-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Project Gemini Revealed
- Thread starter Lee
- Start date
devilred
New Member
I say bring in soarin' and that is it. Maybe you can put a coaster in, but put it in the back area with trees and crap and dont clog up the area in front of the pavilions. Personally i like the design in front of the land. By the way dont add too many trees.
By the way in 2006, the monorail narrator will say and I quote, "Welcome to Six Flags (cough) I mean Epcot Gemini."
By the way in 2006, the monorail narrator will say and I quote, "Welcome to Six Flags (cough) I mean Epcot Gemini."
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
Let's not forget that Epcot Future World pavilions are designed to have major modifications every ten years--it is time for Living Seas, Spaceship Earth and Wonders of Life to change. They are not futuristic. Am I saying they should be replaced by thrill rides? Definitely not. They shouldn't all be replaced in such a manner. But that does not mean thrill rides are a bad addition--especially when I think of Soarin', which is planned to replace nothing, and it is definitely an Epcot style attraction, so I welcome it with open arms. Likewise, I like the proposed Time Racers attraction--very much the same as the current Spaceship Earth, only more thrilling. You cannot pretend to tell me thrill rides are not a substantial part of the Disney experience, and have been since Walt's time. This should not and will not turn into a thrill park--Eisner would never agree to pay that much money for a park only for teens. However, an attraction such as Soarin' is certainly geered toward families, Time Racers to a possibly lesser extent. Many Disney Classics are thrill rides. Think of what these attractions could be if they were given the funding that attractions like the Tower of Terror had--allowing Imagineers to work their magic. These could be fantastic attractions, which you can't deny. Think of Kilimanjaro Safaris--arguably, Disney at its best, with incredible, immersive theming. I would argue the Imagineers still have the talent--and with Microsoft interested in supported Time Racers, I would think it could get the funding to be fantastic, like Mission: Space is looking. Just my two cents. I will not name names, but some people on this thread, in particular, need to stop ridiculing each other for their opinions--and it goes both ways. As I have always believe, do not expect respect if you don't show it. Read the thread and you will understand. It is unfair to ridicule people for liking thrill rides, when Disney stresses them by making a large proportion of its e-rides thrill-based (I am not saying people were not making posts that deserve to be questioned, but going down someone's throat because they support this plan in any way, shape, or form is absurd).
Could someone please explain to me the problem with trees? I really don't get it--granted I don't want Future World to turn into the Oasis, I would think more scenery could be good. What is wrong with trees? You wouldn't be alive without them...Cheers.
Could someone please explain to me the problem with trees? I really don't get it--granted I don't want Future World to turn into the Oasis, I would think more scenery could be good. What is wrong with trees? You wouldn't be alive without them...Cheers.
wdwjmp239
Well-Known Member
I read the article on the Jim Hill media website (see very first posting in this thread) in regards to "Project Gemini" and even though the layout seems a bit cluttered, I say we just sit back and let WDI do their thing and who knows??? Maybe we'll like the new FutureWorld (errr.. I mean "DiscoveryLand") and will attract more visitors.
By the way -- has anyone here been on Mission Space yet? I understand they're running a "soft opening"
Bayou_Tigerfan
New Member
So WDW should only be interested in bringing in the guests of the "right quality"? :veryconfu Maybe Disney should put you outside the gate so that you can decide who to let in.
I'm also sick of hearing how thrill rides split families. Most of the time, that is simply not true. The only ones who can't go on thrill rides are babies and very small children. In general, kids love thrill rides and love doing them with their parents. Going on Space Mountain with my parents when I was 7 years old was the highlight of my childhood, and I can tell you that I enjoyed SM way more than the slow rides. Thrill rides can bring families together if done properly.
