Spirited Spring Break News, Observations & Thoughts ...

[wdisney9000]

74 speaks the truth. There are those within the ranks of Creative, and many of those that are no longer working for Creative, that are a little tired of the reliance on video screens as the center of Universal’s attraction roster. Just like the original FJ concept, Gringotts started out as a nicely balanced ride that included a judicious mix of video and practical sets/show action and effects. Due to the very same reasons FJ suffered the loss of multiple practical, illusion/effect-based scenes Gringotts has become about 85% screen-based. Once again I need to qualify this with a great big – THIS RIDE WILL STILL BE A LOT OF FUN AND MANY WILL FIND IT TO BE SPECTACULAR. Please remember the following comes from someone who has been working on the project for several years now and therefore may see this from a very different perspective than many of you.

The screen-based argument is not a simple issue. The first thing to consider is that show action, AAs, and other types of practical effects can be extremely costly to maintain. When the consumables estimates are done during the design phases for example this is all taken into account. There are currently four LN2 based effects in Gringotts that fire off about every 30 seconds and that adds up to a pretty penny. Another example would be the Goblin AAs that include multiple functions and controls and require an expensive stock of spare parts and tech. services man-hours to perform PMs and maintenance. Not to mention the figure finish and QA. Now multiply the number of AAs and other mechanical show systems and we are talking a massive annual budget just to maintain these components. This is a factor in the decision to rely more upon Video for sure and it gives those in the current upper echelons of the Creative offices ammunition to make their case to the financial decision makers.

I understand all the foregoing but my main issue here is that Creative is not fighting for more “magic” and practical show elements but would rather maintain the status quo. Movie/Video is what certain upper level Creative executive are comfortable with and they really don’t have a full understanding of the theme park medium (at least what some of us would call the “old school” version of theme parks). I know that sounds crazy..that those in charge with conceptualizing the main attractions for a mega theme park company like Universal don’t understand theme park dark rides and attractions but just look at some of their backgrounds and how they talk in the meetings. An argument could be made that they are reinventing the theme park attraction experience and if that is a valid argument I guess I could say I much prefer “old school.” I’m not going to go into the reasons why here because I’ve done it In other posts and certainly many others have also. I would love to see a much more even balance of video and practical but so far we are losing that battle mainly due to the two reasons I’ve outlined in this post: Cost and a design philosophy/laziness.

Yes a budget needs to be worked up and adhered to in order to ensure the financial success of any project. What is wrong in this case is that they barely even care to work with the existing budget and adjust the concept because of ignorance. They feel the attraction will be successful (which it will be of course) using the tried and true formula (Spiderman, Transformers, Simpsons). I hate to bring it up and I can hear the groans virtually as I type but…Tokyo Disney somehow manages to budget full-fledged AA shows and rides and keep them in 100 percent working order. Please don’t tell me it’s just because they are in Japan because supposedly Florida’s Magic Kingdom gate revenue is larger than TDL. I have seen similar quality at Hong Kong Disney. Mystic Manor is a fantastic recent example of a balanced use of video and practical that is elaborate, impressive and very well maintained. So the examples are out there if anyone at Universal would like to see.

I’ve also pointed out many times how much visitors will be amazed when they tour Diagon Alley and ride the Hogwarts Express and Gringotts. It is a fantastic land and perhaps these, what some would call, minor criticisms will be forgotten once it opens and people see it for themselves. There are some jaw-dropping sets and details that will satisfy theme park fans and tourists. Gringotts is really BIG and the scene 7 finale will be exciting. Hogwarts Express to me will become one of the “classics” which should prove to anyone that I’m not completely against video. In the HE case the video is balanced with some practical sets, effects, and not to mention the way the video is being utilized is innovative. So I'm not saying Diagon will be bad obviously. My purpose in writing this is to echo what 74 is saying as well as educate some on what could be an even more exciting Universal future if the right people wake up and start questioning Creative’s design strategy and philosophy.

In summary I can't wait for you guys to see Diagon and the many wonders it has to offer but I’m also disappointed that we are only seeing a percentage of the potential it could have been. It’s true that every project team has criticisms and most visitors will never know or even care about what they might be missing when experiencing these new attractions. But that is the beauty of the internet. In this case it’s allowing me to express my concerns anomalously in the hopes that the message will reach the right ear and make someone think before the next project concept is locked down. At the very least maybe a few Universal visitors will mention it in one of those surveys they take.

