Possible hint to new film for Soarin?

[imagineer boy]

I still say they should make it "Soarin over the Land." That would help reinforce the purpose of the Land pavillion. Just imagine, instead of California, how about flying over the Rocky Mountains, Niagra Falls, the rain forest, the sahara desert ( with the pyramids ), rocky ocean shore lines, the mississippi, open fields, orange roves, large farms, and more. And for the finale, instead of flying over DL ( especially during Christmas ?! ) how about flying over epcot, through the Illuminations fireworks, then round about to the land pavillion to give the impression that you just landed back where you started. And yes, keep the Goldsmith Score, its so sweeping and beautiful. And I agree with what somebody else said, the transitions shoudn't be so jumpy. Have whip pans instead, for example: You're flying through a forest, then you swoop past a tree and the scene transitions to somewhere else. It just works so much better that way, and it makes you feel like you're really flying to places rather than watching a large movie and rocking backward and forwards to it.

 

[Frank Stallone]

You know, I am begining to like you.

Maybe we should start a 'Who is Frank Stallone?' thread!








:lookaroun

Inigo Montoya: "Who are you?!"

Dread Pirate Roberts: "No one of consequence"

I am a Figment of Disney's Imagination.

 

[Bill Smugs]

How about this they do Sorin over the World but they start the flight at Disneyland then fly over Tokyo Disney, Hong Kong Disney, fly over Disneyland Paris. Then Jump the pond to fly over WDW starting at the MK, then DAK followed by the studios and ending with a front row seat for Iluminations finally complete with We Go On playing well the final torch lights.

 

[coastermaster83]

^ coastermaster83 like that idea. But what would the children look like?

 

[Scar Junior]

Maybe what's going to take til 2009 is the building of the physical attraction in Paris, not the filming... therefore the filming could be done but with nothing to show it on yet, they're taking until 2009. My only question would be, would Disney premier a film at WDW a whole 3 years before the Paris attraction debuts? That to me would seem like a problem...:lookaroun

I would think Epcot would keep the California movie until the programming has been finished in Paris. That way there is little down-time at Epcot and the successful attraction can be running. Once completed, the new film and simulation software would be brought over and the ride would still be renewed.

 

[S.E.A.]

I would think Epcot would keep the California movie until the programming has been finished in Paris. That way there is little down-time at Epcot and the successful attraction can be running. Once completed, the new film and simulation software would be brought over and the ride would still be renewed.

but that won't be until 2009 at the least. If the film is already in the can this early, I would suspect that Paris would only be borrowing off a project that is already under way...aka EPCOT's Soarin' Over the World.

 

[unkadug]

Even if Soarin' over the World has been made, what's wrong with Epcot getting it's own version, instead of being the b@st@rd step-child and getting hand-me-downs from other parks?

 

[AEfx]

Even if Soarin' over the World has been made, what's wrong with Epcot getting it's own version, instead of being the b@st@rd step-child and getting hand-me-downs from other parks?

Nothing wrong with it, but it just doesn't make much sense.

I don't have exact figures, but I'd be willing to bet the amount of people who visit WDW and also visit DLP (even just once) is going to be less than 1%.

How in the world does it make sense for them to make a different film, with the same theme, which would cost millions and millions to make (IMAX ain't cheap), when those millions and millions could be spent on something else new and original and 99% of the guests are never, ever going to know that Epcot isn't the only place that has it (or even care if it didn't)?

I'd much rather them invest those millions in something worthwhile and visible instead of on a new film that doesn't need to be made just because a few fan-people imagine there is this virtual pi**ing contest going on between the parks when we just all really want each park to be the best it can be, regardless.

AEfx

 

[unkadug]

Nothing wrong with it, but it just doesn't make much sense.

I don't have exact figures, but I'd be willing to bet the amount of people who visit WDW and also visit DLP (even just once) is going to be less than 1%.

How in the world does it make sense for them to make a different film, with the same theme, which would cost millions and millions to make (IMAX ain't cheap), when those millions and millions could be spent on something else new and original and 99% of the guests are never, ever going to know that Epcot isn't the only place that has it (or even care if it didn't)?

I'd much rather them invest those millions in something worthwhile and visible instead of on a new film that doesn't need to be made just because a few fan-people imagine there is this virtual pi**ing contest going on between the parks when we just all really want each park to be the best it can be, regardless.

AEfx

Ok....... point taken :wave:

 

[nyfrenchy]

Soarin' over Florida sounds terrible... I really hope that is dismissed.

Still beats "Soarin over Iowa"...

 

[mousermerf]

Soarin' over New Jersey *cringes*

 

[kcnole]

Even if Soarin' over the World has been made, what's wrong with Epcot getting it's own version, instead of being the b@st@rd step-child and getting hand-me-downs from other parks?

And who's to say it's Epcot getting the hand me down video of the soarin over the world. Perhaps it's being filmed for Epcot and Paris is the one getting the hand me down.

 

[AEfx]

And who's to say it's Epcot getting the hand me down video of the soarin over the world. Perhaps it's being filmed for Epcot and Paris is the one getting the hand me down.

I'm sure, if the original article is acurate, then it was a joint decision.

Soarin' is desperately needed at DSP, and I'm sure it helped the buget get greenlight more quickly because the film could be reused in more than one park. Or perhaps the film was already being done for WDW, so the DSP attraction got greenlight because they'd only need to build the actual ride. In either case, I'm pretty confident the non-exclusivity and reusability of the film was part of the decision making process.

AEfx

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Im slightly bemused that it would take so long to build something like Soarin.

I know the French arent exactly renowned for the length of their working days but 3 - 4 years for Soarin??

I know theyre building a poor mans ToT and when I was there late Feb they were clearing ground for something else, but if you think MGM is a half day park Disney Studios will be a half hour visit.

It needs more to do and it needs it now not in 4 years.

 

[marni1971]

^ Soarin` hasn`t been green lit yet for WDSP. If the ToT and Nemo dark coaster pull in the crowds then expansion, maybe including Soarin`, will follow.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

^ Soarin` hasn`t been green lit yet for WDSP. If the ToT and Nemo dark coaster pull in the crowds then expansion, maybe including Soarin`, will follow.

I take it the coaster is what they were clearing the land for?

 

[DisneyRoxMySox]

I take it the coaster is what they were clearing the land for?

I beleive the Coaster is all ready half built, there is a thread somewhere on here about it. Corrus posted some pics.

 

[Scar Junior]

I'm sure, if the original article is acurate, then it was a joint decision.

Soarin' is desperately needed at DSP, and I'm sure it helped the buget get greenlight more quickly because the film could be reused in more than one park. Or perhaps the film was already being done for WDW, so the DSP attraction got greenlight because they'd only need to build the actual ride. In either case, I'm pretty confident the non-exclusivity and reusability of the film was part of the decision making process.

AEfx

One thing is for sure... The French would HATE something like Soarin Over California. Disney is almost "too American" for them to stand being at the Paris resort. Could you imagine how they would react to an attraction glorifying the state that has been extremely detrimental to their own entertainment industry!

 

[nyfrenchy]

Soarin' over New Jersey *cringes*

That one could features some awesome scents...

 

[onholiday]

A thought... Soarin at Epcot has an unused queue that is identicle to the regular standby queue and Epcot just started operating, successfully, M:S with 2 standby queues and a FP that splits.

that was originally supposed to be a single riders queue, but they just don't use it.


personally. i read about this rumour about a year ago, and i think it's a great idea. i love the california shots, but honestly, keep that in california, where the name of the ride is soarin' over california. i can watch that show when i go to disneyland. in wdw i'd really like to see something different. i think that having shots from everywhere would bring in what epcot is all about and would just make it more interesting, and perhaps give the ride more to work with in the way of scents and things that the ride has now. instead of orange groves and pine trees, there could be different things instead of, or in addition to. instead of using the old saying 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' here, i think that any improvement on this ride will take something that is already great and make it amazing.