"Adios" El Rio del Tiempo!

[josh_e_washie]

I always thought el rio wasn't anything more than decoration for that great restaurant inside of mexico. I'm sorry, but i mean that's all I think it was good for!

 

[AEfx]

Man, you all are really not comprehending what I posted.

It was obvious that I wasn't directly referring to El Rio, but rather the makeover Epcot has been recieving over the past
decade.

Uh, Okay. Let's see what you are saying here.

1) You walked into this thread, called "Adios El Rio del Tiempo!"

2) You decided to reply, and started with the following text :

It's a good thing I took a lot of pictures back in the day, because the "slow" people of Earth have spoken. Goodbye, classic, wonderful EPCOT Center. Hello, 2nd park with no originality to set it apart.

3) Now you say "it's obvious I wasn't directly talking about El Rio...", after 1) and 2). Huh? I guess there I go being slow again...

If that's the case, why did you post your rant in this thread, about El Rio? Did you just stumble along the wrong thread? Would anything about Epcot have done? Would a thread about the food choices at "Sunshine Seasons" been just as appropriate?

I think you like to generalize people and their comments. You went a little to far this time. As you can see by the other replies, I'm not the only one to notice.

Oh, and if you think America hasn't been dumbed down with the crap I talked about in my other post, then I'd like to knwo where you've been living. All you have to do is open your eyes. You all can call it "opinion" all you want, and say that I don't think others have valid points..................but you'd be wrong.

Uh, I'm here to talk about Disney and El Rio. Again, if you actually read what I said, I do recognize and miss the Epcot that has gone. However, if you really look at it...we lost Horizons and WoM, which were epic and beautiful, but there wasn't THAT much education to begin with.

However, just like people who were tricked into believing that MGM was ever a "working studio", you were among those tricked into thinking Epcot was "educational". Yes, they used to deal with more topics and in a more banal way, but it's a big leap to "educational". Part of the problem is the Wonders of Life factor : a theme park attraction by it's very nature is built to last decades and takes many years to build. How do you present topics that are always changing in a static medium meant to be shown to millions of visitors over many years? You just can't get that detailed and topical in something that isn't constantly being updated for this type of audience.

So that leaves history, which is wonderful, but not something to base a park after. They had to stop predicting the future because they couldn't keep up with it (the "New Tomorrowland" quandry), and current science is moving so quickly you can't talk about that. So basically, you have a theme park that was doomed to document history because that's really the only thing they can represent that (relatively) doesn't change.

I recognize how Epcot has changed, because it had to. If you don't enjoy it any more, I guess you'll have to stay home and watch videos and keep pretending that it used to be this educational mecca that it really never was.

That is not the only reason people go to Disney. Walt Disney himself said he didn't like to replicate his successes, he liked to move on to something new. When Disneyland opened you weren't surrounded by Disney character driven rides. You had new and original stories being told like Pirates and HM. You wanted characters? You had Fantasyland. Everything else was original, and that is what people fell in love with.

Characters are not the only reason to go to Disney. I should have ammended my statement to specify that "fun" is what people go to Disney for, not the characters. My point is simply that characters are fun, and fun is a better choice than banal.

I don't know where you get your information from, but this is true. It wasn't until a few years later that the characters began appearing in the park.

Well, I'm not going to sit here and argue with you. I have pictures from 1984 of me and characters at Epcot. Got the 3 Callebros autographs at Mexico, met Minnie at SSE in her space suit. Was this RIGHT THE SECOND of opening? Nope. So you may be right it wasn't the FIRST DAY, but why oh why should the park be stuck where it was on opening day?

People wanted characters, so they got them. Disney *IS* about stories and characters that people have come to love. The parks take advantage of that, and should.

God forbid Epcot not be what it was opening day...really, what is wrong that people seem to think that time sits still at WDW? It certainly doesn't anywhere else. ALL THE PARKS got more characters as time went on, because...hold on to your mouse ears, guys - PEOPLE WANTED THEM. I know, how EVIL to give those slow, ignorant, 99.9% of people what they want, huh?

A theme park that is in danger of losing it's original theme.

Oh someone please get me a drink, LOL.

The parallels between people that believe that MGM was ever a working studio and that Epcot was this educational haven are astounding.

Yes, they tried to sell you that Epcot was "educational" because the attractions generally moved slower and tried to put a bit of information out there to inspire people to learn more. That didn't work for very long, because PEOPLE DO NOT GO ON VACATION for that. It's just that simple.

