StageFrenzy
Well-Known Member
I guess I'm not "todays expert" because I don't mind either park using existing ride tech for a new attraction.I personally never felt that there was anything wrong with omni-movers and I still don't. In fact, I wish all four parks were loaded with them. What my comment was about is that "todays expert" is expecting that Disney should create a whole new system of transport for every new attraction. They don't want to see a duplication of any past system otherwise it earns their disapproval. It wasn't the ride system in Epcot that was the problem it was that in many ways each attraction overlapped in story. Yes, it was FutureWorld and the only thing that addressed the future was Horizons. Everything else was a timeline from beginning to a few steps into the future and not much more. It was never the ride system that got old it was the story line. Let's face it even imagination, after the initial turn table show, was a snore fest. Creative yes, but, a lot less then interesting. All it had, in my opinion was that "one little spark of inspiration" in the imagining and creation of the opening scene with Dreamfinder and Figment. Without the song the ride would have been over right after that.
In order to look into the future there must be an anchor to the past and present. In order to show progress there has to be an understand where you've been. Most of Epcot's pavilions were advertisements on how with their product you can have the future today. The ride was the history and the post show was the future or what people would do with the sponsors product in the future.
Snore fest might be a bit strong for Imagination. Imagination had re-ridability and each ride was different because of the layering on the attraction allowed guests to see new details of the attraction.