Pirate Exchange

[Sambo]

Unfortunately, "balance" and "originality" are words that Disney management has thrown away -- words that once were the operating model for Disneyland. They've been replaced by the word "brand," as today's management continues to follow Michael Eisner's dictum that "Disneyland is all about turning movies into rides."

Could not be more accurate. Thanks for the unvarnished truth Mr Wiggins.

[HMF]

The movie was based off of the ride, so why is it so bad that you have spot appearances by Barbosa and Jack in the ride. Barbosa replaced an unknown captain and what exactly did Jack replace? Not much maybe a pirate in the barrel. It's so minimal that it's laughable that anyone complains about it.

An unknown Captain who managed to become a beloved part of the experience for over 30 years. I don't really have a problem with Jack in the ride per se,The problem with the current version is that not only is Jack in the ride The focus of the ride has been altered to center around Jack in a nonsensical fashion. If he just made a few barely publicized cameos it would be one thing but the way they did it is ridiculous and detracts heavily from the experience.

[HMF]

Because overall Disneyland's quality is slipping exponentially every day. The place stinks compared to how it was years ago. That's why I've stopped going or more accurately not as much as I used to.

To be entirely fair quality-wise Disneyland is doing very well. Maybe not as good as in the pre-Pressler days but much better than it was a decade ago. Walt Disney World on the other hand has been going downhill quality-wise for years now.

[HMF]

Of course they have. He was the villain that the writers created with for the fourth Pirates movie. The one that is currently shown on the mist screen.

Sadly, in a few years time many people might actually believe that. Of course when has the Elliot/Rossio team ever had an original idea?

[ohmyjustin]

I'm not sure why there's a question of balance considering there still is a balance in the ride. Jack is in how many scenes out of how many? How much of the original dialogue exists? How much of the music? Of the set pieces, animatronics, story, etc.? I know that balance doesn't have to literally mean 50-50, but Jack is so easily avoidable except for the scene on the lift hill because there is so much more to see and hear.

Anyway, to answer the question: I would be against this new strictly-branded ride. It's redundant, as someone else said, and would be a waste of space, even in a third park. I don't think there's really a demand for a ride that is all about the movies because there's enough of them in the current ride to satisfy the people who want to see them.

[Retrocool]

Sadly, in a few years time many people might actually believe that. Of course when has the Elliot/Rossio team ever had an original idea?

Hey now, that's not fair. Although the majority of their work has been based in some form or fashion on other existing media (Aladdin, The Puppet Masters, The Mask of Zorro, Shrek) they've also worked on a number of screenplays that were original ideas. Their first was 1989's Little Monsters. They also wrote the screenplays for Joe Dante's Small Soldiers (1998) and Dreamworks' The Road to El Dorado (2000). Sure, much of what they do would be considered adaptations, but that's not as easy to do as it would seem. They've done a great job as screenwriters.

Besides, Edward "Blackbeard" Teach was a real person. Although the original unnamed pirate on the Wicked Wench was not identified as Blackbeard, the AA figure DID have a long black beard, and he WAS the captain of a pirate ship. Had there never even been any POTC movies, Disney could very easily have made a few minor changes to the unnamed pirate's appearance and named him Blackbeard.

You can't criticize Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio for adapting other peoples' stories for the screen, unless you're willing to do the same to Walt Disney himself (Snow White, Pinocchio, Bambi, the Uncle Remus tales, Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan, Lady and the Tramp, Old Yeller, The Shaggy Dog, Sleeping Beauty, 101 Dalmatians, Mary Poppins, etc.? None originally created by Walt, but many successfully adapted by him...or more specifically by people hired by him to do the adaptations).

[HMF]

[QUOTE=Retrocool;1056884856]
You can't criticize Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio for adapting other peoples' stories for the screen, QUOTE]
No but I can criticize them with not providing proper credit.

PIRATES LAWSUIT Artist vs Disney Company-

[animagusurreal]

Yes I would, but ONLY on the condition that they restored the original ride. (They can leave one Jack AA - say, the one in the barrel - as an easter egg, but the mist screens and Captain Jack Sparrow dialog MUST be removed.)

