Expansion and Enhancements coming to Disneyland's Haunted Mansion

DrStarlander19 hours ago

As many commentators have pointed out, the building is detrimentally big and unfortunately it's bigger than necessary due to the extended roof overhangs at the front and side porch. It's inevitable that people will claim the roof overhangs, especially out front, are necessary or that the rehab project to cut them back would be substantial due to the many beefy beams extending out front. As the years go on, people may lose track of how this structure was actually built and what is, or is not, structural. So the following images of the construction phases serve to record the building's construction and to show that those beams are entirely cosmetic. Although the two beam extensions at the roof inflection points (where it changes angle) were originally the actual structural beams, they were cut back during construction (which you can see in the progression of images, and notice the burn marks from the process of cutting the beam back with). They were replaced, and joined with others, including at the ridge, with fake beam extensions. The point of all this is that they spent additional money to create these beam extensions, and on the additional size of the roof. Oh well. But more importantly, now, it is a relatively minor project to cut this front roof extension back to match the back of the structure as seen in the bottom reference image (and, architecturally-integrity-wise, it always should have matched). This, and eliminating the porch overhang, would reduce the visual scale of this building. 856965

lazyboy97o1 day ago

There is no such thing as “the main Imagineering team”. Every project has a different team. Even something like the work on The Haunted Mansion would have had different smaller teams based on project scope and discipline. Vendors are not given free rein to do whatever they want on a project. Their work is still managed and approved by Walt Disney Imagineering.

Figments Friend1 day ago

Horrendous. And yes, this IS what it looks like in person! Just horrendous. Still cannot understand why they felt this was something that needed to be there, and be so LARGE. Yes, I know they needed a new retail spot because of the old spot being taken….yes, I know they needed a place that could contain people and mobility carts…. But day-um. The choice they ended up with just fluffs up the once perfectly designed view from this angle. Clapshack blocking the view of a true masterpiece. Horrendous…. -

eddie1041 day ago

Are we sure the main Imagineering team even handled this project ?? There have been some examples recently that I feel like a lot of this work was outsourced to various companies that don’t have the same standards as Disney when it comes to execution or theming.

DrStarlander1 day ago

For me, it's hard to know what thought or effort the people who designed it put into it. I actually think it's most likely -- and equally, or more, troubling -- that they probably did put thought into it but they lack the talent needed to perform as well as their Imagineering predecessors. Talented creatives would have been able to pull this off with the same, minimal, budget by simply not making terrible decisions, and by allocating their spending in better places. Here are some examples: The deep overhang at the front, as discussed above. This was unnecessary and is a detraction. That's not because of a budget limitation (in fact, what they did costs more), it's because a designer didn't research and understand the relevant historical architecture and instead got excited about hanging lanterns. Speaking of the lanterns, and all the lighting...custom historical light fixtures can be made by countless workshops dedicated to that craft, and it's not that expensive. The lights they're using look like they came from Lowe's. Yes, could it be a cost savings? Sure, but better lights would not have cost that much. Those pendant lanterns out front could have been mystical, thematically enticing, colored-glass lanterns to evoke Madame Leota...isn't that the point of theming this after her? Also on the topic of lighting, the glass in the lanterns is clear, affording too clear a view of the bulbs, which are too white/bright. And none of it flickers up and down to simulate flame. Antique, frosted/seeded glass, warmer color temperature bulbs, and flicker modules would not have added hardly any cost. It was a creative failure to exploit these details to the fullest thematic potential. The siding is fake, probably Hardie board or equivalent, with a fake texture and it looks awful. Actual wood (as used on the Jungle Cruise queue building) comes with additional cost, which includes fireproofing and sandblasting, wire brushing, etc., to bring out the grain/texture. This would have raised costs, and it may not last as long, theoretically (e.g., Hardboard may last 70ish years instead of wood's 50ish), but this is Anaheim (about as mild a climate as you can find) and that is not a real issue. This is absolutely the place to spend money. If this building was real wood, it would have been received significantly better. I know people would doubt that average guests could tell the difference but they can; they can perceive the "cheapness," especially within the context of Disneyland. Also on the siding, the perception of the height of the building could have been reduced with a stone wainscot/foundation (say 3 feet high). This would have made the building look less like a Home Depot shed or school "portable" classroom trailer. It would have looked permanent, historic, quaint, and more visually interesting. If you walk around a suburban neighborhood in the U.S. you'll see stone wainscoting on home exteriors all over. It's not a massive splurge to do stone veneer on the bottom three feet versus any other siding material. It's not a budget buster. It was a creative failure. The iron gate at the back, right near the Haunted Mansion exit, which provides a view of th backstage area, plumbing, and other junk. That is an example of a creative failure, as the custom iron gate cost more than just doing a rustic wood fence gate that would have worked better to block the backstage view. These are just examples. But to me it's creative failure after creative failure. Doing it significantly better would have hardly cost more. I say all this because I think if people put too much focus on Iger and the MBAs, we'll fail to hold the creatives (and the HR department responsible to hiring the best creatives in the first place) responsible. And I'd rather have genius creatives working with smaller budgets than creative lightweights working with bigger budgets.

