24 Days: Wordless Wednesday, Tomorrowland Transit Authority Peoplemover

38 Days: Stitch's Great Escape Moving To Seasonal Operation

Stitch's Great Escape's days are almost certainly numbered. The attraction will be closing for except for the most busy days in the Magic Kingdom. According to the Orlando Sentinel, you'll be able to visit Stitch in Tomorrowland from November 19-26 and from December 17 - January 2. Beyond that Stitch's future is cloudy at best.

Rumors suggest a Wreck-It Ralph virtual reality attraction taking Stitch's place, and this mostly-closure certainly leads one to believe something new is on the horizon.

I'm not terribly excited one way or another over this whole thing. I rode Stitch once and while I'm not as anti-Stitch's Great Escape as a lot of the Disney community seems to be, it's not something I will really miss. I was hoping for a Big Hero 6 attraction or maybe something Tomorrowland (the film) oriented, but I guess a Wreck-It Ralph presence won't be bad. I'm most looking forward to seeing what WDI does with virtual reality, no matter what franchise it's tied to, so cheers to that.

43 Days: Carousel of Progress

The Carousel of Progress at the New York World's Fair in 1964

This is maybe the most "Disney" attraction in Florida. It's one that you'd never see the likes of in Universal or Sea World or Busch Gardens, and that fans of those parks would never in a million years WANT there. The technology is fairly outdated, there's not thrill aspect or tie-in to a franchise, there's a song you'll not get out of your head unless it's replaced by "It's A Small World" later in the day, it breaks down with some frequency, the "modern" family segment is from the 1980s, but I love it.

First off, it's a tangible piece of Walt in a park he never lived to see or even supervise much of the construction of. The Carousel of Progress wasn't built for Walt Disney World, or even Disneyland, it was built for the 1964 World's Fair. The attraction we can ride today is the same one that was built in New York, disassembled and taken to Disneyland and then disassembled again and installed in its Tomorrowland home in Florida. For a guy who loves him some Walt and who hasn't been able to swing a visit to California (yet), it's pretty special to sit in an attraction the The Man himself had a real hand in creating.

But I also have a ore personal reason to find Carousel of Progress special. My parents actually rode it while on a date in high school at the New York World's Fair. They rode the train from Philadelphia to New York City and spent the day at the World's Fair as young teens. And today, I and an my family can experience one of the attractions they saw then in much the same form (with a few small updates). That is a piece of real Magic.

The Carousel of Progress has received a new paint job and is in the process of getting some new signage to match. Here's a link to some recent photos. I like that this classic piece of Disney History is being treated well but not really changed. The fact that Disney spent a few bucks to gussy her up tells me the Carousel won't be going anywhere anytime soon, and that makes me happy.

75 Days: Disney Rocks

Disney Rocks, courtesy of Blog Mickey's wonderful photography

I'm not saying Disney rocks here, though it does, what I am writing about are the rocks in Disney parks. Blog Mickey put up some very nice photos of some new rocks emerging at the entrance to Tomorrowland. They are in the process of being painted, it would seem. They are very nice, and because they are new, I'm sure I'll be compelled to photograph them extensively in October. But that's really just a hook to what I really want to write about.

Our family has a running argument about the Disney rocks. It gets heated. It did just yesterday as I mentioned I was planning to write this blog post. You see, way back on our first trip to Walt Disney World together, a graduation present trip with my parents and sister in the summer of 1993, Lisa asked the fateful question while standing in a queue (I think for Big Thunder Mountain).

"Are these rocks real?" she said.

I think I just looked at her kind of slack-jawed. My dad was even at a loss for words, a rarity. When we regained our composure, much mockery ensued, and continues to this day. I thought it was cute, I gotta say. I figured she was caught up in the Disney Magic and was Believing in the the man-made boulders. But as time has gone by, Lisa has put forth an interesting argument. She says that since the man-made boulders are made of some sort of cement-like material, and that cement is made from basically lime (a rock) and sand (also small rocks) that Disney rocks are indeed "real" rocks. We, on the other hand (me, my dad, my son), argue that since they are man-made, they aren't "real."

It's an argument on the scale of chicken vs. egg, of Coke vs. Pepsi, of Less Filling vs. Tastes Great. It comes up whenever a rock (real or man-made) is around, which is pretty often. We'll be walking on a trail on Grandfather Mountain and John will wonder aloud whether those rocks are real. Then it begins. There's yelling. And laughing. And sometimes pouting. But it's one of those things that ties our family together, and I'm happy for it never to be resolved.

