Stupid Guest Tricks

The case of the missing dragon
The troubled Maleficent has collapsed and is no longer in Disney's Fantasmic show. Park officials say it's 'technical.' Fans are anxious.

By Paloma Esquivel, Los Angeles Times
August 30, 2010|7:03 p.m.

From the start, this dragon never seemed quite ready for prime time.

When Disneyland's updated version of the Fantasmic show debuted in June of last year, it had to do so minus Maleficent, the mighty fire-breather from "Sleeping Beauty" that was supposed to be the star of the show.

At the time, rumors flew across the Web that Maleficent had been unable to make the debut because the dragon's head had fallen off during rehearsal. Disney officials refused to confirm anything more than that there had been some mechanical trouble.

The 45-foot-tall, 18,000-pound dragon with glowing eyes finally debuted three months late, rising from the bank of Tom Sawyer's Island and into the night sky last September.

But on Monday, Disney officials confirmed that the dragon was down for the count again, this time indefinitely. They described the ailment as some kind of "technical" problem during Saturday's show.

Fans were a bit more precise. The beast had collapsed during the show, they reported on micechat.com, a fan website. Or as one observer suggested, Maleficent pulled a "face plant." more...

Yes, the poor dragon has pooped out. Perhaps it had a few too many drinks.

Unlike many folks on some of those other boards, I really don't think that this is a big deal.

These things happen. The dragon is a very complex piece of machinery. At least they have time to work on it now that Fantasmic is only showing on weekends.

Hopefully the issue isn't too serous, and I wish the park the best of luck getting it operational again.

I have to say though, I find it a bit dis-concerning that the LA Times is citing an extremely critical fan message board for sources.

Let em'. I really don't want them calling me.

Disneyguy85 wrote: I have to say though, I find it a bit dis-concerning that the LA Times is citing an extremely critical fan message board for sources.

Not the first time, they've quoted a certain someone who runs that particular board to say that small world got new boats because people are fat. And now, people come up to me all the time, you got new boats cause people are fat and even though that wasn't the reason and I tell them, no it's because the boats are original from when the attraction debuted at the 1964 New York World's Fair, they still want to insist it's cause people are fat. Ever since then, I refuse to read the LA Times, they clearly are unconcerned with credible sources.

looks like a pump failor. but if it was that it would get fixed over night, unless she uses a special pump they have to order from somewhere. but she is so complex it could be anything.

drcorey wrote:looks like a pump failor. but if it was that it would get fixed over night, unless she uses a special pump they have to order from somewhere. but she is so complex it could be anything.

it would have been funny if she landed on a front paw thou.
i.e. huge creature face palm... :D:

Pump or other hydraulic system failure. Fluid in the bottom of the pit is a sure sign.

lady ulrike wrote:I refuse to read the LA Times, they clearly are concerned with credible sources.

Yes, I agree. And that's what I mean, they always seem cite message boards.

disney should answer all inquires monthy python style:

this dragon is dead!

Nooooo, its just sleeping...

And I was hoping to see her on my trip down there in a couple months :( . Well, it is towards the end of October, maybe she'll be up and running again by then :D: .