Regarding Horizons, World of Motion, COP, etc...

[Jasper Dale]

i have a question for all you guys who had the opportunity to visit all the parks before so many of the attractions went extinct.

my wife and i always hop on the Carousel of Progress at least a couple of times on each of our trips to WDW. i've read so many opinions by people who say the ride is so "boring", but for us, it is a great "break" from all the walking, and it has "imagination".

as i never had the chance to do any of the extinct Epcot attractions, i watched some ride throughs on "you tube" and found them all charming. i downloaded some of Martin's "tribute videos", and it's a shame they were deemed "out dated".

but i know that watching an old wobbly VHS tape someone took back in the 80's could never compare with actually being on the attraction. and so i am curious. were the attractions "that" good?

while we truly love WDW and are returning in a few months for another visit, so many of the attractions don't really seem to have the "inspiration" that the "oldies" did. is this just me, or do were the older attractions really that special?

 

[Bairstow]

while we truly love WDW and are returning in a few months for another visit, so many of the attractions don't really seem to have the "inspiration" that the "oldies" did. is this just me, or do were the older attractions really that special?

You've got the right idea, and from what I can tell, it's mostly an issue of "authorship." Because opening EPCOT meant WED had to design multiple E-ticket attractions at once, the project leads on these rides were given an unusually high degree of freedom, which meant that their individual vision for the ride was much pronounced.

In this way something like the "World of Motion" was essentially a Marc Davis creation and "Horizons" was by George McGinnis.

Of course there was still a great deal of oversight from management required to build anything, and the corporate sponsors still had a lot of input.

These days WED only has a few projects going at a time, and the lack of projects to go around combined with the increased penny-pinching Disney understandably has to do means that any attraction Disney builds today is the work of a committee more so than in the EPCOT days.

 

[Rob562]

I think what made Horizons and WoM so amazing to me was how "epic" they seemed. Large, detailed sets. Whimsical touches. AAs everywhere you looked. A good story.

They just don't build them like that anymore, unfortunately.

-Rob

 

[Figment632]

imo Horizons was WDI at it's best, it had great detialed and elaborate sets, was a sequel to COP, had a great score and message. I truely was one of the best rides they ever produced. It was starting to get outdated but could and should have been updated just like SSE.

WOM was just as elaborate but for some reason I can barely remember it.

 

[GatorGambit]

There's no question that Horizons was "that good." The level of elaborate themeing was amazing in that attraction. The Onmnimax theater and the "choose your own ending" twist of Horizons was unique for the time and still relevant today. When it re-opened because of Test Track's schedule overruns, the ride was notably in need of serious maintenance. Like another poster said, it should have gotten the SSE / SM treatment, and not horrifically torn down.

World of Motion was also a great ride with very elabotate sets and a fun theme to it. As a kid, I loved Transcenter - it was easily my favorite part. WoM's downfall is that it was one of 3 similar Omnimovers (SSE, WoM, JII), and 5 total Future World Omnimovers (add Horizons, Living Seas). It was very similar to (and sometimes redundant to) SSE in many respects. and it was time for something new in FW. I like Test Track as much or better than I liked WoM - it's experience makes up for it's shallow themeing.

I kind of wish Mission: SPACE was a seperate attraction built on another expansion pad or built where WoL is now. I feel that it's a nice attraction - although again long on experience, short on themeing - and a needed thrill ride at Epcot. It would have been great had Horizons been spared, and it's something that is sorely lacking in today's Future World.

 

[raven]

Horizon's was indeed a spectacular attraction. I tried to get it on video as well but it just didn't do it justice. Nothing like actually being there. That's the problem with video though and it will never replace actual reality.

On a side not, as I've mentioned before, the Horizons building was planned to stay for the retro fit of a new space pavilion (There are designs and concept art backstage). It wasn't a sink hole or structure problem that ultimately brought the demise of the building but a decision that Michael Eisner made to detroy it to build a whole new atraction. After the many problems Imagineers faced trying to retrofit Test Track into Wolrd of Motion they decided it would be easier, and cheaper, to just build a new building. I don't agree on the placement of Mission: Space though and would have rather seen it built on a site other than the old Horizons site.

 

[TubaGeek]

That's a lot of quote marks...

 

[Future Guy]

The great thing about those old attractions was how they transported you to a totally different place and time. SSE and POTC still do that, but not many other attractions do anymore, certainly none of the new stuff at EPCOT (with the possible exception of Soarin')

 

[jakeman]

In some people's opinion, yes they were that good. In other's, no they were not.

I fall into the latter category. They were outdated omnimovers that embodied the reason EPCOT Center was considered a "boring" theme park.

Just my opinion though.

 

[Figment632]

In some people's opinion, yes they were that good. In other's, no they were not.

I fall into the latter category. They were outdated omnimovers that embodied the reason EPCOT Center was considered a "boring" theme park.

Just my opinion though.

Agreed EC may have had way to many of the same type of attractions. The only thing that bothers me is that there were plans to Keep horizons and bring Mission space. The only reason it didn't happen was Eisner's penny pinching.

 

[jakeman]

Agreed EC may have had way to many of the same type of attractions. The only thing that bothers me is that there were plans to Keep horizons and bring Mission space. The only reason it didn't happen was Eisner's penny pinching.

If you deal with what is planned and not with what is presented you will more than likely always be disappointed.