81 Days: Is Stitch Making His Final Great Escape?

I saw a rumor this morning from WDWThemeParks.com suggesting that Stitch's Great Escape will close towards the end of this year and re-open in 2018 as a new attraction. The rumor is classified as "Blue Sky," meaning it's just a rumor at this point, but I doubt anyone would be surprised to see Stitch leave Tomorrowland. It doesn't seem to be a hugely popular attraction, though if Disney fan social media is true to form it will attract a huge following the minute Disney announces its closure. Just watch :-) The fun question to me, though, is assuming a closure, what is the replacement? Let's play armchair Imagineer and put out a couple ideas.

My first thought for this spot was a Big Hero 6-themed attraction. It's right across the walkway from Monster's Inc. Laugh Floor and around the corner from Buzz Lightyear's Space Ranger Spin, so another animated movie based attraction would provide some sort of flow to the area. It is a way to bring Marvel into the Magic Kingdom, which is a bit of a stick in the eye to Universal and as such much fun. The film is great and fun and colorful and would work great visually as an attraction. The setting is quasi-futuristic so it wouldn't be jarringly out of place, in my opinion. I'm not sure of the mechanics, though. I mean an entire year would be enough time to gut the present ride and create something new, as in not "theater-based," but Disney hasn't seemed to be in a start from scratch mode when updating or switching attractions lately. Which leads me to a second idea.....

What about a Tomorrowland-based attraction in Tomorrowland? I was telling the lovely and talented Lisa about this story and

my wish that somehow the Tomorrowland movie would be incorporated into Tomorrowland the Land, and she thought this would be a great fit. She's right. It would even work in its present configuration. The characters in Tomorrowland are transported to Tomorrowland by strapping into seats and having a shaking, sensory overloaded experience. That would completely work here. As Lisa suggested, you could even work in some sort of live-feed from a camera outside looking down the sidewalk toward Space Mountain as an ending shot. The downside to this idea is that the movie wasn't all that well received, but I loved it, so that should count for something, right?

What do you think? What would you put in Stitch's place? Or would you leave our little blue friend alone?

Things I ALREADY Love About BLT's Into The Woods

We can start with that poster. Cool, huh?

I've been happily watching this show come together and largely keeping my mouth shut about it. We open two weeks from last night. Two weeks from this moment, I will be backstage at Odell Williamson Auditorium. I like that idea. So, I'm going to list a few of the other things that make me happy about this show, and particularly Brunswick Little Theatre's production of it.

1. The Writing

James Lupine is credited with "the book" on this show. That's, to my simple understanding of musicals, the words between the songs. I imagine he and Stephen Sondheim worked together hand and glove with the lyrics and spoken word bits. The story is told largely in song, so they had to. It really worked, in ways I truly admire as an aspiring writer.

During the opening number, there's a knock on the door to The Baker's cottage. His Wife asks who it is and The Baker responds in a way that sums up so clearly where this journey is taking us. Into The Woods is largely about normal people's responses to unusual situations. It is a great mix of the fantastic and the mundane, both feeding our imagination and relating to us in ways we can completely identify with ourselves. The Baker and his Wife take it for granted there's a witch next door, but it doesn't mean they completely buy into that part about "magic beans." That just strikes me as funny, they accept she's a witch but are suspicious that the beans she claims are magical really are more than just beans. The whole show and all the characters in it are like that. They are upset by a giant walking around their little world, but accept that giants sometimes do that. Cinderella talks to birds and her dead mother, but is shocked to see a giant beanstalk. It just goes to show that "impossible" is often in the eyes of the beholder.

I'm also in love with the idea that so few characters have names. The story is centered on The Baker and The Baker's Wife. Don't assume the show is sexist for identifying the female lead only as the wife of the male lead, the two Princes and called Cinderella's Prince and Rapunzel's Prince.  We also have The Witch, Granny, Little Red Riding Hood, The Wolf, the Evil Stepmother, and Cinderella's Father. Cinderella and Rapunzel have names, of course, but they are so well-ingrained in our cultural identity that both are essentially meaningless as personal monikers. The only two "real names" in the show are the Evil Stepsisters Florinda and Lucinda, which I'm pretty sure speaks to some greater point, but I haven't figured it out yet. The lack of personal names lends the whole story a general appeal, as if it's about US and not just THEM. I'm sure that was the idea, and this isn't a new or particularly subtle way to go about generalizing one's lessons, but I love it nonetheless.  There really is a bit of all these characters in all of us. We are greedy and cutthroat and kind and generous, we are clever and simple, we are loyal and fickle, we are brave and cowardly. And our children WILL listen, just as we did to our parents and their children will to them someday.

2. Steampunk

Jen decided to give this show a steampunk flair in its costumes and set, and it's looking great. If you aren't familiar with the term, steampunk refers to a sort of style based upon Victorian-age science fiction. It's Jules Verne-esque stuff, full of brass and airships and goggles and proto-industrial tech. Not to brag, but I was steampunk WAY before steampunk was cool. I was drawn as a young'un, totally mesmerized, to the 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea attraction in Disney's Tomorrowland. I mean, it was a submarine that looked like a big, metal fish. And you could see all the bolts! I loved blimps and airships. I had a Goodyear Blimp model in my room. I wore goggles and funky hats whenever I could get my hands on them. Back then I was weird. Today, it's a whole subculture and people are going to a lot of expense and trouble to look like I wanted to when I was 8. Jen has designed a whole show to fit my elementary school imagination, and I couldn't be happier to be a part of it.

