-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Cameron has given the OK ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
Disneyfan_76
Well-Known Member
awwwhh... I don't see anything. Was the picture taken down already?
Avatar aside, why is Disney so hell bent on creating new attractions based on ride technology they've already used?Have they really become that stagnant from a creative perspective?
At least Uni used the Kuda arm and a completely groundbreaking way of delivering WWoHP. It seems like Avatar will be Soarin' and It's A Small World/Great Movie Ride part 2. TLM is a basic Omnimover, RSR is Test Track, Dinosaur is Indy, etc., etc.
At least Uni used the Kuda arm and a completely groundbreaking way of delivering WWoHP. It seems like Avatar will be Soarin' and It's A Small World/Great Movie Ride part 2. TLM is a basic Omnimover, RSR is Test Track, Dinosaur is Indy, etc., etc.
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
DocMcHulk
Well-Known Member
Uni does the same thing too. It's all about how you theme and evolve it. Potter is very different, but Transformers is basically Spiderman.
Beholder
Well-Known Member
Jumpin' Jehoshaphat! I check out for a while and wow! Teach me to blink. I've been trying to catch up on all this (reading about every other page) and I must admit, it's all pretty interesting. Don't know where it's all going, but with the attraction drought that WDW has been under, it's nice to finally get some rain.
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
Transformers is the same ride system as Spidey. And it is still a state of the art ride system. The theme park world moved past Omnimovers right after EPCOT opened.
looking forward to what gringotts has to offer
DocMcHulk
Well-Known Member
Disney has been doing some good stuff, unfortunately, a lot of it isnt state side.
prberk
Well-Known Member
I have to admit that I do not understand what the blueprints are showing exactly in the way of ride technology... but, assuming that it is true that they are re-using existing ride technologies, I have to say that even Walt did that. Look at It's a Small World and the Pirates of the Caribbean.
I have no problem with re-using technology. The question will be whether it is the best choice for the experience, and overall whether the technology and other elements of the ride are put to their best use. In other words, a good ride is a good ride, even if it uses old technology. And a bad ride is a bad ride; new technology does not a great ride make by itself.
Every movie in you local multiplex is shown on a screen, most digitally projected, and most have surround sound. Clearly some are great and immersive, putting their visual and aural convass to good use. Others waste it.
So, it remains to be seen whether any new rides are actually well-thought-out and worth the investment -- but the ride system itself is a very small part of the equation.
I have no problem with re-using technology. The question will be whether it is the best choice for the experience, and overall whether the technology and other elements of the ride are put to their best use. In other words, a good ride is a good ride, even if it uses old technology. And a bad ride is a bad ride; new technology does not a great ride make by itself.
Every movie in you local multiplex is shown on a screen, most digitally projected, and most have surround sound. Clearly some are great and immersive, putting their visual and aural convass to good use. Others waste it.
So, it remains to be seen whether any new rides are actually well-thought-out and worth the investment -- but the ride system itself is a very small part of the equation.
njDizFan
Well-Known Member
I have no idea if the leak was intentional or not but it's certainly not a secret anymore(even Dis kept their link up to Merf's website).
Why would Disney do this? Well possibly to breathe fresh air into a concept that is now 13 months old without any new info. After the initial buzz we haven't seen or heard any real progress. Perhaps they want to guage the fans reactions? The speculation as to why the FLE plans changed was due to the overwhelming outrage that that the new land was too girl-centric(therefore removal of Pixie for the Mine Train ride).
Disney has such a huge online fanbase at their disposal to use as an instant measure of excitement/approval. I'm not saying that TWDC bases their decisions on us fanboys but we can be used as a tool or leverage.
Why would Disney do this? Well possibly to breathe fresh air into a concept that is now 13 months old without any new info. After the initial buzz we haven't seen or heard any real progress. Perhaps they want to guage the fans reactions? The speculation as to why the FLE plans changed was due to the overwhelming outrage that that the new land was too girl-centric(therefore removal of Pixie for the Mine Train ride).
Disney has such a huge online fanbase at their disposal to use as an instant measure of excitement/approval. I'm not saying that TWDC bases their decisions on us fanboys but we can be used as a tool or leverage.
Mickey1984
Active Member
Pumbas Nakasak
Heading for the great escape.
The only tool with any clout appears to be a spreadsheet.
Scuttle
Well-Known Member
Agreed! These prints look pretty lame. Even TE entire document looks weak and doesn't reveal anything.
Scuttle
Well-Known Member
Ya I don't see the E-Ticket either. Unless that simulator is a suspended ride vehicle with a full range of motion then I don't think that's anywhere near E-Ticket.
PeoplemoverTTA
Well-Known Member
I'm pretty critical of TDO and what has been happening in WDW, but I really don't have a problem with Avatar. I haven't seen the movie (but I should, since I know a very talented designer who worked on it), but, if the attention to immersive theming and detail that Cameron took for the movie is applied to the land, who cares if it's attached to a movie you don't know or like? From what I understand of people's comments from the past year or so, the land wouldn't be tied directly to the plot of the movie, but to the location itself. So, if you don't know (or like) the movie, you should still be able to appreciate and enjoy well-done attractions and a themed land. (My "yous" aren't meant for anyone directly, just a general statement).
In a way, couldn't you just pretend it's an immersive land not tied to a movie (since you don't know/care for Avatar?). Then it could just be treated like another well-themed area (as I hope it will be). Why does any kind of movie/franchise tie-in have to automatically make it a disappointment (notwithstanding any budget cuts, which are an unfortunate reality on any project)?
In a way, couldn't you just pretend it's an immersive land not tied to a movie (since you don't know/care for Avatar?). Then it could just be treated like another well-themed area (as I hope it will be). Why does any kind of movie/franchise tie-in have to automatically make it a disappointment (notwithstanding any budget cuts, which are an unfortunate reality on any project)?
