Fast & Furious- Supercharged details officially released

[lazyboy97o]

Fallon and F&F replaced Disaster and Twister. Hardly major losses there.

This idea that replacing lackluster attractions with lackluster attractions should be praised, or at least accepted, is just silly. It’s resources that have been wasted with little net gain. Even being “filler” attractions doesn’t excuse sloppy execution. Fast & Furious Supercharged is a poorly executed portion of the tram tour that is being lifted with little adjustment and shoved into a problematic format that is even less relevant to its story. It shouldn’t be defended, even if Disney has done stupid stuff too.

 

[lebeau]

This idea that replacing lackluster attractions with lackluster attractions should be praised, or at least accepted, is just silly. It’s resources that have been wasted with little net gain. Even being “filler” attractions doesn’t excuse sloppy execution. Fast & Furious Supercharged is a poorly executed portion of the tram tour that is being lifted with little adjustment and shoved into a problematic format that is even less relevant to its story. It shouldn’t be defended, even if Disney has done stupid stuff too.

I'm certainly not praising F&F. I will give it a chance before I pass final judgement. My family enjoyed Fallon and Kong. They aren't the attractions I would have chosen for the parks. They may even be lackluster, but they aren't destroying anything as JamieCoops has repeatedly claimed.

I am optimistic future additions will be better.

 

[Swoosh32]

So... when is F&F opening?

Also Kong is fun so poop on anyone who says otherwise.

 

[raven]

I have no problem with the cloning of attractions across parks; I was merely commenting on the fact that after Universal stated they were moving away from designing screen based attractions due to guest complaints they again are installing the F&F ride and the new Kung Fu Panda.

The F&F franchise deserved so much more in Orlando much like Frozen did in Epcot; I do understand the limitations in Hollywood with adding it to the tram tour and their decision to clone the KONG system, but in Orlando they did not have those limitations.

I get that they are limited to what they can do with the Shrek Theater and completely agree that the F&F ride will be more of a draw than the old Disaster! ride, however I still feel this is lazy of them and I am especially disappointed with the F&F decision.

I rode the tram in CA and saw F&F section. I think it sounds best to reserve judgement until the attraction opens.

 

[raven]

But when nearly 90% of the rides are bloody screens and screens and screens and screens...

90%?

This idea that replacing lackluster attractions with lackluster attractions should be praised, or at least accepted, is just silly. It’s resources that have been wasted with little net gain. Even being “filler” attractions doesn’t excuse sloppy execution.

Yet those screen-based rides are attracting some of the highest guest counts day after day. Even at Disney (FoP and Soarin’). F&F will be extremely popular none the less.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

Good. More people in line for the screen rides = less people in line for E.T.

 

[Tom Morrow]

Personally, I like Kong better than FoP. And think it is considerably more immersive. All you have to do during FoP, to completely ruin the magic, is turn your head to either side.

All you have to do to ruin the immersion on Kong is not be seated in the exact center of the truck in one of the back rows.

 

[OG Runner]

Personally, I like Kong better than FoP. And think it is considerably more immersive. All you have to do during FoP, to completely ruin the magic, is turn your head to either side.

Can you just face forward and enjoy being immersed in the ride on Kong? Just asking, I have never ridden it.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Can you just face forward and enjoy being immersed in the ride on Kong? Just asking, I have never ridden it.

The RV is similar to the Kilimanjaro Safari trucks. Except the driver is an AA. They have 5 different trucks with 5 different drivers, each with their own narration. All of the seats face forward. The first 3 rows have a pretty bad view of the action because of the truck's cab. The action takes place on both sides of the vehicle.

 

[JoeCamel]

The RV is similar to the Kilimanjaro Safari trucks. Except the driver is an AA. They have 5 different trucks with 5 different drivers, each with their own narration. All of the seats face forward. The first 3 rows have a pretty bad view of the action because of the truck's cab. The action takes place on both sides of the vehicle.

There is only one place that picture could have been made. On the grand opening stage the short time it was up. Do I win the internet or at least a nice parting gift?

 

[lebeau]

All you have to do to ruin the immersion on Kong is not be seated in the exact center of the truck in one of the back rows.

We were seated towards the back and had no problems. <shrug>

I have heard Soarin' 2.0 has problems if you're not seated dead center.

 

[OG Runner]

I have never had a problem on Soarin', just did Soarin' Around the world in January, other than feeling like I
was going to hit an elephant with my feet or run into the Eiffel Tower. I was on an end seat, but in the middle
set of seats. It sounds like Kong will be fun also.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

All you have to do to ruin the immersion on Kong is not be seated in the exact center of the truck in one of the back rows.

There is not a ride out there that can't be ruined by refusing to buy into the suspension of disbelief.

On FoP, I just don't look around. On Kong and Soarin', I ask for and will wait for the better seats. I like Fallon more than Na'vi River Journey as far as fillers go. It's a silly ride with a killer Barbershop Quartet. NRJ, even if you buy into the suspension of disbelief, is rather pointless.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

I have never had a problem on Soarin', just did Soarin' Around the world in January, other than feeling like I
was going to hit an elephant with my feet or run into the Eiffel Tower. I was on an end seat, but in the middle
set of seats. It sounds like Kong will be fun also.

If you sit near the far ends on Soarin' over the World, the Eiffel Tower looks odd.

 

[JoeCamel]

If you sit near the far ends on Soarin' over the World, the Eiffel Tower looks odd.

Kong made it banana shaped......

 

[lebeau]

If you sit near the far ends on Soarin' over the World, the Eiffel Tower looks odd.

I have seen weird distortion in other parts as well.

But the tower is the one that really stands out if you get the wrong seat assignment.

 

[Tom Morrow]

We were seated towards the back and had no problems. <shrug>

I have heard Soarin' 2.0 has problems if you're not seated dead center.

Oops, I meant to say "not be seated in the exact center of the truck and you have to be in one of the back rows."

There is not a ride out there that can't be ruined by refusing to buy into the suspension of disbelief.

On FoP, I just don't look around. On Kong and Soarin', I ask for and will wait for the better seats. I like Fallon more than Na'vi River Journey as far as fillers go. It's a silly ride with a killer Barbershop Quartet. NRJ, even if you buy into the suspension of disbelief, is rather pointless.

Soarin' 1.0 had similar problems with the Golden Gate Bridge scene. I think that Soarin', Simpsons, and Kong are the top three rides where your seating can have the most negative impact. Simpsons looks awful on the third floor.

 

[MisterPenguin]

As much as I love, love, love FoP, it also has a viewing angle flaw I just noticed (after 12 rides): If you are on the extreme right or left then the forward movement of the camera is clearly not aligned with you. Rather than looking like I'm riding on the banshee's body, it seems like I'm riding to the right or left of it as if I was in a side car.

 

[lazyboy97o]

There is not a ride out there that can't be ruined by refusing to buy into the suspension of disbelief.

Suspension of disbelief is a reaction, not a conscious decision.

 

[smile]

Suspension of disbelief is a reaction, not a conscious decision.

origin of the phrase suggests otherwise -
no sane person believes they're actually on a banshee in pandora, but it is the conscious suspension of disbelief that allows us to be able to be tricked into feeling like we're flying

what i think you're jiving at would be more akin to being amazing by magic, but in so doing, irrational is made/appears rational as opposed to knowing what it is you're experiencing is fake and allowing yourself to go with it, even if on a fleetingly conscious level