Wired has an excellent write-up on Imagineering on their website. Just go read it... Now!
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.12/rebuilding.html
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.12/rebuilding.html
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Excellent Write-Up on Imagineering
- Thread starter pheneix
- Start date
Good article.
Some interesting points. Would Imagineering ever think of using other companies to develop their attractions technologies? You suppose they would ever trust them? I mean, Universal really took advantage of getting help from ouside companies and have wound up with a lot of really great stuff, but there's always the risk of ending up with something like Mr. McBean's Super Machines (or whatever they are called, I keep forgetting). A great idea, but the outside developers didn't get it all right.
Some interesting points. Would Imagineering ever think of using other companies to develop their attractions technologies? You suppose they would ever trust them? I mean, Universal really took advantage of getting help from ouside companies and have wound up with a lot of really great stuff, but there's always the risk of ending up with something like Mr. McBean's Super Machines (or whatever they are called, I keep forgetting). A great idea, but the outside developers didn't get it all right.
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
Actually, Universal has had a good number of problems with non-conventional ride systems... Jaws, which was originally scheduled to open with the park but didn't until many years later (after a few lawsuits between Universal, the designing firm and the company that constructed it) is the perfect example of that. Likewise, other attractions such as E.T. and Back to the Future were less than reliable upon opening. To this very day, they still have routine difficulties with E.T. and then there is Spiderman which we all know is a headache to Universal the way Test Track is to Disney...
There was actually an article in Wired Magazine a few years back (same place this article came from) where they spoke with Imagineers and went behind the scenes of WDW. They discussed the inner workings of the American Adventure and Alien Encounter and others... Thinking back, the person writing the article noticed some brand names on things "beneath" AE and the Imagineer giving the tour stated "We see no need to constantly reinvent the wheel" so clearly, they aren't at all opposed to looking to outside vendors to help make their designs possible. I think the thing we should worry more about is when they start looking to outside vendors for total solutions like most of the competition does.
>>>Jaws, which was originally scheduled to open with the park but didn't until many years later (after a few lawsuits between Universal, the designing firm and the company that constructed it) is the perfect example of that. Likewise, other attractions such as E.T. and Back to the Future were less than reliable upon opening.<<<
Don't forget Kongfrontation...
>>>Would Imagineering ever think of using other companies to develop their attractions technologies?<<<
They already have. Intamin and Arrow provided assistance with the EMVs in Indiana Jones and with the Matterhorn respectively. Arrow has also been a major factor in the development of Disney's dark ride systems.
Don't forget Kongfrontation...
>>>Would Imagineering ever think of using other companies to develop their attractions technologies?<<<
They already have. Intamin and Arrow provided assistance with the EMVs in Indiana Jones and with the Matterhorn respectively. Arrow has also been a major factor in the development of Disney's dark ride systems.
Testtrack321
Well-Known Member
Almost all of WDI's vehicles and other complicated systems are outside made. From the Doombuggies to Indiana Jones, all vehicles and ride systems are made by someone else.
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
That’s right. These day’s WDI does most of the design work themselves but with the exception of pieces that are simple or individually unique (such as set pieces and animatronics and so on) just about all of the construction is outsourced. It just isn’t practical for it all to be done in house.
The reason we don’t see people like Universal with their own Time Rovers is because Disney still holds the patents on the technology.
Huh, I never knew that. I do remember Arrow's relationship with Disney in the past, but I guess I never realized that so many other attractions are built by other companies.
So why is it, then, that Disney has so many Imagineers compared to Universal Creative if they both use outside vendors?
So why is it, then, that Disney has so many Imagineers compared to Universal Creative if they both use outside vendors?
CAPTAIN HOOK
Well-Known Member
Interesting article, thank you
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
Because Universal goes to other companies and says “We want a MIB attraction” and the company comes up with ideas and Universal approves it and it gets built. Or in some cases, Universal goes to a company with an idea of what they want and it is taken from there. Essentially, you or I or anyone else can do this. We do it all the time when we think up cool new attractions that we wish Disney or Universal would build. If that was all that Imagineering did, they wouldn’t be very important.
In most cases, the attractions are not built by other companies. Technologies used in the attractions may be but Disney did not outsource the Haunted Mansion. They just hired another company to construct the Doom Buggies and the track that they use. The key word here is “construct” because the Doom Buggies were the first use of Omnimover [TM] technology which is an invention of WDI.
It is also worth pointing out that Arrow and Disney have a rather special relationship because back when DL was being figured out, Arrow was essentially a machine shop. The owner had purchased a small amusement park as an investment and they did repairs to the park before building a few small attractions that were later duplicated for other amusement parks.
The stuff they did for Disneyland was WAY beyond anything they had ever done up to that point. The fact that they weren’t experienced with the attraction end of things probably worked out to Disney’s advantage because they were willing to let Disney tell them what they wanted them to do and how to do it – sort of like the company working with Disney on Mission Space.