Thanks for posting your thoughts on the issue. That was a great read. I wish it was 10 pages longer! I gotta ask though, did you write that in one take, or was there an original version that possibly "said too much/gave something away" and you had to edit it? Thats the version I want to read. lol. Thanks again for the info, very refreshing!

 

[Omnispace]

74 speaks the truth. There are those within the ranks of Creative, and many of those that are no longer working for Creative, that are a little tired of the reliance on video screens as the center of Universal’s attraction roster. Just like the original FJ concept, Gringotts started out as a nicely balanced ride that included a judicious mix of video and practical sets/show action and effects. Due to the very same reasons FJ suffered the loss of multiple practical, illusion/effect-based scenes Gringotts has become about 85% screen-based. Once again I need to qualify this with a great big – THIS RIDE WILL STILL BE A LOT OF FUN AND MANY WILL FIND IT TO BE SPECTACULAR. Please remember the following comes from someone who has been working on the project for several years now and therefore may see this from a very different perspective than many of you.

The screen-based argument is not a simple issue. The first thing to consider is that show action, AAs, and other types of practical effects can be extremely costly to maintain. When the consumables estimates are done during the design phases for example this is all taken into account. There are currently four LN2 based effects in Gringotts that fire off about every 30 seconds and that adds up to a pretty penny. Another example would be the Goblin AAs that include multiple functions and controls and require an expensive stock of spare parts and tech. services man-hours to perform PMs and maintenance. Not to mention the figure finish and QA. Now multiply the number of AAs and other mechanical show systems and we are talking a massive annual budget just to maintain these components. This is a factor in the decision to rely more upon Video for sure and it gives those in the current upper echelons of the Creative offices ammunition to make their case to the financial decision makers.

I understand all the foregoing but my main issue here is that Creative is not fighting for more “magic” and practical show elements but would rather maintain the status quo. Movie/Video is what certain upper level Creative executive are comfortable with and they really don’t have a full understanding of the theme park medium (at least what some of us would call the “old school” version of theme parks). I know that sounds crazy..that those in charge with conceptualizing the main attractions for a mega theme park company like Universal don’t understand theme park dark rides and attractions but just look at some of their backgrounds and how they talk in the meetings. An argument could be made that they are reinventing the theme park attraction experience and if that is a valid argument I guess I could say I much prefer “old school.” I’m not going to go into the reasons why here because I’ve done it In other posts and certainly many others have also. I would love to see a much more even balance of video and practical but so far we are losing that battle mainly due to the two reasons I’ve outlined in this post: Cost and a design philosophy/laziness.

Yes a budget needs to be worked up and adhered to in order to ensure the financial success of any project. What is wrong in this case is that they barely even care to work with the existing budget and adjust the concept because of ignorance. They feel the attraction will be successful (which it will be of course) using the tried and true formula (Spiderman, Transformers, Simpsons). I hate to bring it up and I can hear the groans virtually as I type but…Tokyo Disney somehow manages to budget full-fledged AA shows and rides and keep them in 100 percent working order. Please don’t tell me it’s just because they are in Japan because supposedly Florida’s Magic Kingdom gate revenue is larger than TDL. I have seen similar quality at Hong Kong Disney. Mystic Manor is a fantastic recent example of a balanced use of video and practical that is elaborate, impressive and very well maintained. So the examples are out there if anyone at Universal would like to see.

I’ve also pointed out many times how much visitors will be amazed when they tour Diagon Alley and ride the Hogwarts Express and Gringotts. It is a fantastic land and perhaps these, what some would call, minor criticisms will be forgotten once it opens and people see it for themselves. There are some jaw-dropping sets and details that will satisfy theme park fans and tourists. Gringotts is really BIG and the scene 7 finale will be exciting. Hogwarts Express to me will become one of the “classics” which should prove to anyone that I’m not completely against video. In the HE case the video is balanced with some practical sets, effects, and not to mention the way the video is being utilized is innovative. So I'm not saying Diagon will be bad obviously. My purpose in writing this is to echo what 74 is saying as well as educate some on what could be an even more exciting Universal future if the right people wake up and start questioning Creative’s design strategy and philosophy.

In summary I can't wait for you guys to see Diagon and the many wonders it has to offer but I’m also disappointed that we are only seeing a percentage of the potential it could have been. It’s true that every project team has criticisms and most visitors will never know or even care about what they might be missing when experiencing these new attractions. But that is the beauty of the internet. In this case it’s allowing me to express my concerns anomalously in the hopes that the message will reach the right ear and make someone think before the next project concept is locked down. At the very least maybe a few Universal visitors will mention it in one of those surveys they take.

