New attraction for AK?

[MerlinTheGoat]

Dinosaur wasn't originally based on the movie at all. It was called Countdown to Extinction when it originally opened in 1998. The movie came out in 2000, a bit more than 2 years later than the original ride. The original ride was altered to add elements from the film and such (only really the inclusion of the main character as far as i can tell, never got to ride the original form and it's very difficult to discern anything from old dark videos).

Randy Savage (from idealbuildout) posts a ton of great park plans. One idea he had for his proposed ideal Animal Kingdom was to expand Dinosaur with an outside bit into a swamp apparently. His idea was to have a far longer and more impressive ride, rather than it just be compared to Indiana Jones. I love the idea of the Dinosaur ride, it's just an undercooked idea that deserves to be the best it can be (doesn't help with all the broken and missing effects from mismanagement, hopefully new management will correct these issues and more if what Lee said comes true).

 

[awoogala]

Dinosaur wasn't originally based on the movie at all. It was called Countdown to Extinction when it originally opened in 1998. The movie came out in 2000, a bit more than 2 years later than the original ride. The original ride was altered to add elements from the film and such (only really the inclusion of the main character as far as i can tell, never got to ride the original form and it's very difficult to discern anything from old dark videos).

Randy Savage (from idealbuildout) posts a ton of great park plans. One idea he had for his proposed ideal Animal Kingdom was to expand Dinosaur with an outside bit into a swamp apparently. His idea was to have a far longer and more impressive ride, rather than it just be compared to Indiana Jones. I love the idea of the Dinosaur ride, it's just an undercooked idea that deserves to be the best it can be (doesn't help with all the broken and missing effects from mismanagement, hopefully new management will correct these issues and more if what Lee said comes true).

ah ok. Didn't think it was anything like the movie, so if it was, it was a bad job .

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

ah ok. Didn't think it was anything like the movie, so if it was, it was a bad job .

I've never seen the movie, but i've seen trailers and clips. From what i've seen and since you say it's nothing like it, i'm inclined to agree. I guess that's somewhat of a good thing though in ways.

 

[awoogala]

I've never seen the movie, but i've seen trailers and clips. From what i've seen and since you say it's nothing like it, i'm inclined to agree. I guess that's somewhat of a good thing though in ways.

EDITED: SPOILER alert (dinosaur movie) the movie is kind of a weird adoption of a dino by a family of lemurs. meteorites wreck their island, they swim on dino's back to new area, new area has tons of dinos. dinos are trying to get to water/nesting grounds. carnotaurs attack. regular dinos leave the weak, dino raised by lemurs try to convince them to help each other, weak and small. everyone but the "leave the weak leader' makes it to nesting ground.

 

[doctornick]

Buldoze DinoLand and build something (ANYTHING!) in its place.

Again, let's focus on adding more rides/attractions and increase capacity of DAK before even thinking about removing working rides. The park only has 6 rides (!) and 3 of them are in the Dinosaur section.

Build Pandora, add a ride or two to Asia or Africa, maybe build Australia or South America and then maybe tearing down Dinorama would be feasible.

 

[fbp]

the movie is kind of a weird adoption of a dino by a family of lemurs. meteorites wreck their island, they swim on dino's back to new area, new area has tons of dinos. dinos are trying to get to water/nesting grounds. carnotaurs attack. regular dinos leave the weak, dino raised by lemurs try to convince them to help each other, weak and small. everyone but the "leave the weak leader' makes it to nesting ground.

Spoiler alert.

 

[td1129]

And why would they do that? There's nothing garbage about that, there's a potentially good point in that regard. It's very well known that Christianity in general doesn't agree with the science of evolution. We don't need to turn this into a who is right or wrong debate here, he's likely correct that certain churches probably would try to raise a stink about it.

I attended a Christian private school during my childhood. Throughout seven years there they only ever showed us one video one evolution, and it was to let us know that the science was "untrue in case anyone else tried to convince you otherwise" (though one of the science teachers you could tell was having to force himself to tell us it wasn't true, against his will and better judgement so as not to irritate the church members that ran the school). I was raised in multiple church environments, pretty much all of them were very much against the science.

I'm not sure how Disney would react to the church in regards to building attractions that might contradict their religious beliefs. At least an attraction focused around the ideas of life going extinct and evolving into different forms.

So you're going to pretend that the term bible thumper wasn't just used in a pejorative way about people of the Christian faith?

