[HN Gopher] Disney Imagineering Debuts Next-Generation Robotic C...
___________________________________________________________________
Disney Imagineering Debuts Next-Generation Robotic Character, Olaf
Author : ChrisArchitect
Score : 144 points
Date : 2025-12-21 21:46 UTC (7 hours ago)
HTML web link (disneyparksblog.com)
TEXT w3m dump (disneyparksblog.com)
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| Related R&D paper & video:
|
| _Olaf: Bringing an Animated Character to Life in the Physical
| World_
|
| https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.16705
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-L8OFMTteOo
| sdiupIGPWEfh wrote:
| Steam Deck spotted, two minutes, seven seconds in. Seems to be
| getting a fair amount of use for puppeteering robots at Disney.
| gkoberger wrote:
| This is cool, but it will almost definitely never end up in a
| park, outside of some promotional situations.
|
| Disney's been doing awesome work with "Living Characters", like a
| Mickey that moves his mouth or a BB-8 that can roll around. But
| for various reasons, they never tend to make it into regular
| usage.
|
| If you have a few hours over Christmas break and want to watch a
| 4 hour YouTube video (I promise if you're on HN on a Sunday,
| you'll be delighted by it), I highly highly recommend this video:
|
| "Disney's Living Characters: A Broken Promise" by Defunctland
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyIgV84fudM
| this_user wrote:
| A lot of it just seems to be marketing. Present the shiny new
| toy, get the news headlines, people book their stays, and then
| it doesn't really matter if they ever actually make it into the
| parks.
| gkoberger wrote:
| Eh, maybe. I have a less myopic view... I think their
| Imagineers just like pushing the envelope, and there's a
| difference between awesome tech vs things that can withstand
| the wear-and-tear of millions of guests.
|
| Nothing about all that tech makes me think Olaf could
| withstand a hug from an excited kid.
|
| Disney does a ton of R&D that doesn't directly make it into
| the parks, such as smokeless fireworks (they donated the
| patent for this) and their holotile floor (basically an
| endless VR room you can walk around). I imagine they don't
| know the practicality at the start, like any good R&D.
| hamdingers wrote:
| Each time they trot out one of these new robots they
| strongly imply, if not outright promise, that they will
| become part of the parks[1], that's the problem. Things
| like HoloTile are accurately marketed which makes me
| believe it's a choice they're making with the character
| robots.
|
| 1. The article states "he's soon making his debut at Disney
| parks," which is misleading to a casual reader who may not
| realize that Olaf will only appear on the day of his debut.
| dotancohen wrote:
| > things that can withstand the wear-and-tear of millions
| of guests.
|
| In the video, one of the presenters removes and reattaches
| Olaf's nose. The robot laughs and loves it. I thought to
| myself, how many kids tearing at that wear item will this
| survive? I think the answer is significantly less than the
| thousands of kids who are expected to see this attraction
| every day.
| sharkweek wrote:
| Amazon drone delivery comes to mind...
| hamdingers wrote:
| The term for that is false advertising.
| chroma205 wrote:
| > The term for that is false advertising.
|
| No different than Elon Musk claiming self-driving will be
| deployed to all Teslas in 2017; 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021,
| 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025, 2026.
| makeitdouble wrote:
| We're probably looking at a halo effect ?
|
| Similar to concept car demoed at trade shows, we get an idea
| of Disney's technical engagement, and some of it will perhaps
| in some way or form get applied into future
| products/attractions.
| mattv8 wrote:
| 4 hours is an awfully big investment... Especially for those of
| us with multiple young kids and who no longer own their own
| free time. Care to give the gist?
| Melonai wrote:
| Defunctland is genuinely amazing and always a fun watch, and
| I never regret the time spent on their videos, they're kind
| of like a special occasion... though they're getting
| incredibly long... :)
|
| There are a few older shorter videos in the half hour range,
| I highly recommend checking them out if you find some quiet
| time! (It's awfully hard for me too in recent times, I
| haven't gotten around to watch the Living Characters one
| myself, so I can't give the gist... I'm just glad I got the
| holidays off to finally catch up!)
| gkoberger wrote:
| For anyone who DOES have time, this one is amazing: it
| combines broadcast history, Disney Channel nostalgia, and a
| genuinely beautiful storyline.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_rjBWmc1iQ
| lazystar wrote:
| and for anyone with 4 hours to kill... here's as an
| incredible documentary covering the misaligned incentives
| and poor guest experience at the now-shuttered Disney
| Star Wars hotel.
|
| https://youtube.com/watch?v=T0CpOYZZZW4
|
| She covers everything - the line getting in to the hotel,
| the size + cost of the rooms in comparison with the same
| size/cost on a Disney cruise ship, and theories on why
| the experience was so poor.
| robbiet480 wrote:
| Jenny Nicholsen is as excellent as Kevin Perjurer's
| Defunctland. I highly recommend both.