Thanks for taking the time to write that! I suppose it can be argued that screen-based effects are more able to meet the hyper-action-based experiences that certain types of attractions demand. In a way they are able to meet the motion requirements that wouldn't ordinarily be physically achievable otherwise.

Another thing to consider is that with attractions becoming more and more tied to what one sees in the movie theater, there are certain expectations by guests that they will be able to relive the same experiences. Slow reveal and suspense don't seem to be qualities that as much in vogue in movies nowadays -- at least not with the big blockbuster IP's that are being touted by the theme park industry as their solution to synergy. It's especially true for Universal who has a more obvious connection to the film industry for their theme.

Also interesting point about the managers. Unfortunately, they are selected for their management abilities but put into the position of making creative decisions.

 

[danv3]

No, Muppets from Space is widely considered to be the terrible one. And what are you talking about, Tim Curry was amazing in Treasure Island

QFT.

 

[whylightbulb]

Thanks for posting your thoughts on the issue. That was a great read. I wish it was 10 pages longer! I gotta ask though, did you write that in one take, or was there an original version that possibly "said too much/gave something away" and you had to edit it? Thats the version I want to read. lol. Thanks again for the info, very refreshing!

I could probably write a book with the stuff I've edited out of my posts. The problem is the things I really want to say could make it very easy to identify me so I have to be careful.

 

[Lee]

I could probably write a book with the stuff I've edited out of my posts. The problem is the things I really want to say could make it very easy to identify me so I have to be careful.

Don't need a book. Just forward those unedited posts this way...

 

[whylightbulb]

Thanks for taking the time to write that! I suppose it can be argued that screen-based effects are more able to meet the hyper-action-based experiences that certain types of attractions demand. In a way they are able to meet the motion requirements that wouldn't ordinarily be physically achievable otherwise.

Another thing to consider is that with attractions becoming more and more tied to what one sees in the movie theater, there are certain expectations by guests that they will be able to relive the same experiences. Slow reveal and suspense don't seem to be qualities that as much in vogue in movies nowadays -- at least not with the big blockbuster IP's that are being touted by the theme park industry as their solution to synergy. It's especially true for Universal who has a more obvious connection to the film industry for their theme.

Also interesting point about the managers. Unfortunately, they are selected for their management abilities but put into the position of making creative decisions.

In the case of Gringotts large-format 3D video tied with dynamic track motion bases is a great way to simulate those action sequences from the film using less space. Let me tell you these are some large screens and in some cases require the use of multiple projectors on the floor and on the catwalk. Another positive thing I can say about Gringotts projection setup is the POV will be similar to being in the middle of the screen at Simpsons (the sweet spot). So you are meant to look down and up, not just up from the floor as with Spiderman and most of Transformers. I don't have an issue with using video my concern is the overuse of it at the expense of more practical show elements. Than again I'm one of those that are tired of 3D in the theaters. I also miss the old school style of theme park entertainment when it comes to the latest projects.

 

[Lee]

What better place than this random thread to share Hitler's reaction to FP+

That...may be the best thing ever.
Please let that go viral in TDO and Burbank...

 

[whylightbulb]

Don't need a book. Just forward those unedited posts this way...

LOL I would if I had not destroyed all the evidence in the shredder.

 

[Omnispace]

......I don't have an issue with using video my concern is the overuse of it at the expense of more practical show elements. Than again I'm one of those that are tired of 3D in the theaters. I also miss the old school style of theme park entertainment when it comes to the latest projects.

Definitely! There should be a balance of all types of experiences.

 

[jt04]

Quite frankly, JT, yet again you have no clue what you are even speaking of (not that it ever stops you). I don't know why you wish to discuss LaughingPlace.com, but if you do, then I know I am in a far better position to talk about the place as a longtime member of what was once a thriving online community.

The fact it is dead now (I firmly believe the only reason it exists in any form is because Doobie is a fan and has the finances to keep it up) speaks to losing many powerful voices, including mine. By the time I opted to leave for good in 2011, the place already was fighting to keep the tumbleweeds away. The fact the site died had little to do with any negativity. It had to do with losing important respected voices.

It also had to do with Disney giving Lee MacDonald an ultimatum involving his contract work with the company in Asia that resulted in LP shutting down their fantastic Tales From the LP fanzine so as not to compete with Disney's inferior D23. If you'd like to discuss it further, then I'd be glad to. But don't presume to understand things that you just do not.

But I do agree that social media allows people to live lives not based in reality. Indeed, that is the enabling factor I bring up when discussing mental health and the fan community.



