Avatar Flight of Passage reviews, comments and questions

[flynnibus]

From Disney's own blog, 3 months ago: https://disneyparks.disney.go.com/b...-new-look-inside-pandora-the-world-of-avatar/

"Avatar Flight of Passage, which will allow guests to ride a Banshee over the world of Pandora"

Guess next time I'll demand a more thorough explanation of "ride a Banshee".

Psst... Pandora isn't real...

Like I said... you took that to mean something... but the statement isn't contradicting anything. Disney also advertises you'll see pirates, ariel, go under the sea, etc.. and none of those things are true in a literal sense.

 

[flyerjab]

Saw this tweet today and couldn't agree more since I experienced the same phenomenon on our recent visit to Pandora.

https://twitter.com/schmoofy/status/868115777962094592

 

[MisterPenguin]

From Disney's own blog, 3 months ago: https://disneyparks.disney.go.com/b...-new-look-inside-pandora-the-world-of-avatar/

"Avatar Flight of Passage, which will allow guests to ride a Banshee over the world of Pandora"

Guess next time I'll demand a more thorough explanation of "ride a Banshee".

Now you being purposely obtuse. Here's Disney's own description of IaSW:

"Sing along to the classic anthem of world peace during a delightful musical boat tour hosted by the children of the world. ... behold a cast of almost 300 traditionally dressed, dimple darlings from nearly every corner of the globe sing a simple song in their native language about universal harmony and dance. Travel to all 7 continents... Before you return home, the children reunite for a grand finale, reminding us of the common bonds of friendship, laughter and happiness we share—and that if we see the world through the eyes of a child, we’ll realize we are all basically the same."
​

So, you wanna complain how Disney leads you astray because you expected 300 actual children singing? No mention of dolls.

BTW, you didn't actually go to 7 continents, either.

And in Peter Pan, you don't actually fly over London or leave this realm of existence and enter Neverland. And you don't actually fly on an elephant. Or cruise down tropical rivers in Asia and Africa.

So, go ahead, and demand a more thorough explanation of "children" and "flying".

 

[BubbaQuest]

Gawd I love the Disney Kool-aid. I make a simple point indicating I thought an attraction was supposed to simulate riding on a Banshee, based both on interviews with James Cameron and Disney's own blog, and was surprised to find out it turned out to be something else...

Enjoy the motion simulator from 1998, everyone. I know I did. Back in 1998.

 

[FigmentForver96]

Gawd I love the Disney Kool-aid. I make a simple point indicating I thought an attraction was supposed to simulate riding on a Banshee, based both on interviews with James Cameron and Disney's own blog, and was surprised to find out it turned out to be something else...

Enjoy the motion simulator from 1998, everyone. I know I did. Back in 1998.

Hard to call it Disney kool-aid when even some of the biggest Disney critics are liking it. The ride stimulates just like the movie did. Knowing the movie would let you know humans are to small to ride a banshee. The wording Disney gives could be confusing to some but they aren't technically lying about it. You are technically riding the banshee through the eyes of your avatar who you've connected to.

 

[TalkingHead]

I agree with TalkingHead. It would be better on a full sized actual banshee with individual wings and a head. They could have done a row of 1, heck maybe even 2 on each row. Take that times 3 levels and 4 theaters on a 7 minute cycle and we are talking an hourly capacity of about 205. There is no doubting for 205 people every hour the ride would be better if Disney had chosen to do this.

What did Walt say? "It's fun to do the impossible." Glad the Imaginees of old didn't have your philosophy.

 

[TalkingHead]

Gawd I love the Disney Kool-aid. I make a simple point indicating I thought an attraction was supposed to simulate riding on a Banshee, based both on interviews with James Cameron and Disney's own blog, and was surprised to find out it turned out to be something else...

Enjoy the motion simulator from 1998, everyone. I know I did. Back in 1998.

If you don't think the ride is a masterpiece and break into tears while riding it, then you're not doing it right. I get that park fans want to believe this is the best ride ever. You're probably going to be disappointed if you go in expecting that. Just saying.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Gawd I love the Disney Kool-aid. I make a simple point indicating I thought an attraction was supposed to simulate riding on a Banshee, based both on interviews with James Cameron and Disney's own blog, and was surprised to find out it turned out to be something else...

Enjoy the motion simulator from 1998, everyone. I know I did. Back in 1998.

No... it wasn't a simple point. You're making it that it was a bait and switch.

"Oh, I thought the vehicle was going to be a simulated banshee" -- That's a simple point.

"Guess next time I'll demand a more thorough explanation of "ride a Banshee". -- That's a complaint you've been misled.

 

[matt9112]

So "better" means it feels like much of an actual drop, correct?

ST can be a pretty rough/jostling ride, though. I presume FOP is much smoother?

Bigger drops IMO and yes butter smooth....thats one of the most underrated parts of the ride it conveys so much motion and depth without jerking you at all.

 

[RustySpork]

Psst... Pandora isn't real...

WAIT, WHAT! That's it, I'm not renewing.

