Skull Island: Reign of Kong from construction to opening

[Jimmy Thick]

Because I live in So Cal and likely won't ride it within the next 5-10 years.

Even then I wouldn't watch a video. We as fans if we're lucky get one new attraction a year, to spoil it by watching a video and not actually experiencing what the designers intended is not my idea of a good time. But to each his/her own of course.

This day and age of instant information takes away from the hard work of literally thousands of people who made one hell of an experience.

Jimmy Thick- Haven't seen Shanghi's Pirates either...Even though I have no plans to go to China...Yet...

 

[JoeCamel]

ran a truck in closed the doors and turned off the fire

 

[Tom Morrow]

I rode it! I didn't watch any videos before riding it. I learned the hard way by spoiling Radiator Springs Racers from YouTube videos and from now on I won't watch any ride videos except for new coasters since there's nothing to spoil.

Spoiler: Thoughts:

- the facade and entire exterior are phenomenal and it blends seamlessly with Jurassic Park (though I think they need to re-install the Jurassic Park arch somewhere).
- the exterior queue has a music loop that is very reminiscent of Albert AWOL's broadcast at the Jungle Cruise.
- the interior queue is effectively creepy, however, I found that the acoustics were kind of bad and everyone's conversations were amplified to headache-inducing levels.
- Though the ride's plot is very simple, there seems to be very little context as to why you're there and it seems like you're supposed to pick up everything from brief audio announcements and a few signs. Are we part of the expedition? Are we just being given a tour of the island? I was not able to pick up on the context. They boast that there are 5 driver characters and some others, but where were we supposed to learn anything about them or care about them? I know pre-show rooms are something Universal doesn't like to do and they can make re-riding annoying, but Gringotts was refreshing because it actually took some time to set up why you're there and what is going on. I also know the average theme park goer doesn't care and just wants to see "stuff happen", but for a great theme park experience, this stuff is important.
- I agree completely with @David2319 - the first few scenes absolutely did not need to be screen based and it seems it was only done so they could show a character being attacked and carried off by a dinosaur. Or perhaps they thought it would be awkward to ask you to put on your goggles mid-ride instead of at the beginning? The Kong 360 element might have a higher wow factor if it was the only screen element.
- Going back to my statement about needing some sort of pre-show for more context - who was this character being carried off? Why should we care about them?
- I knew the main element of this would be a copy of Kong 360, which I have not experienced in person. I didn't care for it, and it didn't feel immersive to me. It felt like what it is - an enhancement for a tram tour.
- Of course you get hit with water. Of course you fall and get caught at the last second.
- The Kong animatronic is amazing.
- I think the ride is longer than people are making it out to be at several minutes. It must be the idea of sitting in a big truck has people assuming the ride will be long. That said, it could have used maybe two more scenes/rooms.

Ultimately, it's a good, well-done ride, and would be great - if it wasn't in a resort full of attractions that all already hit all the same familiar notes.

 

[Daveeeeed]

Of course your average guest won't know or care. We do- but we're insane people who post a thousand comments about theme parks! Fanatics, right?

I would also argue this AA is nothing like the old Kong AA other than they are both giant Apes. Matterhorn and Yeti aren't the same either. I would say the innovation and drool comes from the scale of this attraction- and the fact this is Universal's biggest venture in years without the oversight of JK Rowling. It is a people mover, it has a long ride time, and it mixes slow dark ride elements (4 of the 6 scenes) with thrill elements (2 of the scenes)- with the real star being the scale of the rockwork, the Kong AA and the queue.

I think people get way too focused on the rides themselves. These arent amusement parks- they are theme parks. I am way more interested in scale of work, craftsmanship, and immersion- than the ride itself. Want a badass ride? Go to Riddlers Revenge at Six Flags Over Texas- one of the best rides ive ever done- thrilling. But its a giant green pendulum that swings at 70mph with zero theming. If you want badass theming and immersion- look no further than Reign of Kong.

Ratatouille was a completely non thrilling good combo of screens and sets. It could have used more yes, but when you looked above you were getting roasted under an oven etc. I am for screens if used in flight like Soarin', or Harry Potter, and if done super well like Gringotts, or Toy Story Midway Mania, but it is insane to have every headliner screens based. How would have Radiator Springs Racers been if Disney decided to go a cheaper route and use screens, and the animation in the screens isn't cheap, but the alternative is ultra expensive. I love a good happy medium. Mummy was nice to go in and take up the actual scenery. Kong could have used 3D to its advantage combined with sets, but then they have this women that know one cares about. I just don't get it. It's for sure not a bad ride, in fact it is good, but it's nowhere near as good as Shanghai POTC, Forbidden Journey, RSR's, Journey to the center of the Earth, Indy etc. Falls more under the SDMT, good but severely overhyped. Love Universal, Love Disney, but I got to hand it to Disney, thankfully they balance it.

