lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Evolving EPCOT costs more than $1 billion.They spent half of the EPCOT overhaul budget on this one attraction.
Evolving EPCOT costs more than $1 billion.They spent half of the EPCOT overhaul budget on this one attraction.
Yes the lighting was heavily modified to mostly hide it. When it was working during the opening year it was VERY visible from the second you entered the cave.
I never saw it, but it seems like it never worked correctly(well consistently) from day one so I don't see them repairing it, ever. I would love to see it though!Well, yeah, that looks pretty awesome! Would have scared me!
But I still love the ride, the theming, the music, the queue...one of the greatest!
You misunderstand my intentions. I wasn't comparing show lighting, I was comparing the other physical elements of the queues like the walls and paint. I only picked pictures of Horizons without show lighting so you could actually see the queue in good detail. Horizons operated in the 80's and 90's when cameras had significantly lower quality imagery, which would make it harder to see in normal show lighting with photos.Yes, flash pictures of the Horizons queue without show lighting definitely look worse than the manicured promotional images of the new queue. Talk about an unfair comparison.
Well here is a video and it really is less than a second for the Yeti. I believe that if the shadow Yeti where he tears the track didn't work it would be more of a disaster. I believe the Yeti is shown around 3:10
Definitely not alone in thinking this, I got futureport vibes. The whole "from our world to yours" quote upon entry too definitely gave it that classic vibe, even if it is merely parody.Ok, with all the controversy already surrounding this first room of the queue, lets compare a "classic" epcot queue with the galaxarium:
Horizons:
View attachment 629765View attachment 629768
Cosmic Rewind:
View attachment 629770View attachment 629771
It won't be the most popular opinion in the room, but they honestly share a lot in common. Only differences are quality of video and a few more colors used in Horizons. Considering how short the very front of Energy is, I'm expecting this to be a smaller space than it looks. I might be wrong though.
Now, I'm not a fan of every single queue in EPCOT being purely blue lights. We need some variety in that department.
Like someone else said, Tower of Terror wasn't intended to have animatronics. Many of us expected Guardians to have animatronics, especially after Mission Breakout did. Something that is worse than what I was expecting is, by definition, a disappointment.The Tower of Terror doesn’t have animatronics, would you consider that a disappointing ride? Can you really criticize a company for making a profit-driven decision, which is the backbone of what they do?
I only think that TRON makes MORE sense than GotG. I don't think either one belongs in Epcot. I'm just saying if I were an Imagineer in the group that was discussing these additions to the park, I would have pushed for flip-flopping the two rides.Why does TRON make sense but GotG doesn’t? No offense intended but that just seems like a personal bias tbh. Nothing in original EPCOT Center utilized preexisting IP.
Yep.Side note: @marni1971 did they ever get far enough on planning that for there to be blueprints?
Easy there fella. Don't go givin us too many details,Yep.
Do they say SD, DD or CD somewhere on the side?Yep.
I wonder where those blueprints are now, and if some anonymous Imagineer or archivist would have the guts to leak them...Yep.
While nothing in WDI truly ever gets tossed out, Time Racers is an idea that should be buried and forgotten about. The idea of stuffing a coaster in Innoventions and (but more so) SSE is just wrong.I wonder where those blueprints are now, and if some anonymous Imagineer or archivist would have the guts to leak them...
The Guardians 3 excuse makes no sense. They didn’t know Rocket and Groot would be in the movie?I found some articles it seems, "the Audio Animatronics were cut from the design early into development, partially for budget purposes but also partially because of the uncertainty surrounding “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3.”
I did not understand that either. I think they meant the uncertainty of Guardian's 3 being made at all at the time or who was going to direct etc.The Guardians 3 excuse makes no sense. They didn’t know Rocket and Groot would be in the movie?
Yeah, that one makes no sense. We're going to feature Xandar, which is in the first movie, but we don't know if the 3rd movie will be made so we need to cut the AA's. The mental gymnastics around this whole project are just mind-boggling.I did not understand that either. I think they meant the uncertainty of Gardian's 3 being made at the time.
Maybe when Gunn was wishy washy on directing they ran scared which makes no sense either. Or just cut costs because heck we dont need do that, people will come anyhow, who knows.Yeah, that one makes no sense. We're going to feature Xandar, which is in the first movie, but we don't know if the 3rd movie will be made so we need to cut the AA's. The mental gymnastics around this whole project are just mind-boggling.
Maybe when Gunn was wishy washy on directing they ran scared which makes no sense either. Or just cut costs because heck we dont need do that, people will come anyhow, who knows.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.