We always discuss how the movie stuff isn't a good fit for the ride, but I'd also say that the ride isn't a good representation of the movies. Jack Sparrow and Co. belong in a big thrill ride, something more akin to the Indiana Jones Adventure, not a darkly charming musical boat ride. And, although I'm not the biggest fan of the movies, I think it could be a good ride.

But here's a couple more observations on how Jack spoils the original:

Before, the pirates came off as giddily subversive (I think the fact that the ride was created in the late 60's had something to do with this, ditto for Haunted Mansion and Jungle Book). By making Jack the hero, you make all the other pirates the "bad guys" - I mean yes, they were always "bad," but they weren't the antagonists. (If they were, who was the original protagonist? Dunking Mayor? Dog with Keys?)

Also, by making half the conversations about Jack, you detract from the "cocktail party" aspect of the ride (as Walt once put it) where "each time you tune in on a different conversation." Putting that thread in there makes it feel too structured. (Much like the new attic in HM - but that's another thread...) I do think we needed some new conversations to tune in on - because they've been yakking away at this same party for decades - but just having them say "Captain Jack Sparrow" all the time doesn't cut it.

BTW, Mr. Wiggins, I'm honored to have my comment quoted in your post on balance .

And speaking of balance:

I'm not sure why there's a question of balance considering there still is a balance in the ride. Jack is in how many scenes out of how many? How much of the original dialogue exists? How much of the music? Of the set pieces, animatronics, story, etc.? I know that balance doesn't have to literally mean 50-50, but Jack is so easily avoidable except for the scene on the lift hill because there is so much more to see and hear...

The argument isn't entirely about balance in this ride, it's also about the park in general. When virtually all of the new rides are movie-based, it makes the balance seem even more out-of-whack when they try to make the original rides seem movie-based too. I totally understand why they put Jack in there - he suddenly exploded into a big, iconic character, and I think people would have asked where he was if he wasn't in there at all. But far more of the ride is about him than your post suggests. He's half the reason all the pirates are there to begin with. The scenes that he and his illustrious name have been insterted into are all key scenes. He IS the finale. (Not to mention Davy Jones and Blackbeard taking over for the wonderful spooky/funny voices that they used to have in the caves.)

[Sambo]

If you remove pirates (and a wench in a barrel) to install multiple captain Jack's and at the same time change the entire theme and purpose of the pirates in the town from pillage, plunder, rifle and loot, extort and pilfer, filch and sack (as the song clearly states) to one of an ambiguous and ill defined search for captain Jack - that is not balance it is muddying well designed clarity and devolves the attraction's message into thematic pablum.

[ohmyjustin]

The argument isn't entirely about balance in this ride, it's also about the park in general. When virtually all of the new rides are movie-based, it makes the balance seem even more out-of-whack when they try to make the original rides seem movie-based too. I totally understand why they put Jack in there - he suddenly exploded into a big, iconic character, and I think people would have asked where he was if he wasn't in there at all. But far more of the ride is about him than your post suggests. He's half the reason all the pirates are there to begin with. The scenes that he and his illustrious name have been insterted into are all key scenes. He IS the finale. (Not to mention Davy Jones and Blackbeard taking over for the wonderful spooky/funny voices that they used to have in the caves.)

I'm still not entirely convinced it's as much of an issue as this forum suggests it is. I don't think I underrated the level at which Jack is embedded into the ride...I might be missing a lot of how the ride's subtext (?) has changed since he was added, but the way I currently understand the ride is that there are individuals/bands of pirates who are searching for Jack, but there are other pirates who are pillaging the town and have been for a while. There are yet others who are selling wenches and there is still a town that is being completely destroyed by other pirates who may be completely oblivious to Captain Jack Sparrow.

There is still a cocktail party effect to me. I don't see how it was destroyed. Perhaps there is a linear plot that detracts from the nature of the original ride, but I feel that's a non-issue considering that's what appeals to the average person--that is, not someone from MiceChat.