story telling and keep visiting the stuff they know, so again Disney did a great job getting away with lack of story telling and still keep spending up. I think Disney gradually and successfully lowers it's bars without loosing money. It's like the frog that is slowly cooked.
@Anon You are really rude, just saying.
However, I also try to have a little perspective and realize that not every addition to the parks is going to be perfectly suited to me and my tastes. And in reality the only people complaining about 7D are grown ups. Conversely, I have spoken to several recent visitors who told me 7D was their kids' absolute favorite ride. So the intended audience seems to be quite pleased while people like you and me are left wanting. But Disney seems to know what they are doing as attendance and profits grow, so I am merely defending the actions of Disney in that regard. It doesn't mean I am thrilled with their decisions just that I understand them.
Also, you have to understand my local park is Cedar Fair's Worlds of a Fun, so almost anything Disney does is comparatively impressive to me and mine! ;)
Most Disney and Universal dark rides have too much detail to take in, and that is a plus in my book.
Personally, I love noticing something new on my second, third -- twentieth, thirtieth -- ride through.
P.S.: Sure, some kids don't know the Seven Dwarfs at all. But the movie has been available on VHS, then DVD and Blu Ray, for decades now. Surely millions of people from all generations have seen it in those formats.
As for the long wait time for a short ride, that is endemic of Fantasyland rides, and wait times are predictably long for a new attraction. Even if it was twice as long, would it be worth waiting for an hour or two in the summer heat?
It's not another Radiator Springs Racers -- it's a Fantasyland ride. And two minutes is pretty standard for FL.
As has been pointed out it sits within Fantasyland which is aimed fair and square at kids under 11 or so - often much younger. So big thrills are out. So is complex nuanced storytelling. What we've got is something that looks gorgeous and so creates a real heart and centre-piece to Fantasyland, anchoring a themed area that is as good as it gets anywhere in the world visually. And that matters to Disney, and it matters to a lot of the people who visit Disney regularly. They are looking for that sense of being somewhere else and new Fantasyland delivers.
And most of all it's not aimed at the sort of people who inhabit forums like this. Most of us want cutting edge, technology-pushing attractions, not a gentle 'my first coaster' experience. We were never going to get the former. Disney doesn't really do cutting-edge. It does landscaping. It does theming. It does immersion. And for its market that is more than enough, as the figures show.
I understand the disappointment. We would all love to be blown away by a Disney attraction but I'm not sure that's what Disney is about. I think we will get something impressive from Disney eventually - maybe Avatar, maybe Star Wars. But not yet. In the meantime, complain if you want to. But I predict 7DMT will be popular for years to come, and that's all that matters really....
Disney could have opened 7D whenever they wanted, but they chose to have it open a month before Diagon Alley. I have a hard time believing that was a coincidence. Whether it was intended to be compared or not, the opening of these two attractions at the same time means that they will be held to the same standard, which is that they should be "impressive". Why is it okay that 7D be good enough, why not brilliant?
I sort of feel that the addition of the witch and snow white at the end of 7D has caused the primary issue of story. If the coaster only told the story of the dwarves going home at the end of the day, the scope of the story would fit the short duration of the ride. But then all of the sudden the rider is introduced to a conflict right before they depart the attraction. That to me is why the ride seems incomplete.
Though the ride may seem (or be) incomplete in a sense, the viewer could pick up the DVD for $20 and watch it on the flight or drive home. That would not only satisfy the curiosity of the guest, but be another money maker for Disney.
Here's the story of the Dwarves mining and going home at the end of the day and partying with Snow White. Simple, cute, safe.
But I like the little sting in the tale at the end. There are plenty of great novels or films that end with a hanging plot - leaving the reader to imagine what happens next. Think of the Italian Job for example....
It could be argued that Disney is stimulating imagination with this ending, allowing children to decide what they think will happen next. Who is the witch? What does she want? Why is she holding an apple? What will happen next?... If I had kids that's the conversation I'd be having with them after riding...
There is nothing wrong with an open ending.
From everything I've read about 7DMT, kids are giving this ride enthusiastic thumbs up. By that measure, it appears to be a complete success.