Shaman
Well-Known Member
I agree. That was the only thing that annoyed me, the rest was pretty good. I think the attraction is better today than the old one.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Gran Fiesta Tour now open! Video here
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
I agree. That was the only thing that annoyed me, the rest was pretty good. I think the attraction is better today than the old one.
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
Not always, but most of the time. If it has a good story and animatronics then the ride is bound to be great. 3 Cabs has a decent enough story, and animatronics would've made it a much more memorable experience.
That was a little harsh. Besides, I'm not blaming the imagineers here. If they had more budget and creativity from the blessing of upper management, then some of their more current work would be better.
That's because of the story. Like I said above, the ride must have a good union of story and animatronics to make a great ride.
Wow!!! A couple of birds flying around on a magic carpet on a plasma screen!?!?! Holy smokes! How did they DO that?
Even if animatronics couldn't duplicate what's on the video, they'd still be far more impressive. You could have the AAs on a carpet held up by an unseen lever behind them making the thing float slowly up and down and it would be a great effect.
It most certainly would not be having AAs for the sake of AAs. It would make the characters feel more real and 3 Deminsional rather than 2-D characters runnng around on a flat TV screen. And it would make the ride much more memorable. If I were a first timer to WDW and went on this ride, I'd probably forget about it in due time. But if they added cool looking animatronics, chances are that I would remember it more.
There are a lot more things that go behind making a good memorable attraction than you think...
Connor002
Active Member
You seem to be focusing on a concept of "memorability." Well, I call shenanigans. AAs have no effect on how "memorable" an attraction is. Whether Phillarmagic or Splash Mountain, it's experience being presented that makes the attraction. AAs are only a mark of correlation between a good attraction and medium, not causation.
Could it be that the imagineers were the ones who chose tp use screen tech? The option is there, and there's no evidence to say for sure who's decesion it was.IB said:
Wow!! Creepy dolls on sticks dancing to an annoying song! Holy smokes! How did they DO that?IB said:Wow!!! A couple of birds flying around on a magic carpet on a plasma screen!?!?! Holy smokes! How did they DO that?
I disagree fundamentally with your assumption that Audio Animatoroncs make an attraction "great," "impressive," or "memorable," but it has become quite clear that you are not willing to accept the conclusions of others. I would rather see the fluid, "cartoonish" motion of the original medium (cartoon animation, in this case) than a clunky, static three dimensional robotic figure.IB said:
These characters are 2 dimensional. Please see above regarding the "memorable" argument. Just because you think something is "cool" does not mean it is best suited to interpret the medium and convey the experience.
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
Would Splash Mountain be as good if they had characters on screens rather than AAs? Absolutly not. No where near as good. Infact, other than the drop, it would be completely lame. It would be like watching a movie, except in boats.
I have no information on what the budget was, but trust me. If the imagineers did have a good budget, they definately would've used animatronics instead of utilizing the old TVs.
Its way more impressive than TVs would ever be...
Accept the conclusions of others?! Do you expect me to all of a sudden go, "Oh, I'm sorry. You were right all this time. I'm such an idiot." I'm simply providing my arguement.
Who said they could be clunky and static? Have you seen the AAs in the Sinbad ride at Tokyo Disney Sea? Their movements are incredibly quick for such small figures to the extent where you don't think they are robots. Perhaps they could intercut AAs with screens? Like have the AA Cabs talking about trying to find donald on their magic carpet, then you turn to a TV screen showing them flying around. Something like that at least.
[/QUOTE]These characters are 2 dimensional. Please see above regarding the "memorable" argument. Just because you think something is "cool" does not mean it is best suited to interpret the medium and convey the experience.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but it won't leave any lasting impression on the viewer what so ever. All rides must have an extra kick to make them memorable or enjoyable. Characters on TV screens are not going to wow or impress anyone. If you have a motion picture that has nothing interesting or unique about it, people are going to forget about it.
mousermerf
Account Suspended
There aren't any TV screens in this ride - have you been reading other inaccurate websites again?
mharrington
Well-Known Member
My sister LOVES Donald Duck and she like Three Caballeros, so I bet she would love this ride.
Does anyone have a video of it, like from Youtube or something? I was thinking of emailing her about it.
unkadug
Follower of "Saget"The Cult
new version
http://www.wdwmagic.com/granfiestatour.htm
old version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt1huHrJXvc
mharrington
Well-Known Member
Never mind. I found one on Youtube by myself.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
Animatronics are incredibly expensive and we cannot expect every ride to cost $100,000,000. We would have very small parks, indeed (or very expensive tickets). This was not meant to be an E-Ticket ever, so it was given a modest budget and the Imagineers stretched that budget incredibly well to make a whole attraction with a reasonable story and a good deal of fun. They could have done what they did or, with the same money, had probably a few animatronics that guests would enjoy for about 20 seconds of the ride before returning to the old, dusty, run-down ride that they didn't have enough money to clean up b/c they spent so much money on their impressive flying-carpet animatronic. Given how this attraction is, any additional animatronics would likely have been of the calibre of a Fantasyland dark ride's animatronics--nothing awe-inspiring.
polarboi
Member
:sohappy:
I agree. And this, too:
:sohappy:
Part of what makes Disney so great is the variety of attractions. I love the AAs in Splash (my all-time favorite ride). But I don't want every ride to be AAs. I love the interactive screen technology in Turtle Talk. But I don't want every attraction to use interactive screen technology.
