Thoughts about the progression of projection rides?

Pepper's Ghost

Pepper's Ghost

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
I was going to post this thread in the DLR forum due to the first question, but I feel like the real meat of the question is related to WDW.

First question is what do you think of the updated version of the DLR Alice in Wonderland dark ride? I've never ridden it, but did a nearly equal ride-through on Youtube. :rolleyes:🤣 In a 2-dimensional viewing, it seems to strike a good balance of animatronics and projection, but I'm wondering what people think who've actually ridden it. Did they strike a good balance? I've also Youtube ridden the Shanghai PotC ride which looks fantastic, but I credit the sets and creation of ships to ride through, which adds the needed realism to the projections IMO. It's been a few years since I've been to the WDW parks so when I did the same poor man's ride-through for M&MRR, it just looked like they too heavily relied on projections.

What are the thoughts here on whether Disney is striking the right balance in projection rides? Do they seem to be striking the right balance and improving experiences with them, or are they finding cheaper ways to "entertain", but ruining rides in the process? I'm a huge fan of the old Soarin' Over California, so I'm not anti-projection in general, but I'm just not convinced that Disney is using projections for the right reasons of improving the experience. Thoughts?
 
JIMINYCR

JIMINYCR

Well-Known Member
I havent seen the Alice ride yet. But I think we havent seen the last of them. Disney's going to keep doing what will be a money saver in the end. Guests have been positive in receiving most of what has been put out recently. Balanced? At this point, generally yes. As long as they dont go overboard and cease building the attractions we enjoy most, I'm OK with it. They certainly arent ones that I enjoy as much as the old fashioned attractions.
Disney's popularity comes from providing unique entertainment and thrills, which projections do not really provide and falls short. In a park, you need a variety of experiences and Disney shouldnt abandon what guests look for most, which is the real deal.
 
eliza61nyc

eliza61nyc

Well-Known Member
I also have not seen the Alice ride but I adore Soarin so I guess it would be a bit hypocritical of me if I said don't do them. I do like variety no matter where my vacation so I hope that the parks will continue to offer a cross section of offerings. From my limited understanding the new GoTG and tron are not total projection rides.
RoTR is great, what would you call that?
 
kap91

kap91

Well-Known Member
I really love the use of projections in the classic dark rides. I think it's a natural fit for them cause they're already more two dimensional and abstract anyway. There's also some great uses of projection mapping for effects like in Indy.

My favorite use of projections is some of the scenes in Navi River Journey. It's the only time I've seen projection on screens, scrims, and actual objects combined in a way that REALLY works. The bugs on the log, the projected waterfall that turns into a real one...some of the best stuff I've seen. Really is able to bring scenes to life and add depth and animation you couldn't otherwise have.

I'm less enthusiastic about when it's just a simple screen and movie. Especially when you're transitioning between that and sets, or when it's just almost exclusively that. I know there's reasons for it, but it just doesn't give you that sense of actually being in a world or place that I'm looking for in a ride. But it does depend. Disney in particular has gotten really good in some attractions at integrating screens into fuller sets, sometimes pretty seamlessly, generally through the use of real world foreground objects. The tire shop scene in radiator springs comes to mind. Or the even the windows out of rise of the resistance. There's also a lot of projection based lighting and textures these days...like the ballroom floor of the beauty and the beast ride. That's BRILLIANT. Never will scuff up and eliminates the need for a lot of additional show lighting.

IMHO, projections and screens are just tools to tell a story just like any other, like lighting, AAs, or sets. And just like any scenic tool, they're best used in combination with other tools, so each can do what they do best. It's when they're by themselves forced to do the entire work of storytelling alone they tend to be disappointing, but that would be true of most any other tool.
 
mf1972

mf1972

Well-Known Member
i’m not entirely against screens, but i prefer animatronics. just more realistic imo. also not much of a fan of the frozen animatronics with the face projection. looks too phony. the dwarves look better.
 
WondersOfLife

WondersOfLife

Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
Everything is always good when there is balance. Forbidden Journey and Rise of the Resistance are good examples.

Navi Journey and 3 Caballeros are examples of too many screens.

Peter Pan and Pooh are examples of old school attractions that could benefit from some added screen effects alongside what is already there.

Everyone should face the fact that we will never get Splash Mountain, Spaceship Earth, or Haunted Mansion quality attractions again.
 
yensidtlaw1969

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
Generally I find that when Disney creates an attraction that mixes projections in with physical sets, at best the balance tends to lean a little too far in favor of projections, and at worst favors them far too much. It's very rare for contemporary Disney to create an attraction that uses projections in a wholly tasteful way - so rare, in fact, I'm not sure I can think of any off the bat. They always seem to get carried away and overstep by at least a little bit. Often not enough to "break" the attraction, but enough that there's always one or two examples easily named where a practical element would clearly have been a better alternative.

