So why are the changes at Space Mountain not so drastic?
Jason Garcia of the Orlando Sentinel, the man with the world’s greatest journalism job, writes this morning on the paper’s terrific website The Daily Disney about the changes we reported on yesterday over at the Magic Kingdom’s Space Mountain. They report the details of the refurbishment rather extensively and also expand a bit on the idea we discussed yesterday that this project may have fallen somewhat short in the scope of changes anticipated by Disney fans.
Like I said yesterday, I am on the fence a bit about this one. While I felt resources would be better spent in a down economy on problem areas at Walt Disney World and not on a perennial favorite like Space Mountain, after the work began I was perhaps hoping for more dramatic and exciting changes. But as Garcia reports, big changes to Space Mountain, like the ones completed in Disneyland’s version of the ride, just may not be the way things are done at Walt Disney World.
At Disneyland, which caters heavily to its Southern California population, executives are more willing to take down a popular attraction for an extended stretch of time because so many of its guests make multiple visits each year.
But at Disney World, attendance is driven in large part by out-of-state and international guests, many of whom may visit the resort only once every three to five years. And so executives don’t want to risk souring their experience — and losing out on any future return trips — by having a marquee attraction out of commission.
“An attraction like Space Mountain is on everybody’s short list. It’s a big consideration to have it up and running,” said Alex Wright, a senior show designer with Walt Disney Imagineering and creative director of the Magic Kingdom’s Space Mountain rehab.
Quite frankly, this sounds like a little Disney damage control, and that the folks at WDW may feel as though I am not the only one who was hoping for a little more. Sure, in some respects this rational is true. Perhaps Disneyland guests are somewhat more open to having closures since they go back more often than the average Florida traveler, but that seems like such a silly reason to not change something if you think the end result is better.
Honestly, I just am not buying this line. So are we really expected to conclude that no Disney World E-Ticket will ever be drastically remade because guests might get cranky with the time it takes to complete the work? That’s just nonsense. Maybe this comes into play to some small degree, but I would imagine cost is a far greater influence on making this kind of decision than potentially disappointed guests. I mean, Disney just went through a very busy summer without Space Mountain, and in recent years they did the same with the Haunted Mansion and Spaceship Earth. It is somehow okay to disappoint those people who came for their once-every-five-years trip during a blistering summer, but a few more months to really wow the guests would be just too much for the Customer Relations folks to bear? Please…
Cast Member Joe said,
November 17, 2009 @ 4:19 pm
People seem to forget that the Disneyland Space Mountain Refurb/Redo took two years, not six months. And Disneyland only had to remove one track, not two, piece by piece and install another. WDW Space Mountain has two, that while separate, are intertwined structurally. Allowing a 2-3 year refurb at what is the original Space Mountain and according to our leaders, the most popular attraction in the Magic Kingdom was simply not acceptable at this time. Sorry to disappoint But the attraction had deadlines and limits and had to be back up by Nov. 22. That was the mandate.
David said,
November 17, 2009 @ 4:46 pm
Joe,
thanks for reading and for your input here.
I must say that I am having a difficult time saying what I want to say. I have no problem with keeping it the way it was. And these changes are probably good ones as most of the recent refurb projects have yielded good results.
I initially had an issue with pouring money into this, a reported $12 million, while other areas of WDW needed to be addressed and made a better experience. Space Mountain already was, as you say, the most popular attraction in the most popular park. So why spend the cash and 7 months of downtime?
But since they decided to go ahead anyway, and I am one who missed this attraction on my last trip so I guess management didn’t care all that much, why not make it worth the time and effort? It didn’t need a 2 year makeover, but it just seems to me that reports are showing this to be good but underwhelming. Why 7 months to underwhelm?
I am still talking in circles…ugg. I guess I need to withhold anymore potentially negative comments until I get there myself.
Randy said,
November 18, 2009 @ 3:30 am
David-
I haven’t seen the rehab in person, but I am excited by what I’ve seen online. The pre and post shows were dated and in bad need of repair and updating.
Also, I understand that the ride control system was replaced/modernized. Also, I feel that they have needed a safer load area for a long time. The new gates at the load area probably took a big portion of the rehab time and expense. The changes to the queue area will allow us to be able to enjoy the queue again- which we haven’t been able to do ever since fast pass was put in ( making long lines outside while the queue area is empty because they had to work in the fastpass folks from outside).
The rehab was necessary to refresh and update safety systems, in my opinion and I can’t wait to see it.
I’m sure that a lot of people would like to see something akin to the more modern space mountains at the other parks– or even a new attraction. This rehab is good thing.
Dan said,
November 19, 2009 @ 1:23 pm
David,
I can understand why the WDW would not want a major headliner attraction down for more than a year. The Magic Kingdom’s abysmal lack of headliner attractions is at fault. Disneyland is packed to the gills with other great attractions to satisfy guests (AP holders or otherwise). They can certianly afford to have one go down for a major rehab.
On a recent trip to the Magic Kingdom I was suprised at the lack of attractions compared to Disneyland. I’m sure this was magnified because Space Mountain was in rehab. I think WDW management has finally admited this fact and is spending money where it is more useful, like the Fantasyland expansion. I don’t think they have the luxury of spending money on major rehabs of existing popular attractions. They really just need to build more of them.
Omar said,
December 5, 2009 @ 2:36 pm
There are some areas that need a huge overhaul though. Even some paint would be an improvement to the Magic!