Too Many Hats1 day ago

I feel like we're all incredulous at the final product and can't figure out why easy/inexpensive adjustments weren't made -- but for some reason the discussion keeps sidestepping the obvious "Occam's razor" explanation. The carriage house is thematically intrusive because the people who designed/approved it put literally no thought or effort into it whatsoever. That's it; that's why it stands out like a sore thumb at Disneyland. I'm not trying to shut down the discussion, I just think we should speak more plainly about this. To some extent we must acknowledge the reality of the commerce/art imbalance within this company under Iger. For all the good (new queue; new bride), there's bad (thematically intrusive shop). Could be worse; they could be paving the ROA to build a "Frontierland" attraction with anthropomorphic cars. Disneyland will never be thematically complete, as long as there's clueless decision-making MBAs left in the company.

DrStarlander1 day ago

Exactly. They put an extended overhang at the front for absolutely no reason (what they did was architectural incorrect...it's not based on real Southern architectural vernacular). It just makes the building more massive than necessary. An overhang on a 19th century carriage house would have been fairly minimal. Then they could have a shed roof directly above the barn doors, which would have created more depth and visual interest at the front of the structure in the lowest 12 feet where guests will notice/appreciate it (deep overhangs 12-25 feet up are pointless). The structure's protruding beams are also glaringly out of place. Luckily those beam extensions are entirely fake and unnecessary for the structure, so the roof could be cut back for a minimal cost. As far as the extended side overhang (which partially covers the Haunted Mansion exit path), that was indeed a historically reasonable feature, but it creates two issues: first, again, it make the building bigger than necessary, when all efforts should have been made to minimize the scale of the building; two, the placement of the support posts is awful. They should cut that overhang back as well and if they want a feature to extend from the building, put an arbor there with vines that completely crosses the HM exit path so there are no posts in the way. Artificial vegetation on the roof of the structure (as used on nearby Tiana lift barn) would help reduce the perceived scale and blend better to Bayou Country. Some dormer windows and a cupola would further add charm and detail and break up the visual massiveness of that boring roof. Landscaping (tall grasses) and a tree or two at the front corners would help a lot, the fact the building is plopped on the concrete with no landscaping gives it the temporary Home Depot shed vibe. All these things could be done relatively inexpensively (by Disney standards) and they owe it to the legacy of the Haunted Mansion and the park, they really created a detriment that should be addressed.

Adventureland Veranda1 day ago

I finally saw the gift shop in person this week. It looks so cheap with the poorly aged siding and horrible signage. I liked the original concept art and don't understand why they went with such a tall structure. It looks ridiculous when you stand in front and compare its size to the mansion. The new HM queue however looks great. Glad they incorporated the old fountain too.

MK-fan2 days ago

Basically a switchback line

etc982 days ago

I didn’t realize they built a new Jungle Cruise hehe building in the 90s. What did it look like before?

SuddenStorm2 days ago

So really , the only reason to go past the Mansion exit now is the Canoes. Everything else has been harmed in some way the last 10 years.

SuddenStorm2 days ago

One was early 1990s WDI, one was 2020s.

wityblack2 days ago

WOah, the Jungle Cruise station isn't a stain /s

mickEblu2 days ago

An an unsightly stain on an otherwise near perfect land. Of course it was at its absolute best with Magnolia Park.