Mods, do your job.

 

[Donald96]

Let's fix up Dinosaur though. Don't tear that down. They can change it to Indy though. Sorry, I had to correct a little misstatement.

Is this a pun to the briefing video? Sorry I just can't say "to correct a little misstatement" with out hearing Dr. Marsh in my head

 

[JungleTrekFan]

Dinosaur wasn't originally based on the movie at all. It was called Countdown to Extinction when it originally opened in 1998. The movie came out in 2000, a bit more than 2 years later than the original ride. The original ride was altered to add elements from the film and such (only really the inclusion of the main character as far as i can tell, never got to ride the original form and it's very difficult to discern anything from old dark videos).

Although the name change is true, I’m pretty sure the main characters from Dinosaur were always featured. The Neverland Files might be wrong but to quote them "Because of the high cost of maintaining live animal exhibits in Africa and Asia, the Animal Kingdom team only had enough money left over for one more land - dinosaurs or dragons. Ultimately, they chose dinosaurs - primarily because of the impending release of Disney's CG animated film Dinosaur and the cross-promotion Michael Eisner wanted to employ to make a return."

 

[Clyde Birdbrain]

Again, let's focus on adding more rides/attractions and increase capacity of DAK before even thinking about removing working rides.

I agree ... why would they bulldoze Dinoland when there are perfectly good empty lots at AK to build new lands/attractions? I am not a big fan of Primeval Whirl and TriceraTop Spin, but Dinosaur is pretty good and I really like the theming of Dinoland. I am probably in the minority on this forum, but I like the theming of this area, especially Chester & Hester's Dinosaur Treasures and Restaurantosaurus.

 

[SirLink]

understand what you are saying but i still would say that they will build off of the environment on pandora and not so much the story...because their are no limits to what they can do

Exactly if Disney got the rights to LOTR, certain Disney fans would say it was a fad.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

So you're going to pretend that the term bible thumper wasn't just used in a pejorative way about people of the Christian faith?

Mods, do your job.

You're the one who attempted to turn this into an angry debate on religion (as per your usual postings which do little besides directly attack whomever you see and don't agree with).

The phrase "bible thumper" is not an attack on the Christian religion itself, but on certain select people that happen to be a part of that religion. I would suggest you do some research on the term before attacking people for using a word that you don't understand the definition of-
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bible-thumper

It is a term directed specifically at fundamental and militant members of the religion, members who express bigoted, hateful, and sometimes violent words and actions against anyone or anything that doesn't adhere 100% to what their books or leaders tell them. These groups of people do not define the Christian religion as a whole, just as the word terrorist doesn't define the Islamic religion as a whole. There are always hateful people in every religion or ideaology (including atheism). But there are also tons of good and peaceful people within these religions.

As stated, there will always be overzealous religious people who would be adamantly against a Disney ride involving evolutionary science themes like the one I proposed. Maybe even violently outspoken and hateful towards the idea or anyone that supports such a thing. If someone was so violently and hatefully opposed towards such a ride based on religion, i'd definitely say bible thumper is an accurate term for them. By default not all Christians are like that, just those overzealous ones. And I don't think you'll meet many rational and fair people who will claim you should defend those types of religious zealots. People of the Christian religion who don't go around with that sort of attitude aren't being targeted and shouldn't take offense to something not directed at them.

 

[td1129]

You're the one who attempted to turn this into an angry debate on religion (as per your usual postings which do little besides directly attack whomever you see and don't agree with).

The phrase "bible thumper" is not an attack on the Christian religion whatsoever. I would suggest you do some research on the term before attacking people for using a word that you don't understand the definition of-
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bible-thumper

It is a term directed specifically at fundamental and militant members of the religion, members who express bigoted, hateful, and sometimes violent words and actions against anyone or anything that doesn't adhere 100% to what their books or leaders tell them. These groups of people do not define the Christian religion as a whole, just as the word terrorist doesn't define the Islamic religion as a whole. There are always hateful people in every religion or ideaology (including atheism). But there are also tons of good and peaceful people within these religions.

As stated, there will always be overzealous religious people who would be adamantly against a Disney ride involving evolutionary science themes like the one I proposed. Maybe even violently outspoken and hateful towards the idea or anyone that supports such a thing. If someone was so violently and hatefully opposed towards such a ride based on religion, i'd definitely say bible thumper is an accurate term for them. By default not all Christians are like that, just those overzealous ones. And I don't think you'll meet many rational and fair people who will claim you should defend those types of religious zealots. People of the Christian religion who don't go around with that sort of attitude aren't being targeted and shouldn't take offense to something not directed at them.