3. The Costumes

I'll let them speak for themselves.

4. Milky White

Into The Woods features as a sort of character Jack's cow, Milky White. Milky White has been portrayed in different productions using everything from a big prop cow on wheels to an actor in a cow costume. Jen has chosen the middle road, an actor carrying a cow prop.  It's a great idea as it gives the audience a cow but also allows an actor to portray the cow's, well, emotions. The cow goes through a lot. And the actor Jen chose, a teenager named Chase Costen, has totally embraced his bovine side. In rehearsals, I've seen him react with his face and body in logical ways to what the cow is doing and seeing. When they line up to do vocal warm-ups, Chase brings his cow. He gets that they are one piece, not a boy carrying a prop. It's a little thing, but it really tickles me.


That's about all I feel I can say right now. We build the set next Saturday and I am sure I will be adding that to my list. But I don't want to give too much away. You'll have to come see for yourself. Find out all about it here. You'll not be disappointed

Imagineering Oversight....or is it?

Before our trip to Disney, I bought an Imagineering Field Guide for each of the four Florida parks. I love these books, they are small, but packed with really interesting information about the thought processes that went into building the Disney theme parks. The books are written by Walt Disney Imagineering (it gives author credit to "The Imagineers" right on the cover) and are full of drawings and photos and inside info on the little details they work into everything they do. For a Disney Geek, these things are Nirvana.

One of the central themes of these books is the continuity they try to keep in place within and even between the parks. They work hard to make sure you aren't jarred by something "out of place." They went so far as to make the top of the Tower of Terror ride's architecture look vaguely Middle Eastern because it was visible from Morroco in Epcot's World Showcase. They even do things that I'm convinced are for their own amusement, such as locating all the bathrooms in Columbia Harbour House, which straddles Fantasyland and Liberty Square, in the Fantasyland half because there was no indoor plumbing in the time period represented by Liberty Square. Their efforts aren't always so grand or so obscure, mostly they just use architecture and landscaping to obscure views of things that don't fit in with the story they are trying to tell in a particular place.

I think I found a pretty good example of where they failed to hide the bleed-over from over stories with this picture.

This is a view of Space Mountain and the entrance to Tomorrowland as seen from the Swiss Family Treehouse, complete with old-timey gas light. I thought at first I had "caught" the Imagineers falling down on the job, how hard would it be to have a wall here and face the opening a different direction? But after thinking about it, I think I've underestimated the Disney crew.

Walt Disney's spirit is alive and well among the Imagineers; just look at the whole of Walt DisneyWorld, built entirely after Walt's death, for proof. Walt Disney was a man of seeming contradiction, but in actuality he was very wise. He was nostalgic to an amazing degree, recreating the world as it was in his time and before in his theme parks. He loved the past and studied history and longed to see the world hold onto the best parts of our heritage. He was also one of the world's greatest all-time Futurists. Walt believed in that "Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow" and he worked hard to see mankind progress as far and as fast as possible. He was the best kind of idealist, the kind of man who sees a wonderful future as possible and tries to make it so. He had one foot in the past and one in the future, but he lived in the now, taking the best of history to inform his attempts to build a great tomorrow. In order to think and act like this, Walt Disney needed to be always ready to act today, to "carpe diem," to make the most of the moment no matter what the naysayers said or what was generally assumed to be possible. But he also had to have an appreciation of the fact that the future would always be there, that what we do today never stays as it is, but changes over time. He understood that he needed to not only prepare for this fact, but take advantage of it. When Walt built Disneyland, he commented that the park would never be the same, that it would grow and change and become more beautiful as the trees he planted before opening day grew over time.

It's this spirit that I think the Imagineers understood and I at first did not when they built the Swiss Family Treehouse with a view of Tomorrowland. To face the view away from the park would give guests a sight "behind the scenes" and into an area of concrete and parking lots and warehouses and sheds. Not very magical. To face the room towards the park in another direction would guarantee that some sort of "intrusion" into the story would always be there. Look again at that picture and I think you'll see the Imagineers took the best possible route. The view of Space Mountain is partially hidden by trees. I bet that when this treehouse was first constructed, much more of the park was visible. I also bet that within about ten years, as those trees grow even taller, that view of Tomorrowland will no longer exist. I think that was the idea all along. It took me a while, but I finally did step outside the box and look with eyes to the past, present and future. That's what Walt did all the time, as a matter of course. I want to get to the point where I do that as well.