 

[matt9112]

It's Soarin' Meets The Simpsons on a tricycle. It's nice that you really enjoyed it. I did too but I'm not going to oversell it for what it's not.

Lol except it's not....the Simpson's is awful and ancient ride tech. And soaring is like an iMax theater with cool seating....so your saying FOP is like an iMax theater...ok than.

 

[RustySpork]

Lol except it's not....the Simpson's is awful and ancient ride tech. And soaring is like an iMax theater with cool seating....so your saying FOP is like an iMax theater...ok than.

It does load like Simpsons, until you reach the ride vehicle. It's also like Soarin as well. FoP seems to have taken good ideas from multiple rides, and there's nothing wrong with that.

 

[matt9112]

It does load like Simpsons, until you reach the ride vehicle. It's also like Soarin as well. FoP seems to have taken good ideas from multiple rides, and there's nothing wrong with that.

The way you are saying it makes a cottage somehow relatable to a sky scrapper....because evolution? No there nothing alike even if both are buildings.

 

[RustySpork]

The way you are saying it makes a cottage somehow relatable to a sky scrapper....because evolution? No there nothing alike even if both are buildings.

So what you are saying is that you can't comprehend how they can take good parts of different things and use those parts to make something else that's better.

Got it.

 

[flynnibus]

The way you are saying it makes a cottage somehow relatable to a sky scrapper....because evolution? No there nothing alike even if both are buildings.

His points are valid.. the breaking off into the batch load rooms (like Simpsons).. loading that hides then 'reveals' the performance area/screen (like Simpsons). The dome projections (like Simpsons, and Soarin).. The multiple ride vehicles all sharing the same screen (like Simpsons and Soarin). These kinds of choices are not automatic or necessarily obvious. They are design elements.

Your cottage analogy is awful because it misses the point the topic is design and elements

 

[Oddysey]

But I believe it was James Cameron himself that said this ride was going to be all about riding your own banshee. I realize things change and early designs don't match the final product, but I too was surprised to see the final video after all the pre-show hype about "bonding" with your banshee. I wondered how you knew which banshee you were flying on, only to find out your not on any of the banshees in the video. You're flying as a group behind what's on the screen. You could have just as easily been in a helicopter.

Tech wise, this is BTTF 1.5. Disney lead me to believe it was something else.

It may not be what you envisioned, or exactly what was described, but there is in fact a bonding/syncing process with your Avatar just prior to take off. It is actually really well done.

 

[Oddysey]

Enjoy the motion simulator from 1998, everyone. I know I did. Back in 1998.

At first I disagreed with the poster stating that you are being obtuse, but having experienced the attraction, comparing FoP to a 1998 simulator is either a case of you being obtuse or ignorant. I am not implying stupidity when I state that you may be ignorant on this topic. I just believe that your ignorance comes from either not yet experiencing FoP in the flesh or experiencing FoP and never experiencing a 1998 simulator.

 

[flynnibus]

Have you been on the ride, Flynn?

Nope - which is why you haven't found me praising or reviewing it. I've watched the videos, but I'm of the opinion you'll really need to experience it to weigh how the elements work together strong enough or not. Clearly the reviews so far are positive.

 

[TalkingHead]

Nope - which is why you haven't found me praising or reviewing it. I've watched the videos, but I'm of the opinion you'll really need to experience it to weigh how the elements work together strong enough or not. Clearly the reviews so far are positive.

The reviews of media and Disney bloggers are overwhelmingly positive. I suspect the E-ticket drought has something to do with that. When was the last E to open at WDW? Everest, over a decade ago?

I rode twice - first time the people next to me were raving. Second time, the response was more muted. This was with 25-30 min waits. It'll be interesting to see what people think after 1-2 hour waits.

I think a lot of people are expecting a super intense ride - that's not what this is. The drop on Gringotts is more intense than the drops on here.

You just seemed to have strong opinions on the experience of the attraction, so I thought you might have already been on it.

 

[flynnibus]

The reviews of media and Disney bloggers are overwhelmingly positive. I suspect the E-ticket drought has something to do with that. When was the last E to open at WDW? Everest, over a decade ago?

Everyone loves something new Much of the 'theory' arguments are ignored by people once they are in the heat of the moment.. and then it's just a personal experience if it works for them or not. The whole point of all the theory and design is not to exist upon itself, but to deliver on an end objective. You design a way hoping to deliver that objective as successfully with your target audience.

The duration sounds reasonable so far..
The ride/rider interaction is pretty unique for Orlando which is good for it..
The staging seems impressive

To me the question is how much does the motion+video make you forget where you really are.. and how engaging the actual 'trip' you make is. Soarin' is an example of an attraction that works almost solely because of the scale, visuals, and direction (last two being topics significantly hurt in the 2.0 version). Things you can't really replicate fully without doing it live and with everything working together.

I'm a little concerned the 'trip' may be a bit chaotic and so fast you kind of fall into superhero land (think spiderman swinging on webs instead of true speeds)... but I'm not judging yet. I've only watched some of the initial leaked videos and didn't really look at the full duration ones. No rush for me