| russdill wrote:
| Loved it and it showed up several times in the recent
| defunctland video. That and quite a bit of Freshbaked
| gkoberger wrote:
| The basic gist is that while the tech is cool, it just ends
| up being impractical for regular use in the parks. (But like
| the other poster mentioned, with Defunctland it's less about
| the tldr and more about the journey and fascinating segues he
| takes)
|
| Totally get it's difficult to make time with kids, but
| depending on your kids ages... the video shows a LOT of
| Disney characters talking and doing things and the videos are
| colorful, so it could work as something you can listen to and
| they won't mind having play in the background!
| crooked-v wrote:
| One of the key reasons is that it would be really, really
| easy to accidentally injure parkgoers with any design big
| enough to interact with and engineered well enough to be
| reliable in a full day of appearances.
|
| For example, the working WALL-E robot that's made a handful
| of PR appearances weighs seven hundred pounds. They
| absolutely can't risk that ever running across some kid's
| foot.
| luqtas wrote:
| > They absolutely can't risk that ever running across some
| kid's foot.
|
| imagine it packing a kid into cube
| kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
| > Mickey that moves his mouth
|
| The Disney wiki has a pretty comprehensive list of usages for
| the "articulated heads". It's more than I remember it being.
|
| https://disney.fandom.com/wiki/Disney_Characters%27_Articula...
| aspenmayer wrote:
| > https://disney.fandom.com/wiki/Disney_Characters%27_Articul
| a...
|
| A somewhat more readable frontend I like, since Fandom.com's
| interface cramps the actual content it's meant to present,
| imo:
|
| https://breezewiki.com/disney/wiki/Disney_Characters'_Articu.
| ..
| jfoster wrote:
| They literally sell BB-8 toys that can roll around and say on
| the blog that the Olaf robot is coming to Disneyland Paris and
| special appearances at Disneyland Hong Kong.
| ohyoutravel wrote:
| R2D2 is an example of one that you can buy in the gift shop
| (for $20k!) that was promised to make it into the park but
| just comes out highly supervised, occasionally.
| gkoberger wrote:
| I know there's BB-8 toys, but I'm talking about the version
| meant for the parks: https://youtu.be/RDgZjdZsc6g
|
| Much like Olaf (and many before him... dinosaurs, WALL-E,
| talking characters, etc), it was implied he'd wander around
| the parks. But it tends to happen for a short amount of time,
| mostly for events, and fade away quickly. (The blog post even
| says that: Olaf will be part of a 15 minute temporary show,
| and then will visit Hong Kong).
|
| Maybe I'm wrong, but I've seen this exact thing happen a
| dozen times over the past 20+ years. (And watch the video I
| posted if you want to see more!)
| mrandish wrote:
| > But it tends to happen for a short amount of time, mostly
| for events
|
| I expect you're correct. While it's fantastic tech, it's
| also very expensive to keep highly-precise, carefully
| calibrated micro-machinery like this aligned and operating
| 12+ hours a day outdoors where temps vary from 50-110
| degrees. Disney thinks in total cost of operation per hour
| and per customer-served.
|
| While there's probably little that's more magical for a kid
| than coming across an expressively alive-seeming automaton
| operating in a free-form, uncontrolled environment, the
| cost is _really_ high per audience member. Once there are
| 25 people crowded around, no new kid can see what all the
| commotion is about. That 's why these kind of high-
| operating cost things tend to be found in stage and ride
| contexts, where the audience-served per peak hour can be in
| the hundreds or thousands. For outdoor free-form
| environments, the reality is it's still more economically
| viable to put humans in costumes. Especially when every
| high-end animatronic needs to always be accompanied by
| several human minders anyway.
| Animats wrote:
| > the cost is really high per audience member.
|
| Disney has problems with that. Their Galactic Starcruiser
| themed hotel experience cost more to the customer than a
| cruise on a real cruise ship, and Disney was still losing
| money on it. The cost merely to visit their parks is now
| too high for most Americans.
|
| It's really hard to make money in mass market location-
| based entertainment. There have been many attempts, from
| flight simulators to escape rooms. Throughput is just too
| low, so cost per customer is too high.
|
| A little mobile robot connected to an LLM chatbot, though
| - that's not too hard today. Probably coming to a mall
| near you soon. Many stores already have inventory bots
| cruising around. They're mobile bases with a tall column
| of cameras which scan the shelves.[2] There's no reason
| they can't also answer questions about what's where in
| the store. They do know the inventory.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars:_Galactic_Sta
| rcruise...
|
| [2] https://www.simberobotics.com/store-
| intelligence/tally
| jerrysievert wrote:
| while I haven't seen them at parks (I just don't make it to
| any), I have seen them at Star Wars events at my local MiLB
| team - BB-8 in the size of your video, somewhat interactive
| and autonomous, same with R2D2. there's usually a human
| nearby to monitor it, but they're definitely around.
| apparent wrote:
| Why do you say this? I don't have 4 hours right now and would
| appreciate a TLDR.