By the way, Kyle, thanks for defending the Imagineers. They are human and do make mistakes (like Hester and Chester), but they have also done excellent work lately in several areas.
netenyahoo
New Member
Thrill rides are fine, but not all thrill rides. If they can make all these new rides so that the height limit would be 40" and maybe 42" I think that is fine. My 3 year old is just over 40" so she can go on most everything, but when she was shorter it was such a pain to go on rides. I like to go on rides with my wife, but I had to go by myself and her by herself. Now that my daughter is a little taller all the rides that are too big for her are the ones I want to go on, but my wife doesn't. This is just a personal example.
I was thinking that it would be cool to have an indoor roller coaster in the Wonders of Life Pavilion where you are shot into the blood stream and race around the body. There could be really cool effects and you could end up in a cell and be dropped off there. This would be tons better than Body Wars and we could still have the pavilion and have a trill ride with a good theme.
I was thinking that it would be cool to have an indoor roller coaster in the Wonders of Life Pavilion where you are shot into the blood stream and race around the body. There could be really cool effects and you could end up in a cell and be dropped off there. This would be tons better than Body Wars and we could still have the pavilion and have a trill ride with a good theme.
Favrefire4
New Member
Can anyone confirm those are really the real plans for gemini? Everyone is arguing over it including myself, but do we know how truthful they are? I just think we should know how real they are before we start specualting about everything. Thanks
Bayou_Tigerfan
New Member
Whew! I feel better now.
Point well taken. I have, however, seen elderly people riding (and enjoying) RnRC, and I maintain that those in category D basically need to allow themselves to have a little fun. I can understand not going on RnRC, ToT, Body Wars, Star Tours, and the teacups ... but everything else should be safe and fun for just about everyone, including pregant women.
Most of WDW's "thrill rides" really aren't. Everyone bemoaning the "fact" that WDW is turning into Six Flags or IOA should go to one of those parks and see what "thrill rides" are really like. With apologies to RnRC, nothing at WDW has the same "thrill" factor that I can get at my local state fair. We call rides like TT and ToT "thrill rides" because they have a thrill component to them, but they aren't the "Zipper". Nothing at WDW has ever given me a headache or made me want to throw up.
I pray that Eisner lets this happen! It looks great on paper, anyway.
I like the idea of making the future more full of "life" with the truckload of plants and trees. I think Epcot has always had the reputation of conveying a somewhat sterril and cold future, but this should help.
Ya know, a while back I posted something in the Imagineering section about putting Autopia in at Test Track, and I guess there are others that see it logical too!
The best thing it seems about this concept is that the park will still remain very unique, with educational purposes along with a whole lot of fun. Everyone seemed to be so afraid that Future World would loose its educational value, but I think with the new and improved areas of the park, including that new House of the Future and "Cool Stuff" building
there's still hope after all!
We'll just have to wait and see.
I like the idea of making the future more full of "life" with the truckload of plants and trees. I think Epcot has always had the reputation of conveying a somewhat sterril and cold future, but this should help.
Ya know, a while back I posted something in the Imagineering section about putting Autopia in at Test Track, and I guess there are others that see it logical too!
The best thing it seems about this concept is that the park will still remain very unique, with educational purposes along with a whole lot of fun. Everyone seemed to be so afraid that Future World would loose its educational value, but I think with the new and improved areas of the park, including that new House of the Future and "Cool Stuff" building
there's still hope after all!We'll just have to wait and see.
Raidermatt
Active Member
If there are any doctors reading this, they probably just fell out of their chair. I'm pretty sure every height restricted ride also contains warnings against pregnant women riding, as well as those with other health problems or back trouble.
Further, there are people for whom its not a case of allowing themselves to have a little fun. The effects of coasters as tame as Space Mt and Big Thunder can cause dizziness and nausea in otherwise normal, healthy people. Remember, there are people who can't handle being on a boat because of the motion.
These things become more common as people get older, and many of these people do not frequent internet discussion boards. They do however, have families and large disposable incomes...