WDW has always changed. Well, until about 15 years ago when TDO decided to just live off the past and nostalgia and let its parks grow tired and stale. If you feel that is moving ahead and changing, then you have an end backward view of ''changing with the times.''

WDW is many things. A victim of its own success would not be one, unless you believe that living up to your own standards simply became too heavy a burden for TDO. Is that what you are saying?

I can't ever find the ''Disney isn't investing'' line of BS that often gets trotted out. Indeed, many fans (such as myself) are disgusted by the billions that Disney is spending on data mining, trip planning apps, back of the house tech, door locks, an uninspired Fantasyland redo, more EPCOT eateries, more timeshares etc.

Again, find me posts where folks are saying Disney isn't investing versus HOW they are investing.




Who am I misleading and how? Answer the question.

I will answer but this is my last contribution to any thread you start as you and others object to any challenge to your pov and that causes headaches for the mods. Anyone who challenges you gets reported. I am sure you do not approve of such cheap tactics but it is what it is.

You have never seen me defend the nextgen tech. I have since begun to believe there is much more to it than what is advertised. Some good, some out of necessity and some bad. My only hope is that it eventually leads to some cool applications. It does has potential for that but it would have been nice to see that money go into the parks.

It is easy to throw stones but it is clear to me you only present one side of the story from a subjective pov as do many here. I see progress. Systematic, deliberate, objective progress. Of course I would rather see things happen at the same pace but NO business sector grows at the same rate. And TWDC has other priorities now.

Remember when Lee claimed there were serious discussions of breaking up WDW? Seems they managed to dodge that bullet while spending literally billions on infrastructure. Nextgen tech is largely to do with infrastructure needs IMO. These are the necessary aspects of something as complex as WDW. They are not optional. Now it appears to me WDW has managed those challenges. I believe the future is quite bright.

That they are plowing a lot of money into crowd control, which has to be in place BEFORE they are needed is a strong indicator. See the new hub, MSUSA reconfig, new ferry transit docks and nextgen's ability to control crowds and you have a leading indicator of what the future holds. You disagree. Time will tell.

If you presented a more objective take I would not consider your content misleading.

Steve wants me to leave your threads. My pleasure.

It has been fun but I will post only in the fun threads.

~adios~

 

[hpyhnt 1000]

Thanks for taking the time to write that! I suppose it can be argued that screen-based effects are more able to meet the hyper-action-based experiences that certain types of attractions demand. In a way they are able to meet the motion requirements that wouldn't ordinarily be physically achievable otherwise.

Another thing to consider is that with attractions becoming more and more tied to what one sees in the movie theater, there are certain expectations by guests that they will be able to relive the same experiences. Slow reveal and suspense don't seem to be qualities that as much in vogue in movies nowadays -- at least not with the big blockbuster IP's that are being touted by the theme park industry as their solution to synergy. It's especially true for Universal who has a more obvious connection to the film industry for their theme.

Also interesting point about the managers. Unfortunately, they are selected for their management abilities but put into the position of making creative decisions.

I think that's true as well. But in terms of Universal and its attractions, I'm starting to worry that they're making attractions like FJ and Transformers hyper-action based not because they should, but just because they can.

Its also why I still find Spider-Man to be the best of the sets/screens simulators at Uni: there was at least an attempt at pacing rather than just non-stop action and noise (it's also why BTTF was better than Simpsons). With FJ, its just frenzied movement and noise once you leave the load area, and TF is even worse because its one explosion and collision after another. It's hard to enjoy the experience when you have no time to process anything thats going on around you. Hopefully Gringotts doesn't follow the same formula and allows for a "breather" scene or two.

 

[JimboJones123]

No, Muppets from Space is widely considered to be the terrible one. And what are you talking about, Tim Curry was amazing in Treasure Island

I am talking about him not being amazing.

 

[JimboJones123]

I am SO much more excited about Hogwarts Express than Gringotts. If I could put one criticism on WWOHP 1.0, it is the lack of things for us nausea sensitive folks to do. Especially with repeat visits. HE looks to remedy that.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I am SO much more excited about Hogwarts Express than Gringotts. If I could put one criticism on WWOHP 1.0, it is the lack of things for us nausea sensitive folks to do. Especially with repeat visits. HE looks to remedy that.

I'm more interested in riding HE too. It's one of those quintisential Harry Potter moments that should have been there from the start, like dining in the Great Hall. The two sides will also give it more replay value.

@whylightbulb I assume the 85% screen make-up will not factor into the queue/pre-show area?