Someone who believes in creationism = militant, bigoted, hateful and violent. Got it.

 

[awoogala]

Spoiler alert.

ooops, sorry, since it was an old movie, I didn't think of that!

 

[rle4lunch]

I agree ... why would they bulldoze Dinoland when there are perfectly good empty lots at AK to build new lands/attractions? I am not a big fan of Primeval Whirl and TriceraTop Spin, but Dinosaur is pretty good and I really like the theming of Dinoland. I am probably in the minority on this forum, but I like the theming of this area, especially Chester & Hester's Dinosaur Treasures and Restaurantosaurus.

You don't think it feels cheap and doesn't fit in with any other part of DAK? It feels like it belongs at a Carnival or State Fair. I'm not saying bulldoze the rides, just the scamland area (win a stuffed animal crap!) and retheme the rides. And for all that's holy, get rid of that 1950's esque bright paint job on everything.

It feels as cheesy as toon town or walking into Whoville at Uni. Gag.

 

[nytimez]

I'm OK with the roadside tourist trap town - wouldn't be my first choice of theme, but it's not what drags the place down IMO. It's the carnie games and the two cheapo rides there that stink the joint up.

I think Clyde's right, tho - there's something to work with there. It can be saved rather than razed.

 

[menamechris]

Someone who believes in creationism = militant, bigoted, hateful and violent. Got it.

You're a Christian. WE get it too...

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

Someone who believes in creationism = militant, bigoted, hateful and violent. Got it.

LOL! Not even close. I can tell you didn't read my post at all, so i'm not surprised you don't know what a bible thumper is.

Someone who believes in creationism = someone who believes in some sort of divine creation (generally from some sort of supernatural being), nothing more. It should also be noted that Christianity is also only one of the religions that believes this, Judaism, Islam, and Hinduism also have beliefs of creationism. A type of religion, simply put. One isn't a bible thumper simply for having a religion.

A bible thumper is someone who uses militant, bigoted, hateful violence against anyone or anything that doesn't 100% adhere to whatever ideaology their book or leader tells them (the violence doesn't just include the physical kind, it can be done with words). The key difference between a Christian and a bible thumper is that with bible thumpers there's words or acts of violence involved to try to gain followers.

It really makes absolutely no difference what religion (or lack thereof) you are either, these types of people exist within their ideologies and it's not what everyone within the same belief system is like. And when it comes down to it, there's no reason to be defending anyone who acts like that.

 

[doctornick]

I'm OK with the roadside tourist trap town - wouldn't be my first choice of theme, but it's not what drags the place down IMO. It's the carnie games and the two cheapo rides there that stink the joint up.

I think Clyde's right, tho - there's something to work with there. It can be saved rather than razed.

Okay, that's fair, but I would still argue that fixing Dinorama should be low ont he priority list for DAK over doing things that increase capacity and the overall number of attractions. Building Pandora or something in the Camp Minnie-Mickey area is much more important.

 

[Soarin' Over Pgh]

LOL! Not even close. I can tell you didn't read my post at all, so i'm not surprised you don't know what a bible thumper is.

Someone who believes in creationism = someone who believes in some sort of divine creation (generally from some sort of supernatural being), nothing more. It should also be noted that Christianity is also only one of the religions that believes this, Judaism, Islam, and Hinduism also have beliefs of creationism. A type of religion, simply put. One isn't a bible thumper simply for having a religion.

A bible thumper is someone who uses militant, bigoted, hateful violence against anyone or anything that doesn't 100% adhere to whatever ideaology their book or leader tells them (the violence doesn't just include the physical kind, it can be done with words). The key difference between a Christian and a bible thumper is that with bible thumpers there's words or acts of violence involved to try to gain followers.

It really makes absolutely no difference what religion (or lack thereof) you are either, these types of people exist within their ideologies and it's not what everyone within the same belief system is like. And when it comes down to it, there's no reason to be defending anyone who acts like that.

You're doing exactly what s/he wants you to- to steer this thread off topic, and to religion, where a war will break out, as all threads regarding religion on any/every message board on the interwebs does.

Don't give in. :\