Frankly, I think the way that the 2D characters were combined with the 3D environment works really well for this attraction and is the best way to tell the story. This may come as a shock, but I actually prefer it without the AAs and was hoping they wouldn't use AAs. These characters are much more lifelike to me than, say, the AA figures in California's new Monsters, Inc., ride. And not every AA can be as expensive and sophisticated as the Yeti.
I don't want to see the park overrun with screen-based attractions (we've had quite a few new ones lately), but neither do I think that AAs are the right choice for every attraction.
Again, I think they did a great job with this rehab in plussing a tired attraction.
-p.b.
Pumbas Nakasak
Heading for the great escape.
Just a thought, will I get to 4K posts by the end of the day?
is it possible to post that level of drivel?
damn I could have made that a separate post!
is it possible to post that level of drivel?
damn I could have made that a separate post!
AAs not memorable to an attraction? Don`t make me laugh. What`s the part most people think of about Energy (either version)? World of Motion? JII? The American Adventure?
As stated elsewhere, having a ride full of AAs in Gran Fiesta wouldn`t have the same effect as the projections, but it is obviously a cheaper option than even minimatronics.
And what`s with this new term `screen technology`? You mean projections? Disney have used them since 1955. Production and presentations may have changed since then but it`s still a basic way of presenting an attraction. It worked in 1972 having an entire ride based on them but it`s not nearly as emersive as an AA. Yes, not every attraction needs them (ToT) but relying solely on screens for the desired effect can fall short of the mark. Imagine The Laugh Floor with a few A-100s and a projected backdrop.
At the end of the day, it`s a C Ride not a D or E Ticket, but it could have had a bigger impact with a fair ratio of new AAs and projections. As always, I guess it is down to budgets. I`ve said it before - grass level Imagineering can only use what they are given.
As stated elsewhere, having a ride full of AAs in Gran Fiesta wouldn`t have the same effect as the projections, but it is obviously a cheaper option than even minimatronics.
And what`s with this new term `screen technology`? You mean projections? Disney have used them since 1955. Production and presentations may have changed since then but it`s still a basic way of presenting an attraction. It worked in 1972 having an entire ride based on them but it`s not nearly as emersive as an AA. Yes, not every attraction needs them (ToT) but relying solely on screens for the desired effect can fall short of the mark. Imagine The Laugh Floor with a few A-100s and a projected backdrop.
At the end of the day, it`s a C Ride not a D or E Ticket, but it could have had a bigger impact with a fair ratio of new AAs and projections. As always, I guess it is down to budgets. I`ve said it before - grass level Imagineering can only use what they are given.
unkadug
Follower of "Saget"The Cult
CrashNet
Well-Known Member
To be honest, I like it. It needed an update, and this is just part of the evolution process. Epcot is my favorite park, but the one thing I honestly will never fully understand is how so many will dislike so much of what changes in this park over any other park. As a whole, Epcot still has the most understated showing of the Disney characters in any park, and I imagine it will always be that way.
Sorry - I meant ToT has no AAs. We all know the real ghosts are in the MKToT does have projections. Or are the ghosts REAL!
EpcotServo
Well-Known Member
I haven't been following this discussion, but what I think "screen technology" ment was the amazing quality of the projections in this ride. They were all really clear, and state of the art. It's hard to tell in the video, but they look great in real life.
Connor002
Active Member
Did the Rio rehab have any the budget as Splash? No, and I never should have. It's a C ticket, and adding millions worth of AAs into it would be no better than spray-painting a Timex gold: it may look closer to a Rolex, but it's the same stuff underneath. To me, adding screen tech in place of what could have bankrupt Epcot's funding for years seems a logical (and, as it seems to most, popular and entertaining) alternative.
Exactly. When working with a limited budget (which will never change- Even in Walt's day there's always been a bottom-line) it's better to make the most of what you have than to moan about what might have been.
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
Trust me, knowing the imagineers, if they had a proper budget they would've put in some animatronics. They would've thought more outside of the box than simply putting new movies in. That's what they're paid to do. Heck, if the imagineers had an unlimited budget, they would've torn the whole thing down and put in a completely different ride. The imagineers rarely to never complete an attraction with money to spare.
True, but I highly doubt the average guest will find them cool. Heck, when I came to WDW six years ago before I was a Disney fanatic, I went on Rio and thought the screens were lame and were the reason why I hated the attraction in the first place. Simply adding new movies doesn't make it any better.
No, you didn't get my point. Turtle Talk and Philharmagic have their own reasons for making them memorable. Philharmagic has amazing special effects, and Turtle Talk has the ground breaking interactive guest thing going for it. That's what makes them memorable. 3 Cabs Rio has nothing original or groundbreaking about it. Just the same thing as the old ride except with different movies. Besides, shows like Turtle Talk and Philharmagic have a different medium where they don't need/ can't have animatronics. Philharagic's main medium is the 3-D and special effects which is already enough to wow the viewer ( although Philharmagic DOES have one animatronic which is Donald's butt ). And Turtle Talk just flat out can't have any animatronics because the technology for interactive animatronics hasn't been developed yet.
There's nothing to make the most of. The bottom line is that the whole ride is an extremely cheap fix to make the ride more popular again when it really has vast more potential. If you watch a cheap movie thrown out by the movie studio just to get a quick profit, chaces are the movie is going to be bad.
I thought the screens were the best part of the ride. Sort of like combining circlevision with IASW. Updated movies along with a humerous story upgrade sounds great.
Lucky, the Muppets at DCA and the future Mr. Potato Head for Mania show that it has been developed.