So since then, Epcot has EVOLVED into a park that tries to balance entertainment, excitement, with positive messages that are more timeless than technological. So, say, the Nemo ride and the Seas as a whole now inspire kids to learn more about the seas while giving a character based story is arguably just as effective as spouting facts and figures to them they probably will never remember, or care to hear on vacation, or that will likely be outdated or obsolete over time anyway. Teach a man to fish, or fish for him - you know how that one goes. Inspire them to learn on their own, or cram facts down their throat that change over time.

Epcot : The Univeristy never existed but in the minds of some people who latched on to it and are Disney park fans who tend to greatly rose-color their glasses based on the fact that most of us have spent more time reading about WDW than actually being there since most of us don't live nearby. It's called evolution of an idea, to make it work the best.

What would have Walt wanted? A park people enjoy going to, and who may not be academically educated by but hopefully have their minds opened a little bit. Epcot's attendance has reflected that.

The truth is : Disney lied to you in the 1980's. They said that Epcot was educational, and that MGM was a "real working studio". So if you are going to get mad, get mad at the people who were in charge then. They had these grand ideas they didn't know how to maintain, and the price paid is the disillusionment of some hard-core fans in favor of keeping the millions of people visiting the resort coming back. They sold you an idea they didn't have the ability to back up indefinately.

Since the 1980's, Epcot and MGM have both been trying to evolve and cope with these restraints put on them by marketing during their respective openings to actually become successful theme parks. They are more popular than ever, and you don't often hear people walking around WDW saying, "Gee, I wish this was more educational!" They go on vacation to have fun - which can have doses of enlightenment easily, but isn't the reason for going.

Who'd have thunk?

AEfx

 

[AEfx]

The majority of Epcot's guests don't deserve better. They're the only reason it's become what it has.

That's really what it comes down to for you, doesn't it?

I guess I shouldn't have wasted my time replying to you at all then.

Yes, yes, we know - the rest of humanity is below you, and that you are some how enlightened beyond what the average human couldn't even dream of understanding.

Does that about cover it? You repeat it over and over in so many ways.

My God, as important as you must be to have that attitude, I wonder how in heck you have time to argue on Disney message boards.

AEfx

 

[Victor]

Well, I'm not going to sit here and argue with you. I have pictures from 1984 of me and characters at Epcot. Got the 3 Callebros autographs at Mexico, met Minnie at SSE in her space suit. Was this RIGHT THE SECOND of opening? Nope. So you may be right it wasn't the FIRST DAY, but why oh why should the park be stuck where it was on opening day?

I'm not completely against characters in the park, but when they are being slapped into rides that didn't need them, I have a problem with that. Rio needs an upgrade, so did The Living Seas, but do they ened Disney characters? I don't think it's necessary.

The parallels between people that believe that MGM was ever a working studio and that Epcot was this educational haven are astounding.

Yes, they tried to sell you that Epcot was "educational" because the attractions generally moved slower and tried to put a bit of information out there to inspire people to learn more. That didn't work for very long, because PEOPLE DO NOT GO ON VACATION for that. It's just that simple.

I agree with that to an extent. But I think the real purpose of EPCOT Center was to showcase human ingenuity and to inspire. I love Test Track and Mission: Space, but do they have a human element? No. Do they inspire? No.

Regardless, I still love the place to death.

 

[pheneix]

The park had one of the lowest attendance ratings of the three parks

If you consider two out of three to be "one of the lowest," then cool beans. But come on, Epcot Center's average attendance was higher than MGM's maximum capacity. The two parks were never in the same league. I can remember when having 20,000 guests at Epcot was considered an "oh my god we should just close the park and issue rain checks" slow day. Now it is a pretty average day for the off-season.

Test Track was opened, the park's rate shot up. Mission:Space followed in this tradition and Soarin' has done the same

Do you honestly think Epcot's spike in 99/00 had to do with Test Track, or did it have to do with the wildly successful entertainment offerings during the Millennium Celebration? Considering WDW as a whole started slipping towards the end of 2000, I'm gonna credit it to the new millennium. For what it is worth, Test Track does at least try to educate. I consider it to be the best compromise when it comes to appealing to the lowest common denominator.

Mission Space did next to nothing for the park's attendance aside from a small bump the month it opened. In fact, it is widely regarded to be one of their biggest failures from both a financial and creative standpoint.

Soarin has done a lot for the park, and while it isn't really a triumph from a story telling perspective, it is a hell of a lot closer to the park's original spirit than anything else they've done for the park in a decade.

you were among those tricked into thinking Epcot was "educational".

I've always believed that Epcot Center's intent was more to inspire than to educate. However, those that are inspired usually want to know how to make the world a better place. That requires the educational element that the park had. Look at Future World. Future World's driving force was to show that humanity was doing wonderful things and that maybe one day the world will be a better place. You also had a lot of education in World Showcase too, even though that was a wonderful bonus next to the real focus of WS, which was to create living embassies of counties where theme park guests could step into the culture of another country. A place where a guest could shop in a Chinese street-mall and enjoy a real English pub. That was what WS was built for. That most people are learning about other cultures speaks less about the park's intent to educate and more about how completely ignorant and inept most theme park guests are. However, again, Epcot was not built for them. That's the Magic Kingdom's job.

hold on to your mouse ears, guys - PEOPLE WANTED THEM

Yes, but what Disney did in Florida was create a self-sustaining marketing machine. The Disney characters do not have nearly as much of a presence in Disneyland.

Epcot and MGM have both been trying to evolve and cope with these restraints put on them by marketing during their respective openings to actually become successful theme parks. They are more popular than ever

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Epcot has been and will continue to be in a slump until the day that a competent executive at Disney realizes what they have and takes advantage of it, but to even call MGM successful right now is a joke. That park is widely considered to be the park in most in need of help around Team Disney, and its attendance is falling so fast that is about to leave the ranks of what is considered a Disney park and move into the Universal bracket. And we all know how Universal is doing these days...

 

[ConnerLives]

You see,

This is the kind of discord that has plagued the Disney company and its fans ever since the "Marne-la-Vallee Project" opened!

That's right, Junior Woodchucks, it's official. I am now under the belief that if Disneyland Paris had not opened, DW's Magic Kingdom Classics would be enjoying frequent upgrades and at least two new E-Tickets by now, MGM would have lived to its full potential, Animal Kingdom would still be the most beautiful of the gates, and Epcot would not have been an overlooked middle child right now...and monorails would be gliding over all of the above! Oh, and did I mention Westcot and DisneySea...in Long Beach?

:drevil:

 

[Victor]

If you consider two out of three to be "one of the lowest," then cool beans. But come on, Epcot Center's average attendance was higher than MGM's maximum capacity. The two parks were never in the same league. I can remember when having 20,000 guests at Epcot was considered an "oh my god we should just close the park and issue rain checks" slow day. Now it is a pretty average day for the off-season.

Do you honestly think Epcot's spike in 99/00 had to do with Test Track, or did it have to do with the wildly successful entertainment offerings during the Millennium Celebration? Considering WDW as a whole started slipping towards the end of 2000, I'm gonna credit it to the new millennium. For what it is worth, Test Track does at least try to educate. I consider it to be the best compromise when it comes to appealing to the lowest common denominator.

Mission Space did next to nothing for the park's attendance aside from a small bump the month it opened. In fact, it is widely regarded to be one of their biggest failures from both a financial and creative standpoint.

Soarin has done a lot for the park, and while it isn't really a triumph from a story telling perspective, it is a hell of a lot closer to the park's original spirit than anything else they've done for the park in a decade.

I've always believed that Epcot Center's intent was more to inspire than to educate. However, those that are inspired usually want to know how to make the world a better place. That requires the educational element that the park had. Look at Future World. Future World's driving force was to show that humanity was doing wonderful things and that maybe one day the world will be a better place. You also had a lot of education in World Showcase too, even though that was a wonderful bonus next to the real focus of WS, which was to create living embassies of counties where theme park guests could step into the culture of another country. A place where a guest could shop in a Chinese street-mall and enjoy a real English pub. That was what WS was built for. That most people are learning about other cultures speaks less about the park's intent to educate and more about how completely ignorant and inept most theme park guests are. However, again, Epcot was not built for them. That's the Magic Kingdom's job.

Yes, but what Disney did in Florida was create a self-sustaining marketing machine. The Disney characters do not have nearly as much of a presence in Disneyland.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Epcot has been and will continue to be in a slump until the day that a competent executive at Disney realizes what they have and takes advantage of it, but to even call MGM successful right now is a joke. That park is widely considered to be the park in most in need of help around Team Disney, and its attendance is falling so fast that is about to leave the ranks of what is considered a Disney park and move into the Universal bracket. And we all know how Universal is doing these days...

Amen. I like you pheneix.

 

[garyhoov]

I've ridden El Rio del Tiempo probably 3 or 4 times. I didn't ride it this year because I've seen it.

Maybe that makes me dumb. I don't know, but if they put a new ride in, I'd give it a try.

Just speaking for myself, I thought Tijuana was a lot more interesting than that boat ride.

 

[Victor]

Just speaking for myself, I thought Tijuana was a lot more interesting than that boat ride.

Oh yeah...you can see some crazy stuff in Tijuana...believe me...:lookaroun

 

[Hakunamatata]

Just speaking for myself, I thought Tijuana was a lot more interesting than that boat ride.

Yes, but the chances of catching an incurrable disease on the boat ride is alot less.

 

[jedimaster1227]

If you consider two out of three to be "one of the lowest," then cool beans. But come on, Epcot Center's average attendance was higher than MGM's maximum capacity. The two parks were never in the same league. I can remember when having 20,000 guests at Epcot was considered an "oh my god we should just close the park and issue rain checks" slow day. Now it is a pretty average day for the off-season.

Do you honestly think Epcot's spike in 99/00 had to do with Test Track, or did it have to do with the wildly successful entertainment offerings during the Millennium Celebration? Considering WDW as a whole started slipping towards the end of 2000, I'm gonna credit it to the new millennium. For what it is worth, Test Track does at least try to educate. I consider it to be the best compromise when it comes to appealing to the lowest common denominator.

Mission Space did next to nothing for the park's attendance aside from a small bump the month it opened. In fact, it is widely regarded to be one of their biggest failures from both a financial and creative standpoint.

Soarin has done a lot for the park, and while it isn't really a triumph from a story telling perspective, it is a hell of a lot closer to the park's original spirit than anything else they've done for the park in a decade.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Epcot has been and will continue to be in a slump until the day that a competent executive at Disney realizes what they have and takes advantage of it, but to even call MGM successful right now is a joke. That park is widely considered to be the park in most in need of help around Team Disney, and its attendance is falling so fast that is about to leave the ranks of what is considered a Disney park and move into the Universal bracket. And we all know how Universal is doing these days...

Where to start? :lol: Actually, when you are running a world class theme park, 2/3 is not so good, trust me on that one. Considering that Test Track was opened as part of the Millenium Celebration offerings and still holds plenty of the speed and length records at Disney parks, I would say yes, the spike is definitely attributed to the ride's opening. Sorry to tell you but Test Track is still the busiest thrill ride in the park. How can you say that WDW started slipping after the Millenium Celebration? That is a biased statement with no support. Sorry, but this isn't Jeopardy where you can just put a statement out there and hope for it to be right. Mission:Space boosted Epcot's attendance like you couldn't believe. The chance to be an astronaut and fly to Mars attracted both adults and children alike-and the attendance charts definitely showed it. Soarin' did the same for the park. Mission Space is only a financial failure because of the bad publicity it recieved making it unsuitable for cloning at the other resorts (which was part of the plan for it).

Who are you to tell somebody they are "Wrong Wrong Wrong?" Sorry to tell you but you haven't backed up any statement you have made with facts. Epcot is not in a slump. It hasn't been in a slump since 1997. You need to get your facts straight because your information is so off base. If you think that WDW's attendance is falling rapidly then you haven't been watching the parks during the Happiest Celebration on Earth, nor what has gone on so far during the Year of a Million Dreams.

 

[AEfx]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Epcot has been and will continue to be in a slump until the day that a competent executive at Disney realizes what they have and takes advantage of it...

Well, to begin with, pheneix, you seem to have confused the quotes of several people. I'm not going to reply to the ones I didn't make (I haven't mentioned MGM besides the comparison between the people who believed it to once be a "working studio"), and since you seem to have lumped all of them together in your arguments, it's difficult to know where to begin.

However, I'd like to point out that your OPINION that Epcot is in a slump is contrary to just about every fact available. It may be your opinion that it is in a creative slump, but Epcot's attendance is great (all of WDW's attendance is great) and the new attractions receive extremely high marks from guests.

It's just people like yourself that aren't satisfied. You can't talk about this topic practically. You talk in these grand terms of what "Epcot was!" and fail to realize that that idealized idea was never really there to begin with. Yes, the focus was on slower moving attractions and raw information over excitement and less focused inspiration. It EVOLVED, because there is no way they could have maintained the park under those circumstances. It worked for a brief time, but time marched on and Epcot stayed frozen.

If you think Epcot is in a slump NOW, you must not have set foot in that park during the entire decade of the 1990's, when they were stuck with "the future that never was" and not knowing how they were ever going to maintain the "world's fair" atmosphere without spending a billion dollars a year to redo every attraction to keep them current in their original incarnations.

AEfx

 

[Victor]

Mission:Space boosted Epcot's attendance like you couldn't believe. The chance to be an astronaut and fly to Mars attracted both adults and children alike-and the attendance charts definitely showed it. Soarin' did the same for the park. Mission Space is only a financial failure because of the bad publicity it recieved making it unsuitable for cloning at the other resorts (which was part of the plan for it).

This is true, it was huge when it opened. The wait times were pretty long. Unfortunately for Disney, it is definitely not a draw for visitors anymore. Thank god they got Soarin' up, or I think there would have been a decline in attendance.

 

[pheneix]

Actually, when you are running a world class theme park, 2/3 is not so good, trust me on that one.

EPCOT WAS RUNNING SECOND TO THE MAGIC KINGDOM!!! What more could you want? Do I think that if Epcot was operated like it should be that its attendance would squash the Magic Kingdom? Hell yes! But still, it was running second to the most popular theme park in the world. Hell, to this day it still outdraws Disneyland Paris.

Considering that Test Track was opened as part of the Millenium Celebration offerings and still holds plenty of the speed and length records at Disney parks

Test Track was supposed to open in 1997. Had a rogue ride vehicle not flown off the ride track and redesigned a few walls it probably would have. And what do speed and length records have to do with anything?

Sorry to tell you but Test Track is still the busiest thrill ride in the park

Aside from Mission Space, it is the ONLY thrill ride in the park. With all that has happened with Mission Space, it will never, ever, ever, ever come close to matching Test Track's counts again anyway, so its a moot point.

How can you say that WDW started slipping after the Millenium Celebration? That is a biased statement with no support.

From the 2nd quarter earnings report of Fiscal Year 2001:

Parks & Resorts results reflect increased theme park attendance and
guest spending at the Disneyland Resort, growth at Disney Cruise Line
and reduced costs at Walt Disney World, partially offset by pre-opening
and other cost increases at the Disneyland Resort and decreased theme
park attendance at Walt Disney World. At the Disneyland Resort,
increased theme park attendance and higher guest spending and preopening
and other cost increases were driven by the opening of Disney’s
California Adventure, Downtown Disney District and the Grand
Californian Hotel during the quarter. At Walt Disney World, decreased
attendance reflects the prior-year success of the Millennium Celebration
which concluded in December 2000. Reduced costs at Walt Disney World
also reflect the Millennium Celebration in the prior year, as well as current
period cost reduction initiatives.

http://media.disney.go.com/investorrelations/quarterly_earnings/2001_q2.pdf

September 11th aggregated WDW's slipping attendance to a very large extent, but the damage was already being done folks.

Mission:Space boosted Epcot's attendance like you couldn't believe.

It spiked Epcot's attendance ahead of the curve for one quarter. After that the park's attendance rose with the general tide thanks to a half-way decent economy and a weakening dollar. And that does not even take into account Mission Space's actual attraction counts, which have been perpetually falling ever since it opened.

Epcot is not in a slump. It hasn't been in a slump since 1997.

Epcot's attendance is down by a 1/3 from 1997. You're right, its not a slump at all. Its been in a freefall.

If you think that WDW's attendance is falling rapidly then you haven't been watching the parks during the Happiest Celebration on Earth, nor what has gone on so far during the Year of a Million Dreams.

I never said WDW's attendance has been falling rapidly. It has grown moderately since September 11th, but it is not growing nearly as fast as Las Vegas, Hawaii, or even the Disneyland Resort. Neither of the original three parks have drawn anything close to what they received pre-AK, except for the Magic Kingdom. And year of a million dreams? Please... Attendance is already off this quarter.

talk in these grand terms of what "Epcot was!" and fail to realize that that idealized idea was never really there to begin with.

