Oh, I think we all know the answer to that one.which one is good...and which one is awesome...
Heck, just based on the musical score alone ....
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Soarin' Expansion and new Soarin' Around the World film
- Thread starter danlb_2000
- Start date
Heck, just based on the musical score alone ....
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
I don't...haven't ridden Soarin over the world yet...12 more days...
It's good, not awesome. You'll see.
AnthHoggard
New Member
Better than the original ?
Not by me. Nor by any other reviews I've read.
I saw it 10x in September. We used FP, or Stand-by of 5-15 minutes. I would never have waited 45-60 minutes for it, as I gleefully did for the original.
Soarin' Around the World is good. Really good, even.
Soarin' Over California was wonderful. *sigh*
For us, the curve was really noticeable on the Eifel Tower scene. Overall, the new version has tall, thin features that really exaggerate the curve when looked at from the side. The old version, not so much. Everything seemed more horizontal, and thus not as curvy in the old version.
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
Because they wanted to do something new.
danv3
Well-Known Member
If we were starting from scratch, I'd say the Soarin' in EPCOT should cover the whole world, but it should be limited to natural wonders as befitting The Land.
danv3
Well-Known Member
No scrutiny is required in the new version. The bent Eiffel Tower reaches out and slaps riders across the face.
HMF
Well-Known Member
Same logic that put Guardians of the Galaxy into Tower of Terror.
tissandtully
Well-Known Member
Yeah, the Eiffel Tower needs a little blue pill in the new film.
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
"The whole thing sucks because a few seconds at the end look a little weird!!"
There are quite a few flaws.
danv3
Well-Known Member
As marni notes, there a number of flaws.
And who said it "sucks"? It's one of my favorite attractions. It's just not as good as it used to be.
This. It's still good. Just not as good.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
That's really the issue. The curves were most noticeable in scene 1 of the old film but the curves of the Golden Gate Bridge helped lessen the appearance.
There are more straight lines in Soarin' Around the World to make the issue more pronounced.
Around the World is OK. But it would be amazing if the CG aspects were tamed. So many fake animals, hokey scene transitions and drawn buildings. CG is overused in this version. (exception being transition through clouds) It's reliance on CG makes the entire attraction seem less genuine or authentic.
Scary thought: CGI opens the door for even more add-ins in the form of IPs.
Remove the Taj Mahal, hang gliders, fix or remove animals, stick to a basic fade whips (yes Hard cuts are bad but these transition effects are surprisingly more jarring) and you'll have a much better attraction, IMHO. That and maybe adding haze/fog machines for additional layer between yourself and the screen. And to enhance transitions with bursts of air.
Scary thought: CGI opens the door for even more add-ins in the form of IPs.
Remove the Taj Mahal, hang gliders, fix or remove animals, stick to a basic fade whips (yes Hard cuts are bad but these transition effects are surprisingly more jarring) and you'll have a much better attraction, IMHO. That and maybe adding haze/fog machines for additional layer between yourself and the screen. And to enhance transitions with bursts of air.
Last edited:
lifeguard1020
Active Member
It may be an awkward thought, but having all those transitions seems like it has a bit of a negative on the film. Each one takes between 1-2 seconds (from what I remember). If they had just used hard cuts, they may have been able to fit an entire extra scene into the film in the same ride time.