 

[Figment632]

If you deal with what is planned and not with what is presented you will more than likely always be disappointed.

Very true it does seem like that is always the case.

 

[dreamfinder]

They were well designed immersive dark rides. Were they solid attractions? Most definitely. However, theme parks have started to shoot themselves in the foot by mostly promoting the tallest, fallest, whatever they built this year. That eventually leads many people to think that is the only thing that a theme/amusement park should have. So people currently think that dark story type rides are blow and boring. The dark rides in Fantasyland get a pass as they are re-interpreting Disney classic movies. But anything outside of that theme gets billed as boring. If you can sit back and read a good book for the story it contains, or enjoy a movie that is plot driven, and not explosion driven, then you would have most likely enjoyed Horizons and the like.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

A thousand times YES to your original question, OP. Those rides were the epitome of Disney....even though they covered things outside of what Disney is known to produce. That's what made them sparkle. It was real, it was immersive, it was detailed, and honestly, if you suspended your belief, you were THERE. The scale of those rides made it possible. It's really John Hench's "Virtual Reality" come to life.

Thankfully SOME of these attractions are still around. SSE, HM, PotC....

I think what made Horizons and WoM so amazing to me was how "epic" they seemed. Large, detailed sets. Whimsical touches. AAs everywhere you looked. A good story.

They just don't build them like that anymore, unfortunately.

-Rob

Exactly. There was no unthemed area becuase EVERYTHING sparkled. Often, the whole park was like that.

Agreed EC may have had way to many of the same type of attractions. The only thing that bothers me is that there were plans to Keep horizons and bring Mission space. The only reason it didn't happen was Eisner's penny pinching.

Right. There could have been a Horizons94.

Honestly, it's still shocking, even today, that the ripped out probably their largest, and greatest attraction, for EPCOT, and perhaps in their history.

EPCOT really is like a World's Fair in that respect...It's main attraction is long, long gone.

If you deal with what is planned and not with what is presented you will more than likely always be disappointed.

And in that, you have to take into account what is EXPECTED from a company such as Disney.

 

[Figment632]

A thousand times YES to your original question, OP. Those rides were the epitome of Disney....even though they covered things outside of what Disney is known to produce. That's what made them sparkle. It was real, it was immersive, it was detailed, and honestly, if you suspended your belief, you were THERE. The scale of those rides made it possible. It's really John Hench's "Virtual Reality" come to life.

Thankfully SOME of these attractions are still around. SSE, HM, PotC....




Exactly. There was no unthemed area becuase EVERYTHING sparkled. Often, the whole park was like that.Right. There could have been a Horizons94.

Honestly, it's still shocking, even today, that the ripped out probably their largest, and greatest attraction, for EPCOT, and perhaps in their history.

EPCOT really is like a World's Fair in that respect...It's main attraction is long, long gone.


And in that, you have to take into account what is EXPECTED from a company such as Disney.

Could have been spectacular! Damn Eisner :fork:

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

Could have been spectacular! Damn Eisner :fork:

Oh, I know.


Even if Seimens did the sponsoring and the interactive finale was ironically UN-interactive.:lookaroun:lol:

 

[Uncle Lupe]

How did the choose your own ending in Horizons work? Never had a chance to ride this "classic".

I still feel Back to the Future was the best ride of all time. But that was in MGM Studios, right? :lol:

 

[EPCOTPluto]

How did the choose your own ending in Horizons work? Never had a chance to ride this "classic".

I still feel Back to the Future was the best ride of all time. But that was in MGM Studios, right? :lol:

Here's a vid of it. It begins around :37.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsVHJHgC2r8

As for BTTF, you're close. Just go up I-Drive. :lol:

 

[Krack2]

However, theme parks have started to shoot themselves in the foot by mostly promoting the tallest, fallest, whatever they built this year. That eventually leads many people to think that is the only thing that a theme/amusement park should have.

Exactly. Disney has done everything in it's power to cultivate a specific type of customer for their theme parks over the past 15 years. Unfortunately, it's not me anymore (or anybody else that thinks these dark rides were the pinnacle of WDI achievement).

Their attitude used to be, "there will be rides that are oriented to all different age groups - kid rides, adult rides, teen rides - but every ride should appeal even a little to everyone. Now their attitude (as demonstrated by their advertising) is "These are theme parks for kids. If you are a kid and you're not here, you are missing out. And if you are an adult and you haven't brought your kids here, you're negligent as a parent. You will see kid rides, roller coasters, movie tie-ins, princesses around every corner."

Sadly, for me - adult, no kids - they are stripping the parks of my reasons to go. Even the World Showcase has lost it's battle against encroachment. There are no more "adult centric" areas of the WDW Resort, except for the golf courses and Victoria and Alberts.

/rant over

 

[Krack2]

How did the choose your own ending in Horizons work? Never had a chance to ride this "classic".

You were in an four person omnimover vehicle. At the end of the ride, each person had a panel light up in front of them allowing them to choose "land", "sea" or "space". Then, whatever was the majority selection for your vehicle, you'd get about a 30 second video "fly over" (not unlike say Star Tours, but without your omnimover moving in concert with the video) of whatever region you selected. The three choices were of places you explored briefly during the earlier stages of the omnimover ride showing you what life would be like in the future (think the Carousel of Progress, but decades in the future).

I still feel Back to the Future was the best ride of all time. But that was in MGM Studios, right? :lol:

No, that was Universal Studios.