You
know what I don't talk about enough? Peter Pan's Flight. Let's fix
that.
Peter
Pan's Flight is the most popular of the Fantasyland dark rides by a
country mile, with queues that regularly top 45 minutes. Granted,
this is partly because of its low capacity for its ride type—the
ornate pirate ships only seat two or three where most dark ride
vehicles seat four—but let's give the ride's content plenty of
credit too. Most people probably assume the secret of this
attraction's success is neatly summed up by its title: it's based on
Peter Pan, one of the most
evergreen films in the Disney Animated Canon, and it lets guests fly.
The
impact of that second bit cannot be overstated. There have been other
suspended rides in the history of the Disneyland Resort, but none
have ever managed to replicate anything like the atmosphere of Peter
Pan's Flight, as you whiz through the stars over London and then
Neverland. The Skyway, when it was around, lacked any sense of
mystique; Soarin' lacks narrative structure and offers only an
illusion of forward movement. Peter Pan's Flight is a proper
adventure, taking place in what is perhaps the quintessential world
of adventure.
But
I would argue that there is another key ingredient to the ride's
popularity: it is perhaps the single best example of classic dark
ride design philosophy in any Disney park. It is about as far from a
“book report ride” as you can get without literally presenting an
original plot.* Instead of summarizing the events of Peter
Pan, it strips the movie down to
its emotional core. There in the heart of the film, we find, simply:
the thrill of flying and the wonder of removing from our humdrum
urban lives to a world of childhood magic. Accordingly, most of the
ride is devoted to the airborne journey from London to Neverland, and
even that is rendered impressionistic, with forced-perspective models
and fiber-optic starfields, rather than being a “faithful”
reproduction of the film scene. Everything else about the movie, even
the central conflict between the children and Captain Hook, is almost
literally an afterthought.
Can
you even imagine a ride like this being built nowadays? If they had
to invent Peter Pan's Flight from scratch in the current era, it
would be called something like Journey to Neverland With
Peter Pan**, more emphasis would
be placed on all the song sequences, not just “You Can Fly!”, and
Peter would be prominent in every scene. It would certainly remind
people of the movie, but it would in no way feel
like the movie. It almost certainly wouldn't build up 45 minutes'
worth of queue at a time, judging by the way guest enthusiasm for the
Little Mermaid ride has cooled.
This
is why, when Peter Pan's Flight went down for extended refurbishment
and gussying-up a few years ago, I was dreading
what they'd do to it. I assumed, quite reasonably, that they'd stick
in a bunch of imagery taken directly from the movie at the expense of
the ride's unique qualities. The first part came to pass, but
fortunately with a light enough touch that we were spared the second
part. It has changed far less than the Alice dark ride did when it
got its own “upgrades.”*** It's still very much the quirky
classic it's always been (or at least since 1983).
I
can make an observation along these lines: of the five dark rides in
Fantasyland, popularity seems to correlate to some extent with
adherence to the more traditional principles of dark ride design. As
mentioned, Peter Pan's Flight is the most popular. Alice in
Wonderland is nearly as abstract and also well-liked. On the other
end of the scale, Pinocchio's Daring Journey is of more recent
vintage than the others, leans toward the “book report” side of
things, and is usually a walk-on. Obviously, there are many other
variables to consider, but I think we can safely say that it doesn't
hurt a dark ride's
reputation to use the impressionistic approach.
So
why have the Imagineers largely abandoned said approach? Clearly
someone believes that
guests want more literal and linear stories in dark rides, but the
pattern I have just observed proves, at the very least, that there's
more to it than that.
In
any case, I'm really glad we still have Peter Pan's Flight as a
counter-example to the current line of thinking.
As
a final note, here's something I bet you never noticed before. As you
turn the last switchback in the queue (before the turnstile), take
a look to your left.
*
Not that presenting an original plot is necessarily a bad way to go.
Roger Rabbit's Car Toon Spin presents an original plot.
**
Punchy attraction names are a dying breed.
***
I'm not convinced most of them are
upgrades; can you tell?