Alice is a good example - most of the new moments with the new projections are nice and support a physical element, but the White Rabbit moment at the beginning is a total dud, as is the collection of "singing" teapots just before the Mad Tea Party scene. You're just looking at a flat screen that isn't even pretending to be anything else. The elements they replaced were not particularly awe-inspiring, but at least they gave you something tangible to enounter.

Even Rise of the Resistance oversteps this way - the 2 Storm Troopers that shoot at you towards the beginning of the ride would have been FAR more effective as simple animatronics that turn to you and raise their guns - the projections are wholly uncovincing and feels like a poor excuse to not invest in 2 basic Animatronics. The Preshow jail cell would be absolutely stellar if they had Animatronics of Hux and Kylo in place of the projections, but at least there I can understand why that was deemed impractical. The Stormtroopers you ride by are the first characters you encounter after boarding the attraction and the projections leave the moment flat, literally, and they don't do anything so wild that there's a good excuse for not using Animatronics.

The Haunted Mansion was for many years an example of an attraction that used projections with perfect tastefulness - they were used very sparingly to achieve effects that took full advantage of the nature of projections, and were totally impressive and difficult to distinguish as projections. Unfortunately, the addition of Constance takes things a little bit too far - again, doesn't "break" the ride, but The Haunted Mansion would benefit from her being achieved by non-projected means. She's very obviously a digital effect in a ride that otherwise disguises its digital effects to a very high degree.

There's room for these types of effects and room for attractions that make extensive use of them, but in almost every case I find they would benefit from just a little more restraint in the projection department. What's that Coco Chanel said about taking off one piece of jewelry before going out? I'd say probably every ride that uses projection effects has at least one projection whose removal would improve the attraction.
 
Last edited:
Djsfantasi

Djsfantasi

Well-Known Member
First IMHO, it is difficult to pull off an experience well that relies primarily on projections. Otherwise. We may as well be on a recliner in our living room at home or a movie theater.

Second, significant effort needs to be made to marry a projection with a 3D world. One of the WORST projection usages is in MMMRR. The tornado scene. The background is ineffective and the 3D tornado doesn’t blend. It comes off as a cheesy effect in a traveling carnival haunted house.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
Married5Times said:
screens should be illegal on rides.

corporal, tangible, physical sets please.
Click to expand...

Physical sets and AAs area almost always preferable to screens/projections, but there are times when screens/projections make sense. A ride like Flight of Passage could not be done -- at least not without being either seriously diminished or costing such an immense sum that it wouldn't make sense to build -- without screens, and Na'vi River Journey use screens/projections properly to enhance physical sets (NRJ lacks AAs, but that's a separate issue and the screens/projections themselves work very well for what they're supposed to do).

A ride like Shanghai Pirates, on the other hand, uses them a bit too much in places where physical sets and AAs would be preferable. You occasionally watch a movie on a screen rather than feeling like you're in the same physical space with the action. I think it's especially noticeable in that ride because it's so good otherwise.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
kap91 said:
My favorite use of projections is some of the scenes in Navi River Journey. It's the only time I've seen projection on screens, scrims, and actual objects combined in a way that REALLY works. The bugs on the log, the projected waterfall that turns into a real one...some of the best stuff I've seen. Really is able to bring scenes to life and add depth and animation you couldn't otherwise have.
Click to expand...

Thank you! I'm glad to see someone else say this. I think Na'vi River Journey uses them better than any other ride I've been on, and should be an example of how to successfully use them as an enhancement to physical sets (rather than a replacement) going forward.
 
adamparanoia

adamparanoia

New Member
The projections in Alice effectively enhance what's already there. On the other hand, the projected stormtroopers on Rise seem lazy and a cost cutting measure. Forbidden Journey is the worst Harry Potter ride for being 75% faded-looking screens. No need to fly across the country to sit in front of a screen. I bet people would actually hate on Pandora if it didn't also feature the epic mountain range outside.
 
Brer Panther

Brer Panther

Well-Known Member
The worst way to use a screen in a ride is when the entire wall is just a screen, and the ride vehicle just parks in front of it. Y'know, like most of Ratatouille, the waterfall scene in Mickey's Runaway Railway, a good chunk of the Toy Story Mania knockoffs in other theme parks, etc. If you're just gonna park the vehicle in front of a screen, what's the point of making it a dark ride at all? Just do a simulator.
 
M

Married5Times

Well-Known Member
Brer Panther said:
The worst way to use a screen in a ride is when the entire wall is just a screen, and the ride vehicle just parks in front of it.
Click to expand...

Gringots Bank coaster epitomizes the above.

I have to agree with the seamless screen approach to Navi River. Screens don't dominate; they compliment.
I hate screens as a medium to tell story or saturate into the story but that application works as an exception.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom