FullSailDan
Well-Known Member
You have to consider though how much Falcon is relying on NASA developed technology. There's a good reason for both private and public action in science
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News American Adventure Refurb, New Projectors and Ending Video
- Thread starter EricsBiscuit
- Start date
You have to consider though how much Falcon is relying on NASA developed technology. There's a good reason for both private and public action in science
mikejs78
Well-Known Member
It's less than you think. Sure, a lot of tech NASA developed in the 60s is used by every rocket company. But SpaceX has developed a lot of things that were said to be impractical or impossible only a few short years ago. Truth is NASA has basically been in a slow decline to stagnation since the Space Shuttle became operational. The ISS and Hubble were blips of development but NASA hasn't developed much new in almost 40 years now.
The problem with public sector space at this point is that it is driven by lawmakers from both parties who want space jobs in their districts, and not scientists. If you look at the big rocket that NASA is building (which will only be marginally bigger than the Falcon Heavy as far as payload capacity), it will cost $1B per launch vs the Heavy's 80M. That's a huge difference for marginal value. The reason? The architecture of the Space Launch System was spelled out by Congress in a bill, rather than developed by rocket scientists. For example, it mandated that the same 40 year old engines that were used for the shuttle be used for this new rocket - square peg in round hole, not to mention that there should be 40 year advances in rocetry that could be taken advantage of.
All this said, it's because of this that I think the future of space is in the private sector, unless Congress can get it's act together and set goals that the scientists can implement, rather than dictate the particulars of rocket architecture.
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
Official Parks Blog just got around to posting some video on recording the new Golden Dream.
Walt d
Well-Known Member
And in the tour today, there has been talk of chirs froom, for winning the past 3 years in a row, at the end of each race there is a motor home, were they are tested. So why did it take them 3 years,for lance to get caught “
Or not.
DznyRktekt
Well-Known Member
The new score is bronze at best.
Tim Lohr
Well-Known Member
seriously? ...they really need to stop wasting time and money altering classic attractions and focus on building new ones. Every time I see Tom Fitzgerald in a new YouTube video hyping some crap new edition to Epcot, I wonder how someone who appeared in the Horizons attraction could be so clueless about Epcot
The new version of the Golden Dreams song is so slow, lethargic, and boring, I think all the singers and musicians must have been on thorazine or tranquilizers or something. The one thing people were good at in 1980's was writing catchy peppy songs, a lot of which a consider "classics" now 30-40 years later... I you really want "fix" something, fix the damn yeti
The new version of the Golden Dreams song is so slow, lethargic, and boring, I think all the singers and musicians must have been on thorazine or tranquilizers or something. The one thing people were good at in 1980's was writing catchy peppy songs, a lot of which a consider "classics" now 30-40 years later... I you really want "fix" something, fix the damn yeti
JohnD
Well-Known Member
Here's the original 1980s version of Golden Dream.
From the @marni1971 tribute video of the American Adventure.
Here's the entire video.
From the @marni1971 tribute video of the American Adventure.
Here's the entire video.
wdwms
Active Member
Ugh... vocal gymnastics and a drummer who has no idea of dramatic timing. The entire piece as others have said is too long and drawn out. It pauses and doesn't know where to move your emotions; as if to say "we have to fill this spot w/something because we have too much footage and don't know where to put it all". Less can be more. There is a fine line between giving chills/goosebumps and smothering people, the latter is prevalent here. Yes I prefer some of the older things at WDW; but this proves again that the current team, while surrounded by glorious new technology and wonderful projection systems still have a ways to go before instilling the hope and promise that the original film and arrangement excelled at.
Slowjack
Well-Known Member
Listening to them talk about the new score, you see the impossible task they have set for themselves. On the one hand, they want something that is timeless, that won't be stamped with today's date. On the other hand, they want something that is contemporary, that speaks to where music is now. Something that is "relevant"--a word that I really think is useless in the context of good storytelling, whether in the service of entertainment or art.
Point is, they can't have it both ways. If you want something that speaks to "now," then you are inevitably going to end up with something that will speak to "then" a few years from "now," like topical jokes in a sitcom that elicit only head-scratches during reruns. If you truly want something timeless, then you need to pick something from the past that still works--something that has stood the test of time.
This is a microcosm of the problem with the overall Epcot overhaul. They keep adding the flavor of the month while telling us they're rebuilding Epcot into something that will never go stale.
THE Monorail Lime
Well-Known Member
Or FANTASMIC!
I wish they refurbished the seats.
raven
Well-Known Member
thepirateking
Well-Known Member
The new song sounds modern. I want to like it. It just never reaches and sustains a good climax. By the time it gets going, it's over. I give it an 8/10. Of course, hearing it "live" in the theater on that amazing sound system combined with big visuals might make it a little more impactful.
DznyRktekt
Well-Known Member
If Imagineering wanted the American Adventure to be timeless but current, and the soundtrack to trigger goosebump inducing emotions, they could have easily implemented styles of Williams, Zimmer, Horner or Thomas Newman.
aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
Agree, after finally seeing this in person yesterday it is true that its much better in person. I went in expecting to not like it at all, but I have to say I thought it was for the most part, well done, even though I disagree with some of the figures they chose to put up on screen. While the song is a different recorded version than what were all use to, it sounded incredible. Its a little more faster/rushed now, but I still found it stirring and the music was full and booming. I am usually very critical about changes like this and its not often I like what they do anymore, but I walked out pleasantly happy and relieved.
That's not weird!