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Steve wants me to leave your threads. My pleasure.

It has been fun but I will post only in the fun threads.

~adios~

Couldn't you include those too?

Think of every thread like a theme park, then you wont be tempted to go near it.

 

[wm49rs]

Couldn't you include those too?

Think of every thread like a theme park, then you wont be tempted to go near it.

Well, at least for the better part of a decade or so....

 

[whylightbulb]

I'm more interested in riding HE too. It's one of those quintisential Harry Potter moments that should have been there from the start, like dining in the Great Hall. The two sides will also give it more replay value.

@whylightbulb I assume the 85% screen make-up will not factor into the queue/pre-show area?

Correct. I was referring to the ride only although there are screens in the queue (elevator and some musion) it is mostly physical sets and show action.

 

[Ignohippo]

Um..... People don't like Treasure Island. Most contend that it is the absolute worst of the batch, and when Rizzo is the only shining star, you have major problems. The movie was neither entertaining (except for the rats on the cruise line) nor funny in any way. The human characters were atrocious as well.

As usual Jimbo, you're stating your personal opinion as fact yet again.

The Muppets fans I know (and I am VERY connected with that fanbase) consider MTI to be one of the better Muppet flicks. Muppets From Space is considered to be the biggest dog (although that one had it's moments).

 

[TP2000]

Quite frankly, JT, yet again you have no clue what you are even speaking of (not that it ever stops you). I don't know why you wish to discuss LaughingPlace.com, but if you do, then I know I am in a far better position to talk about the place as a longtime member of what was once a thriving online community.

The fact it is dead now (I firmly believe the only reason it exists in any form is because Doobie is a fan and has the finances to keep it up) speaks to losing many powerful voices, including mine. By the time I opted to leave for good in 2011, the place already was fighting to keep the tumbleweeds away. The fact the site died had little to do with any negativity. It had to do with losing important respected voices.

Not that you need the help @WDW1974 since you can certainly hold your own, but I just have to chime in and back you up on that. I was a LP.com active member for 15 years. It was the first real message board I used in '98 after I began reading Al Lutz and others on the alt.disney.disneyland usenet boards a few years earlier. I'm imagining that JT and many others were in grade school in the mid 1990's and don't even know what usenet was and the role it played before private websites like LP came along.

LP.com was truly great for quite a few years. It jumped the shark when Doobie moved out to Orlando, after Cynthia Harris was suddenly fired, so he could presumably be closer to the swag buffet. But for awhile it had sharp conversationalists who really knew their Disney stuff, plus a collection of handy insiders like LeeMac, Galaxie 500, etc. It also helped that it was sort of the anti-Lutz website, so you'd get some Bitter Bettys who would dissect and critique the latest Al Lutz rumor and then huff and puff a few months later when the rumor actually panned out. (Lutz's Pirate's Lair coming to Tom Sawyer Island scoop of '06 was memorable; most anti-Lutz critics claimed Al was totally off his rocker and being fed false info by a double-agent, etc. You can imagine the huffy surprise from the critics a few months later when Disney announced they were closing the Island for six months in '07 to turn it into Pirate's Lair with all the neat toys Al Lutz had said it would have.)

To be honest, I also get a bit creeped out by some website owners who raise their families to only eat, sleep and breathe Disney theme parks, which is alarmingly convenient to do in Orlando. Cripes people, get your kids to an art museum or the symphony or a state park once in awhile! Or even just take the kid to a Design Within Reach store to look at cool Eames and Saarinen furniture. The world can't solely be corporate theme parks.

I just went over and looked at the LP boards. Oh, my. Last one to post turn out the lights, please. But threads like this one remind me of the glory days of LP; witty, smart, informed, opinionated yet urbane discussion about Disney theme parks.

All we're missing is "Marcie" from Mouseinfo to do spin control for Meg Crofton and George K. like she did for Cynthia, and it would be perfect.

 

[TP2000]

Meanwhile, at the Social Media Moms Conference in Anaheim...



Come on gang, let's get the little lady to 20 page views!

Then again, what does she care about page views? She just got an exclusive morning 5K Fun Run through the parks, with the finish line on Route 66 followed by Cars Land being closed off just for her and her family for a catered breakfast on Route 66 and two hours of exclusive use of Radiator Springs Racers and the other Cars Land rides without all those pesky tourists clogging up the lines. That's gotta be a benefit worth hundreds of thousands of dollars for Disney to pull off, if not a million bucks.

Here's Instagram proof. She's already got two (2) comments! http://instagram.com/p/mu3z6hBhHR/#