News Soarin' Over California returning to EPCOT for a limited time

[Smiley/OCD]

The difference is that there is not sufficient space to support an additional stand-by and lightning lane queue for separate experiences.

Trust me, there’s enough space in that building to reconfigure the queue…IF they wanted to…

 

[JohnD]

There isn't sufficient room to create completely separate queues while maintaining adequate room for guests in mobility devices. It would be too tight. It would also potentially create lesser capacity in the stand by queue, leading to potential backlogs into the "lobby" area.

They can, in theory, pull it off at the existing merge point (LL and Standby), where it branches off into the three concourses, however, that would compromise the standby wait time calculation, as well as potentially lengthen the wait time for LL guests beyond what is considered acceptable, as one experience may be more popular than the other.

I'm not sure how it would work with guests choosing which one to watch. First timers wouldn't have a clue and would go wherever. Then there are those who want to see a specific movie. With all the throughput, I think it would be a logistical nightmare.

A better solution, I think, would be SATW most of the day then switch over to SOC later in the afternoon/evening, like is done with BATB sing-along and Impressions. I don't claim to know if there would be any technical hindrances in a daily switchover (i.e. smells).

 

[ChrisFL]

SATW also re-orchestrated the score so that the music matched the part of the world you're currently in. Sorta like what IaSW does. Which, IMO, is a bonus.


My hot take: Both movies need to be updated.

Both have bendy issues (SAtW obviously more so). And both have parts where the forward motion doesn't match the view (camera looks sideways), which is disorienting.

SoC has graininess and weird fast-mo parts. Some of the sights are boring (golf course). And a naval port isn't exactly "Living with the Land." And the mechanical camera adjustments are too obvious.

SatW has some obvious CGI issues.

And both need to decide whether its about the natural wonders of the land or the wonders of human artifices. Mixing both in is odd.

And I guess there is nothing to be done to fix the conceit that we're hang-gliding over hundreds or thousands of miles and taking off from an airport -- in order to hang-glide.


But I'm just a pixie-snorting shill who always defends everything Disney does. So, what do I know?

I do agree the parts I don't really love about SoC are the traffic scene and the U.S. Navy Aircraft Carrier....realizing that this was filmed in around 1998? before all of the more recent global conflicts the U.S. was involved in, international guests may not appreciate it as much now as they might have back then.

 

[JohnD]

I do agree the parts I don't really love about SoC are the traffic scene and the U.S. Navy Aircraft Carrier....realizing that this was filmed in around 1998? before all of the more recent global conflicts the U.S. was involved in, international guests may not appreciate it as much now as they might have back then.

I really don't think that's the point he's making. An aircraft carrier isn't "natural" in a Land pavilion. OTOH, neither is DL or EPCOT, depending on which version you're watching. In SATW, you can make the same argument about the Eiffel Tower, Taj Mahal, the Pyramids of Giza, and the Great Wall. Those aren't "natural" either. My take is: If you're flying over it, it's fair game.

 

[Brian]

Trust me, there’s enough space in that building to reconfigure the queue…IF they wanted to…

If they want to tear out existing walls and other costly construction work, sure. I was referring to the current layout where it is, admittedly, fairly wide in much of the standby queue, but they still couldn't just split it in half and make it work.

 

[lazyboy97o]

There isn't sufficient room to create completely separate queues while maintaining adequate room for guests in mobility devices. It would be too tight. It would also create lesser capacity in the stand by queue, leading to potential backlogs into the "lobby" area.m

The life safety space requirements of a queue demand greater space than the accessibility requirements.

If they want to tear out existing walls and other costly construction work, sure. I was referring to the current layout where it is, admittedly, fairly wide in much of the standby queue, but they still couldn't just split it in half and make it work.

Which is what they did at Mission: SPACE. The attraction opened with two queues, was reconfigured to have three queues when they created the Green and Orange Missions and reconfigured again to have four queues when Green became a completely different experience.

 

[Brian]

Which is what they did at Mission: SPACE. The attraction opened with two queues, was reconfigured to have three queues when they created the Green and Orange Missions and reconfigured again to have four queues when Green became a completely different experience.

There was an impetus for those changes, rather than a mere preference for one version over the other. Two guests dying from 2005 - 2006 put the onus on them to "save" the attraction by adding an experience that is accessible to a far greater demographic.

No such impetus exists. It is all a matter of guest preference when it comes to Soarin'.

 

[MisterPenguin]

There isn't sufficient room to create completely separate queues while maintaining adequate room for guests in mobility devices.

The narrowest point in the photos I posted allowed for four people abreast quite easily (once you remove the trash can). Which means they could split it and have a mobility device get through single-file at the pinch point quite easily.

 

[lazyboy97o]

There was an impetus for those changes, rather than a mere preference for one version over the other. Two guests dying from 2005 - 2006 put the onus on them to "save" the attraction by adding an experience that is accessible to a far greater demographic.

No such impetus exists. It is all a matter of guest preference when it comes to Soarin'.

Far more intensive work was done to add the fourth queue lane for the 2017 updates than was done in 2006.

 

[Mark Dunne]

Sorry but to me this seems as if the Disney exec’s either don’t listen to comments on SATW, or they don’t care, I’m guessing the latter, I get S.O.C isn’t perfect, but it’s a lot better than around the world, this needs changing , so just close the ride down and remake a movie, that works for A,B,C viewers, because when Disney get it right, there’s no one better, when it goes wrong we get SATW.

 

[ToTBellHop]

SATW also re-orchestrated the score so that the music matched the part of the world you're currently in. Sorta like what IaSW does. Which, IMO, is a bonus.


My hot take: Both movies need to be updated.

Both have bendy issues (SAtW obviously more so). And both have parts where the forward motion doesn't match the view (camera looks sideways), which is disorienting.

SoC has graininess and weird fast-mo parts. Some of the sights are boring (golf course). And a naval port isn't exactly "Living with the Land." And the mechanical camera adjustments are too obvious.

SatW has some obvious CGI issues.

And both need to decide whether its about the natural wonders of the land or the wonders of human artifices. Mixing both in is odd.

And I guess there is nothing to be done to fix the conceit that we're hang-gliding over hundreds or thousands of miles and taking off from an airport -- in order to hang-glide.


But I'm just a pixie-snorting shill who always defends everything Disney does. So, what do I know?

It has been long-established that you know nothing. You’re not even tall enough to ride Soarin. Tell us your opinions on Pooh.

 

[Eric Graham]

SATW also re-orchestrated the score so that the music matched the part of the world you're currently in. Sorta like what IaSW does. Which, IMO, is a bonus.


My hot take: Both movies need to be updated.

Both have bendy issues (SAtW obviously more so). And both have parts where the forward motion doesn't match the view (camera looks sideways), which is disorienting.

SoC has graininess and weird fast-mo parts. Some of the sights are boring (golf course). And a naval port isn't exactly "Living with the Land." And the mechanical camera adjustments are too obvious.

SatW has some obvious CGI issues.

And both need to decide whether its about the natural wonders of the land or the wonders of human artifices. Mixing both in is odd.

And I guess there is nothing to be done to fix the conceit that we're hang-gliding over hundreds or thousands of miles and taking off from an airport -- in order to hang-glide.


But I'm just a pixie-snorting shill who always defends everything Disney does. So, what do I know?

Wait, some of us are traveling by car that takes us 10 hours from a neighboring state after going through multiple wrecks on the highway and the turnpike.

 

[Eric Graham]

Actually, it's wonderful to do anything after being trapped in a car for so long.

 

[Brian]

The narrowest point in the photos I posted allowed for four people abreast quite easily (once you remove the trash can). Which means they could split it and have a mobility device get through single-file at the pinch point quite easily.

In general, they try to avoid single-file lines for safety purposes. Sometimes it's unavoidable, but in this instance, it's not necessary.

 

[flynnibus]

And both need to decide whether its about the natural wonders of the land or the wonders of human artifices. Mixing both in is odd.

SoC was about California - not nature.. that's why it works as it does. It just so happens that California's nature is a big part of California's identity and to be celebrated. The film celebrates California and uses the thread of flight to move you through it all.

The great thing about SoC is it's all so well rooted in the concept.. celebrates granduer and has a powerful moving soundtrack.

SaTW is like a Chinese knockoff... copying things, trying to 'improve' things, amping things up, all while missing the very essence of what made the thing they are copying so good. It becomes a straight up clip session without any of the connecting tones and emotion of the original.

It's right up there with JIYI in terms of gaffs IMO.

 

[doctornick]

So with the return of World feature a new ending of newish Epcot?

 

[HauntedPirate]

First day of Flower and Garden Festival.

Ah, of course, thanks! Silly Pirate brain acting up again.

 

[HauntedPirate]

SATW also re-orchestrated the score so that the music matched the part of the world you're currently in. Sorta like what IaSW does. Which, IMO, is a bonus.


My hot take: Both movies need to be updated.

Both have bendy issues (SAtW obviously more so). And both have parts where the forward motion doesn't match the view (camera looks sideways), which is disorienting.

SoC has graininess and weird fast-mo parts. Some of the sights are boring (golf course). And a naval port isn't exactly "Living with the Land." And the mechanical camera adjustments are too obvious.

SatW has some obvious CGI issues.

And both need to decide whether its about the natural wonders of the land or the wonders of human artifices. Mixing both in is odd.

And I guess there is nothing to be done to fix the conceit that we're hang-gliding over hundreds or thousands of miles and taking off from an airport -- in order to hang-glide.


But I'm just a pixie-snorting shill who always defends everything Disney does. So, what do I know?

 

[HauntedPirate]

Ideally, they'd create a third film, using parts of the original score, and focus on the natural beauty and landmarks and man-made wonders found around North America. Start in California. Soar over Pikes Peak. Some of the beauty in Canada. Fly down the Mississippi river. Smell the orange groves in Florida. End it with fireworks around the Statue of Liberty. You get the idea. Bob and Josh will never approve it, though.

 

[Eric Graham]

Speaking of penguins, have you done the penguin experience at Sea World. Kind of fun! One of them bit my wife, just a little nip. Fun experience though!