The Loss of Orignal Attractions.

[penguinmickdis1]

I was going through my own blog archive and I found this post The Four Parks: Opinion of the Week: The Loss of Orginal Attractions It made me think, we really never see original attractions. They are always based off a movie or other property. One of my favorite Disney characters is Figment and he was created just for the attraction. What do you think?

[BamaJenn]

The unfortunate fact is that the "original attractions" just aren't as profitable as those based on characters/movies/etc. Build a ride around Nemo and not only does the movie make money but the sale of merchandise from it in the gift shop after the ride brings in even more. Sure, Imagination has a gift shop but it doesn't bring in near what those found at the character themed attractions do I'm sure.

Mr. Toad's Wild Ride is a perfect example of this. The rumored epitaph on his toombstone isn't far off from the truth: "Here Lies Toad, It's sad but true. He wasn't as marketable as Winnie the Pooh!" You didn't see many kids jumping off that ride begging mommy for a Toad stuffy but OMG the shop at the end of Pooh is always booming.

Even those attractions that are still popular today and are "originals" have received a boon in attendance because instead of being based on a film/character, a film/character was based off of them (i.e. Pirates, Haunted Mansion, etc.).

I too am not a huge fan of the fact that every new land or attraction etc. has to be themed around characters (princesses, movies, etc.). It results in the loss of things like Alien Encounter in favor of Stitch and the Timekeeper in favor of Monster's Inc. etc. But all that said, the bottom line is keeping attendance up and profits high and moving toward character/movie based attractions is working in that respect. It's the world we live in today. It is much easier these days to get a family "into" the Disney experience by associating it with that which they can experience outside the parks and at home. While I'm not thrilled with it, it keeps things fresh (usually) and fun!

[HauntedGabe]

I've only looked back through a few albums late last night. I have pictures of Mickey's Birthdayland...little houses, petting zoo, playground, bush maze, misting tanks, Donald's Boat, filling station cars outside restroom. Several pictures of skyway. One of my kid standing on a tall wall off the Fantasyland entrance of skyway that shows the whole building.

What made me even happier was the pictures of the Character Breakfast on the Empress Lilly. Boy that was an old time looking room. The other find was the original Osborne lights, the ones that went through the streets. Woohoo! I have one of my kids sitting in their vehicle on the Motion attraction in Epcot too.

Boxes of photos to look through. Now I want to know what lost attractions I have.

[weepstah]

I can't say I agree, and it's on both ideas being tossed around -

First, there has always been a very strong tie in to popular films or tv shows at the parks. Not all of them have been good, but things like Mr. Toad's and the Mike Fink Keel Boats were recent or even cutting edge in terms of the tie-in popularity back in the mid-50s. Disney abandoning one tie-in for a different one isn't great, but I certainly can understand it.

Second, and much more importantly, I offer the following list of attractions that had no real tie-ins: Expedition Everest, Soarin, Kali River Rapids, Kilimanjaro Safari, DinoLand, even (here it comes) Superstar Limo. Or Alien Encounter. Not all of these rides were successful, but let's give a little credit to Disney for building them.

And how about the Enchanted Tiki Room?

[Zipadeedooda]

Expedition Everest has no tie ins and that gift shop is booming