 

[Daveeeeed]

No joke. Universal has dominated with innovation in both rides and queues the past 6 years- and the domination isn't even close. This Kong ride is no different from everything I've heard from anyone who has actually been on it. They've literally rewritten to book and made the blueprint of how to make new attractions and $ on said attractions and Disney has copied that formula completely.
If you don't like screens- then start going to cedar fair, six flags, and kings dominion. Because screens are the future- now as @Mike S said- Shhhhh

Last one promise.
Pandora: The World of Avatar is the future, where they are going to balance it out. One will be the first screen based attraction at Animal Kingdom (balanced), and the other will be in incredible sets. That is the future. A good line adds to the experience, and can make an amazing ride as perfect as possible, but you ride a ride for the ride itself mainly. If the substance is just okay (with the exception of the kong aa) then what's the point of having an amazing queue? I'm sure a ton of people will love Kong, and that is great, but you got to have a balance to bring everyone in. It doesn't have a very good readability if it's just screens, and one incredible aa isn't enough, you got to have scenes of sets. Forbidden Journey does that better than possibly any ride I've ever seen. That is the future too.

 

[danlb_2000]

I'm getting really frickin' tired of the screens debate so please take it somewhere else.

This is a thread about a ride that is heavily based on screens, the discussion of the merits of screens is totally on topic.

And this is my thread. Respect that.

So are you suggesting we have two threads about this ride, one where we only discuss the aspects of the ride that you approve of, and another where we can discuss any aspect of the ride?

 

[dweezil78]

Love Universal, Love Disney, but I got to hand it to Disney, thankfully they balance it.

Neither company is perfect. Both do a lot right, but have a lot of room for improvement. Without them both though, all of us would be bored and depressed. P

 

[Daveeeeed]

I think Universal needs a better combo, and frankly Kong has a very bad storyline which brings it down too.

Neither company is perfect. Both do a lot right, but have a lot of room for improvement. Without them both though, all of us would be bored and depressed. P

Very true, and by them being in this themepark war it is awesome for us! But Uni has got to have a better balance. It's getting ridiculous.

 

[Mike S]

This is a thread about a ride that is heavily based on screens, the discussion of the merits of screens is totally on topic.



So are you suggesting we have two threads about this ride, one where we only discuss the aspects of the ride that you approve of, and another where we can discuss any aspect of the ride?

Someone already started the thread for the debate for all of Universal. I've just seen it pop up so much recently both here and on OU and I'm getting tired of it. The same thing happened with the Frozen ride having split threads with one focused on construction and updates and one for everything else.

 

[dweezil78]

Very true, and by them being in this themepark war it is awesome for us! But Uni has got to have a better balance. It's getting ridiculous.

Definitely won't disagree with you there. I'm sure a lot has to do with economics. For a fraction of the cost, you can roll out something that seems like an E-ticket AND have the ability to change the show out with much more ease and less revamping costs should guests ever grow tired of it.

But yeah, I do miss the Universal of the 80s/90s when everything was big, big, big with real AAs, fire, and various practical FX. Heck, they even made real tornadoes!!! I'm sure the maintenance/supply costs for all of that was astronomical though, another reason why they've made the switch to screens.

 

[JT3000]

So is the Potter/Radiator Springs Racers comparison "not even close?"

Yes. Radiator Springs is fun and serves as a beautiful backdrop to Cars Land, but there's nothing groundbreaking about the ride. It's a Test Track clone, just with AAs and a "race" at the end. It's an improvement over its predecessor, but it's not at all comparable to the level of innovation seen in Forbidden Journey and Gringotts.

The rest of Cars Land is cute, and it is one of the best themed lands you'll find in the US, but Wizarding World's level of detail still leaves it in the dust (pun possibly intended.)

It's been ages since Disney did anything truly innovative stateside. We can look at what they're doing in other markets, and try to appreciate it through YouTube videos, but I'm not about to excuse the mediocrity they've allowed at their flagship resorts. Universal's been kicking their in that regard, regardless of who might have the more talented creative team.

DL vs USH is no comparison IMO- Particularly with what has come out in the last 6 years there. DL has lapped them 4 times.

I'm not sure that's true. USH still doesn't have a huge lineup of attractions, but they've made great strides in the past few years, making similar improvements as DCA has at a fraction of the cost. Disneyland itself has stagnated yet again (upcoming Star Wars expansion notwithstanding.)

 

[JoeCamel]

Kong is a great ride with that intangible, I want to ride it again and again. I could care less about screenz, I want to be seeing value for my money and I only get that at UOR any longer. You don't like it don't go but don't tell me what I should think about it. I was just there and most of you have not been. Come back to this thread AFTER you ride and give an unbiased opinion. If you are truthful the debate is dead

 

[Todd H]

I JUST missed the soft opening yesterday. I can't tell you how many times I walked by this week hoping to catch it. I will say it looks AMAZING and the forced perspective of the mountains looks awesome. Guess I'll have to catch it next year.

 

[Mike S]

Yes. Radiator Springs is fun and serves as a beautiful backdrop to Cars Land, but there's nothing groundbreaking about the ride. It's a Test Track clone, just with AAs and a "race" at the end. It's an improvement over its predecessor, but it's not at all comparable to the level of innovation seen in Forbidden Journey and Gringotts.