That's actually a good point. But it begs the question of why Disney would spend most of its money on attractions that are thrill-based and therefore reduce the differentiation between themselves and the Six Flag's of the world, when the true thrill seekers still aren't going to visit WDW. By doing this, Disney doesn't really gain much in the way of thrill-seekers, but loses some of its core audience.
Seems like a questionable strategy.
I have to say, however, that a part of me realizes that this plan is most certainly better than nothing.
One other note....Does anyone remember an old part of the Gemini rumor that involved the possible splitting of Epcot into two separate parks?
Isn't it a bit unusual for Disney to consider a plan that actually ADDS (not replaces) two major attractions, as well as several minor ones, to a "mature" park?
Since we are discussing rumors and speculation, I thought I'd throw this one into the mix to see what you all think.
Dizknee_Phreek
Well-Known Member
i didn't entirely read the whole article...i skimmed over parts of it, but i got the gist...in all honesty i feel sick right now...if/when this happens, Epcot will no longer be my favorite park...and quite possibly sink to my least favorite park. i'm sorry, but i'm a purist through and through, and i can't possibly enjoy Epcot looking like THAT when i remember what it was pre-2000. you all may think i'm going overboard when i say this, but i don't even know if i could step foot into it with the aftermath of PG. i'm just so floored right now...sure, it may boost attendance for another 15-20 years, but what then?
i'm extremely opposed to the whole thing, but a few things in particular...Future Mart?! what the hell? that's the best name they could come up with?! sounds WAY too much like Wal-Mart if you ask me! why change Mouse Gear at all? it's the best shop Epcot has to offer...update, cool-looking, Disney-esque...what more could you ask for?
and what's with all the trees and non-straight paths? what are they trying to do? Animal Kingdom of the future?
this whole thing is just ridiculous...they're completely destroying the FW i fell in love with as a kid...sure they updated it since my first trip back in 1992, but the updates were actually GOOD. and they can call it whatever they want....call it Disney-Rama for all i care (which i'm surprised they didn't!) but it will ALWAYS be Future World to me...just like Dixie Landings is still Dixie Landings to me.
is it just me, or is it amazing how after 2000 visions of an intergalactic future just completely diminished? it's like we were all geared up for space exploration and new ways of communication and bringing the world together and all that jazz, and now we just don't even care...or am i the only one that thinks that?
God, i don't even know what else to say...i've already said pretty much how i feel...i'm just completely opposed to the whole thing. if this thing happens, i'll probably try to avoid Future World, or whatever it'll be called, at all costs...i just think i would pain me WAY too much to see it in such a sorry state....and some of you think this is a positive thing and that it won't be a sorry state, but to me it will be, very much. it's like a knife in the heart just to think about it!
i'm extremely opposed to the whole thing, but a few things in particular...Future Mart?! what the hell? that's the best name they could come up with?! sounds WAY too much like Wal-Mart if you ask me! why change Mouse Gear at all? it's the best shop Epcot has to offer...update, cool-looking, Disney-esque...what more could you ask for?
and what's with all the trees and non-straight paths? what are they trying to do? Animal Kingdom of the future?
this whole thing is just ridiculous...they're completely destroying the FW i fell in love with as a kid...sure they updated it since my first trip back in 1992, but the updates were actually GOOD. and they can call it whatever they want....call it Disney-Rama for all i care (which i'm surprised they didn't!) but it will ALWAYS be Future World to me...just like Dixie Landings is still Dixie Landings to me.
is it just me, or is it amazing how after 2000 visions of an intergalactic future just completely diminished? it's like we were all geared up for space exploration and new ways of communication and bringing the world together and all that jazz, and now we just don't even care...or am i the only one that thinks that?
God, i don't even know what else to say...i've already said pretty much how i feel...i'm just completely opposed to the whole thing. if this thing happens, i'll probably try to avoid Future World, or whatever it'll be called, at all costs...i just think i would pain me WAY too much to see it in such a sorry state....and some of you think this is a positive thing and that it won't be a sorry state, but to me it will be, very much. it's like a knife in the heart just to think about it!