The idea to inspire is what Epcot Center was built around. Marc Davis was quoted saying that if Epcot were built right it had the potential to change the world. The Imagineers involved with that project believed in what they did and loved what they were doing. The product that was on display during that time showed it.

 

[Texas84]

Let's get this thread back on track. I'm thinking a Dinosaur-type dark ride. Guests are taken on a wild ride along the Texas-Mexico border at night in a US Border Patrol vehicle. The vehicle is hijacked by a bandito, much like The Great Movie Ride.

 

[jedimaster1227]

EPCOT WAS RUNNING SECOND TO THE MAGIC KINGDOM!!! What more could you want? Do I think that if Epcot was operated like it should be that its attendance would squash the Magic Kingdom? Hell yes! But still, it was running second to the most popular theme park in the world. Hell, to this day it still outdraws Disneyland Paris.
Test Track was supposed to open in 1997. Had a rogue ride vehicle not flown off the ride track and redesigned a few walls it probably would have. And what do speed and length records have to do with anything?
Aside from Mission Space, it is the ONLY thrill ride in the park. With all that has happened with Mission Space, it will never, ever, ever, ever come close to matching Test Track's counts again anyway, so its a moot point.
From the 2nd quarter earnings report of Fiscal Year 2001:
http://media.disney.go.com/investorrelations/quarterly_earnings/2001_q2.pdf
September 11th aggregated WDW's slipping attendance to a very large extent, but the damage was already being done folks.
It spiked Epcot's attendance ahead of the curve for one quarter. After that the park's attendance rose with the general tide thanks to a half-way decent economy and a weakening dollar. And that does not even take into account Mission Space's actual attraction counts, which have been perpetually falling ever since it opened.
Epcot's attendance is down by a 1/3 from 1997. You're right, its not a slump at all. Its been in a freefall.
I never said WDW's attendance has been falling rapidly. It has grown moderately since September 11th, but it is not growing nearly as fast as Las Vegas, Hawaii, or even the Disneyland Resort. Neither of the original three parks have drawn anything close to what they received pre-AK, except for the Magic Kingdom. And year of a million dreams? Please... Attendance is already off this quarter.
The idea to inspire is what Epcot Center was built around. Marc Davis was quoted saying that if Epcot were built right it had the potential to change the world. The Imagineers involved with that project believed in what they did and loved what they were doing. The product that was on display during that time showed it.

Thrill Rides: Mission:Space, Test Track, Maelstrom, Body Wars, Soarin'. There are more than just two.

Fiscally, the attendance went down after that for a short period of time. Things rose up afterwards and would have continued were it not for September 11th. If it weren't for Mission:Space, Epcot may not have recovered as quickly from its severely lowered attendance rate after 9/11. The Test Track car flying off is a myth. The reason they delayed the opening for so long was due to the fact that they had to tweak the cars' and the master system's computing process to allow the timing sequence to fit all 23 (if my memory serves correctly, that is the number) cars on the track, while they were only running 20-21. The entire ride needed to be worked on so that timing was correct in every aspect. For instance, when the car exiting the barrier test onto the outside track, the car finishing its out and back run passes the emerging car in perfect timing. That was part of the alterations made during that final year. Timing my friend, is what kept Test Track down.

Let's get this thread back on track. I'm thinking a Dinosaur-type dark ride. Guests are taken on a wild ride along the Texas-Mexico border at night in a US Border Patrol vehicle. The vehicle is hijacked by a bandito, much like The Great Movie Ride.

Back on track eh? :animwink:

 

[speck76]

Just speaking for myself, I thought Tijuana was a lot more interesting than that boat ride.

did you see the woman with the goat too?

 

[Victor]

Thrill Rides: Mission:Space, Test Track, Maelstrom, Body Wars, Soarin'. There are more than just two.

Eh, I wouldn't really consider Soarin' and Maelstrom thrill rides. I guess you could say Soarin' is a thrill ride for people who don't like thrill rides.

 

[Victor]

did you see the woman with the goat too?

There are goats too!? I thought it was just a donkey...

 

[jedimaster1227]

Eh, I wouldn't really consider Soarin' and Maelstrom thrill rides. I guess you could say Soarin' is a thrill ride for people who don't like thrill rides.

Test Track, Mission:Space and Soarin' are considered "Big Thrills" and Honey, I Shrunk the Audience, Maelstrom and Body Wars are considered "Mild but Wild Thrills" on Disney's website.