| jen20 wrote:
| I worked with someone who had previously worked on park
| robotics, and apparently they had to _guarantee_ that the
| character could not injure a child to be able to put them in
| parks - a particularly high barrier to actually doing so.
| conductr wrote:
| One look at Olaf's hands alone make that an impossible
| thing to guarantee. Those stick fingers will eventually
| poke a kid in the eye if kids are allowed to get close to
| the character. If they gave him a small intimate stage, or
| roped off area, to do some act or crowd work that would be
| more ideal/less risky.
| anshumankmr wrote:
| Why not make those from foam, ie the tip or something?
| efnx wrote:
| That bot is cute, but every kid is going to kick it over. Its
| not realistic to have in a park.
| peacebeard wrote:
| It's not as technically impressive, but my toddler was very
| impressed by the R2D2 that was making its rounds in the park.
| Not part of a show; you could go right up to it. Probably the
| only character where the theme park robot is really
| indistinguishable from the real thing.
| Waterluvian wrote:
| I watched a bit of this with my 8 year old and he kept asking
| to come back to it over the week. We watched the entire thing
| and he kept bringing up interesting thoughts and had good
| questions. Felt like it was his first "wow this lecture is
| actually super interesting" experience.
| sharkjacobs wrote:
| > Most importantly, Olaf can speak and engage in conversations,
| creating a truly one-of-a-kind experience.
|
| We already live in the world where hackers are pwning
| refrigerators, I can't wait for prompt injection attacks on
| animatronic cartoon characters.
| Majromax wrote:
| > We already live in the world where hackers are pwning
| refrigerators, I can't wait for prompt injection attacks on
| animatronic cartoon characters.
|
| It's not necessarily AI controlling the communication. Disney
| has long had 'puppet' characters whose communication is
| controlled by a human behind the scenes.
| flutas wrote:
| Yep, in this case everything is controlled through a steam
| deck.
| crooked-v wrote:
| They're already using similar tech for the Mickey meet and
| greets and the Galaxy's Edge stormtroopers. The details
| aren't public, but it seems to be a mix of complex dialogue
| trees with interrupts or context switches, controlled in real
| time by the actor or operator.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| That's interesting; if you're doing human in the loop, I
| would have thought it'd be easier to just do voice
| swapping. Or did the technology not quite line up?
| pfych wrote:
| Someones linked in this thread the Defunctland video
| essay on these characters that I highly recommend
| watching since it goes into this in detail.
|
| But the main reason is, there's a lot of brand imagery on
| the line with these interactions, someone putting on a
| voice, or using a voice changer _could_ make a mistake.
| Disney instead have a conversation tree with pre-recorded
| voice lines that a remote operator can control. Much
| harder to mess up
| dotancohen wrote:
| And possibly more importantly, much easier to keep doing
| for hours on end. There's no need for a highly trained
| actor.
| lwhi wrote:
| This leads me to wonder, when are we likely to have LLMs in robot
| form in every day life?
| themanmaran wrote:
| You could build one today! Lots of hard problems around a
| proper humanoid form, but if you're cool with wheels it would
| be pretty easy to hook up a little robot to GPT.
| charcircuit wrote:
| >From the way he moves to the way he looks, every gesture and
| detail is crafted to reflect the Olaf audiences have seen in the
| film
|
| He looks nothing like a snowman. Snow doesn't look fuzzy. This
| project appears to focus more on trying to get it moving around
| in an animated way than getting the character to look right, at
| least when viewed from photographs.
| gcanyon wrote:
| They can make a two-legged walking robot, but they can't avoid
| the visible seam in the back of his head?
|
| The tech is amazing, but they need better sewing...
| RandallBrown wrote:
| Isn't the robot in the article a prototype?
| dotancohen wrote:
| Arguably men are two legged walking robots, and men have seams.
| Even nature couldn't avoid it.
| gedy wrote:
| Really neat, and made me realize we are getting close to having
| these type of cute robots at home. With LLMs and voice they would
| be pretty entertaining companions for many people.
| gregjw wrote:
| Five Nights at Freddys has ruined the joy animatronics for me,
| they just seem creepy now.
| whycome wrote:
| Sometimes the idea of a killer cyborg with a hulking physique and
| Austrian accent seems absurd. And then we realize the most
| advanced robots will be made by entertainment companies.
| dotancohen wrote:
| Arguably entertainment requires a much larger range of
| precision actions that the robot must be able to accomplish,
| while being in a less controlled environment. That's the
| cutting edge.
| ursAxZA wrote:
| For Paris, I'd honestly be more curious to see a Beast robot from
| *Beauty and the Beast.
|
| Full-size might be... risky, but a small, friendly mini-Beast
| could be fun.
| fwip wrote:
| When even Disney can't be bothered to write an article without
| using the default LLM voice... ugh.
| sb057 wrote:
| The lack of a video demonstration doesn't really inspire
| confidence.
| jwkerr wrote:
| There's an embedded TikTok showing it off.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-12-22 05:00 UTC)