The rest of Cars Land is cute, and it is one of the best themed lands you'll find in the US, but Wizarding World's level of detail still leaves it in the dust (pun possibly intended.)

It's been ages since Disney did anything truly innovative stateside. We can look at what they're doing in other markets, and try to appreciate it through YouTube videos, but I'm not about to excuse the mediocrity they've allowed at their flagship resorts. Universal's been kicking their *** in that regard, regardless of who might have the more talented creative team.

As far as the lands themselves I'd put Hogsmeade on a similar level as Cars but Digon Alley above both. Why? Sight lines. Diagon Alley fully envelopes you with zero intrusion. From inside Cars Land I could still see Grizzly Mountain and Tower of Terror. For Hosmeade it's Dragon Challenge. Hippogriff strangely doesn't bother me as much. As far as ranking the headliner attractions?

1. Forbidden Jorney
2. Radiator Springs Racers
3. Gringotts

 

[JT3000]

Will absolutely give them credit for doing a nice job here, not disputing that. But everyone's biggest praise seems to be that they made this quickly and on time which is a weird thing to harp on and is something your average guest isn't going to care about. Also, not to take anything away from what looks like a fun attraction, but it's a 6 year old attraction combined with an updated AA from one that's 25+ years old and some well done jungle theming. What exactly is the innovation on this one?

Screen effects and pirate AAs have been around for decades. I guess Shanghai's POTC sucks.

And guests do notice how long it takes everything to open. Not everyone just shows up randomly. Many regulars plan out their vacations and won't return until they know there's something new to see.

And while I'll give them credit for the ride vehicle, let's be honest... that was done more out of necessity to navigate a tight cramped show building and is nothing that is really additive to the experience itself.

There's no sense in belittling a ride's innovative use of tech just because it was deemed necessary. Sticking with our little pirates theme, Disneyland's POTC is much longer than Magic Kingdom's out of necessity. The show building was built outside of the park's traditional borders, which necessitated a longer ride to reach it. Magic Kingdom didn't have this problem, and the ride itself actually suffered for it.

Speaking of necessity, here's a question for those of you complaining about the use of screens: have any of you actually compared the size of this building to Universal's other E-tickets? Then taken into account that it has to accommodate a very large, 72-person vehicle? There's a reason you're parked in front of screens for so long -- it's a very short ride.

 

[Todd H]

As far as the lands themselves I'd put Hogsmeade on a similar level as Cars but Digon Alley above both. Why? Sight lines. Diagon Alley fully envelopes you with zero intrusion. From inside Cars Land I could still see Grizzly Mountain and Tower of Terror. For Hosmeade it's Dragon Challenge. Hippogriff strangely doesn't bother me as much. As far as ranking the headliner attractions?

1. Forbidden Jorney
2. Radiator Springs Racers
3. Gringotts

I saw Diagon Alley for the first time this week and I have to agree. It is literally like stepping foot in the movie. I could have spent an entire day there just visiting every nook and cranny.

 

[MagicGoofy]

Don't act like the general public isn't having the same discussions that we are having, was looking on the youtube comments and man is the ride getting slammed, the ride itself looks fine to me, the que looks awesome. It was a bit anticlimactic with the kong bust sized animatronic sadly in my opinion. These are just observations though. I'm still excited because I'll be riding it sometime in the next month, will post a final review then.

 

[sonoma15]

Don't act like the general public isn't having the same discussions that we are having, was looking on the youtube comments and man is the ride getting slammed, the ride itself looks fine to me, the que looks awesome. It was a bit anticlimactic with the kong bust sized animatronic sadly in my opinion. These are just observations though. I'm still excited because I'll be riding it sometime in the next month, will post a final review then.

The comments are just hating on the ride for using screens, which is pretty much needed because you could not do the things on the screens in this ride with practical effects.

 

[Mike S]

Don't act like the general public isn't having the same discussions that we are having, was looking on the youtube comments and man is the ride getting slammed, the ride itself looks fine to me, the que looks awesome. It was a bit anticlimactic with the kong bust sized animatronic sadly in my opinion. These are just observations though. I'm still excited because I will be riding it sometime in the next month, I'lI post a real review then.

The YouTube comments could always be from readers of Inside the Magic and not all general public.

 

[dweezil78]

Screen effects and pirate AAs have been around for decades. I guess Shanghai's POTC sucks.

I'm not talking about the technology, I'm talking about these two specific show pieces. I am not a Disney nor Universal apologist, I consider myself a pretty unbiased fan of theme parks in general. I'd even go as far as to say Disney has not done anything close to the level of innovation and caliber of attraction that Spidey and Forbidden Journey showcase. They are both on another level that the mouse has yet to achieve. Same goes for the combined theming/linking of the two Harry Potter lands. All wins in the UNI column for sure.

But I will also say that you'd be very hard-pressed to compare Reign of Kong with the new POTC and not easily hand POTC the belt when it comes to that fight.