Jimmy Fallon Ride

champdisney

champdisney

Well-Known Member
Rode Jimmy Fallon twice yesterday. I was pleasantly surprised with it, the waiting area was nice, comforting and entertaining with the ride itself being a lot of fun.
 
Timekeeper

Timekeeper

Well-Known Member
sedati said:
3-D and screenz: I enjoyed all the rides at Universal to varying degrees on their own, but do recognize that by the end of the day there is a sense of repetition in their presentation style, aka screen fatigue. I had several issues with 3-D at Universal and came up with a solution that may or may not be viable. My first issue is unique to the system of glasses Universal uses which while appearing similar to Disney's, I think has a noticeable difference. I don't wear glasses and have good vision, but I began to notice a slight bit of disorientation every time I put on the glasses. My right eye always seemed darker than the left. Holding the glasses to a light, I was surprised that there is a colored tint to each side. Red on the left, blue on the right, with the right eye seeming truly darker. This reminded me of the old 50's style colored 3-D glasses and was surprised such a technique was still in use. Trying the same thing at Disney only showed an even tint with no color (except for Avatar whose glasses look for all the world like clear plastic.) I'm sure the parks have their own technology, but I found Universal's somewhat negative for my own vision.
Click to expand...

Tom Morrow said:
I've never had an issue with the condition of glasses at Universal or Disney :shrug:
Click to expand...

Perhaps sedati was indirectly referring to the noticeable differences between Dolby/dichroic glasses (wavelength multiplex visualization) and circular or linear polarization glasses (like RealD Cinema). The Dolby format is more expensive and is considered by many to produce a brighter and sharper 3D image than traditional polarization. While perhaps the technique seems reminiscent of the "50's style colored 3-D glasses," the actual technology is a bit more sophisticated nowadays.

If memory serves, polarized glasses are used in Philharmagic, Captain EO/Pixar Shorts, Muppet Vision 3D, Toy Story Mania, It's Tough To Be A Bug, T2 3D, Shrek 4D, etc.

maxresdefault.jpg


Whereas dichroic glasses are used in Star Tours, Escape from Gringotts, Spiderman, Transformers, and in Avatar (with a different shape/style), etc.

tumblr_lljxo2zAVF1qa4w2fo1_500.jpg


At least we're not dealing with shutter glasses in these theme park attractions. :cool:
 
sedati

sedati

Well-Known Member
Timekeeper said:
If memory serves, polarized glasses are used in Philharmagic, Captain EO/Pixar Shorts, Muppet Vision 3D, Toy Story Mania, It's Tough To Be A Bug, T2 3D, Shrek 4D, etc.

maxresdefault.jpg


Whereas dichroic glasses are used in Star Tours, Escape from Gringotts, Spiderman, Transformers, and in Avatar (with a different shape/style), etc.

tumblr_lljxo2zAVF1qa4w2fo1_500.jpg


At least we're not dealing with shutter glasses in these theme park attractions. :cool:
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. The issue at Universal was noticeable each time I put the glasses on. Definitely had the issue on Gringotts, Transformers, and Fallon. I acclimated quickly and it didn't hurt the overall experience, but each time I put them on I felt off. Never noticed it at the Disney attractions you listed. No one else seemed to have the same issue as I did, but to me one eye always seemed darker. I agree about the shutter glasses- I went to an IMAX in NYC in the nineties and they had us wear these enormous and heavy battery powered headsets.
 
J

JamieCoops

Member
The attraction was just awful. Lazy.

Queue was great. Exterior very well done.

However, the ride - as soon as we sat down we literally couldn't believe it was another screen ride! What an unbelievable bad joke.

I even found the visuals very hazy. Why not let the attraction breathe, and take it a bit slow. As soon as you take in a scene your rushed away.

I'm sorry but you can no longer just put a motion simulator type attraction out and just move the ride vehicle sideways, down and up at the screen. Where are the smells, the sounds, the weather - really IMMERSE you in the experience. There was none of that here - it's just lazy.

You also weren't really immersed - you could see the borders of the actual ride around you.
 
matt9112

matt9112

Well-Known Member
JamieCoops said:
The attraction was just awful. Lazy.

Queue was great. Exterior very well done.

However, the ride - as soon as we sat down we literally couldn't believe it was another screen ride! What an unbelievable bad joke.

I even found the visuals very hazy. Why not let the attraction breathe, and take it a bit slow. As soon as you take in a scene your rushed away.

I'm sorry but you can no longer just put a motion simulator type attraction out and just move the ride vehicle sideways, down and up at the screen. Where are the smells, the sounds, the weather - really IMMERSE you in the experience. There was none of that here - it's just lazy.

You also weren't really immersed - you could see the borders of the actual ride around you.
Click to expand...

it's a great filler attraction it's meant to be a decent indoor attraction between headliners. your rant about screens is also pretty common but unreasonable since that's CLEARLY the entire industry's direction. both Pandora attractions use screens for example...both major potter attractions as well. there not going away....
 
J

JamieCoops

Member
matt9112 said:
it's a great filler attraction it's meant to be a decent indoor attraction between headliners. your rant about screens is also pretty common but unreasonable since that's CLEARLY the entire industry's direction. both Pandora attractions use screens for example...both major potter attractions as well. there not going away....
Click to expand...


Why would Universal be doing filler attractions? Sorry but it's going back to the bad old days.

The creative department at Universal have been woeful of late. The whole park lacks a vision - you can't just keep making screen rides after screen rides - surely someone must be overlooking the whole parks to realise they are messing the park up.
 
JoeCamel

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
JamieCoops said:
Why would Universal be doing filler attractions? Sorry but it's going back to the bad old days.

The creative department at Universal have been woeful of late. The whole park lacks a vision - you can't just keep making screen rides after screen rides - surely someone must be overlooking the whole parks to realise they are messing the park up.
Click to expand...
I will answer that one! The build what they are told to to build. And you cannot have a park with just headliners, you have to have filler rides. For fillers they are pretty good.
 
J

JamieCoops

Member
JoeCamel said:
I will answer that one! The build what they are told to to build. And you cannot have a park with just headliners, you have to have filler rides. For fillers they are pretty good.
Click to expand...

Fillers are usually older rides, that are no longer relevant, modern technology, etc - you see many of these around Disney.

But when you make a new attraction - surely you can't go into it trying to make a 'filler' ?
 
JoeCamel

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
JamieCoops said:
Fillers are usually older rides, that are no longer relevant, modern technology, etc - you see many of these around Disney.

But when you make a new attraction - surely you can't go into it trying to make a 'filler' ?
Click to expand...
If you need a people eater you make a filler. If you want to increases attendance you build a headliner. They make them all the time.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom