It doesn’t have to literally cover it, being placed at the right angle and location will hide it from view. The trees along the perimeter of Canada are not taller than the Imagination pavilion, but block your view of it because of their location and the guests point of view.
Like I've been saying, Walt taught all of his imagineers and staff how to plus attractions. Now with our bearded buddy Chappie, the way Disney now plusses things are magic maker PLUS, Lightning Lane PLUS, etc, etc...
Yes! Somehow I don't think Chappie would authorize the money to transplant large, grown trees from wooded areas of the property. He would rather save the $$$ and just put saplings around the attractions. He doesn't PLUS things, he MINUSES them.
I do agree with you though. I was just saying some part of Disneyland isn’t exactly well hidden either.
We are not theme park inspectors. We do not control Disney. We do not know the purpose and the goals of the company and we definitely do not have a say in anything. Personally, I really don't care about whatever opinion anyone has about things. I see a lot of things that I don't like either, but what is accomplished by getting our knickers in a knot over things that we cannot control. It isn't complacency it is reality. It is up to me to determine for myself what I am going to decide to do. Moan about things that I can't change or enjoy what is presented or stay home. That is the limit of my power. Yours may differ, but since I don't know you, only you can decide that.
And your point is? My point is who gives a damn. If it is the same or it isn't I can still enjoy it and it doesn't matter if it is the same, in fact I think that is better since I don't have to wonder if I am missing anything.
And I don't see where it is anymore out of place then Space Mountain. It depicts a future thing doesn't it?
I don't understand what you're saying. You are on a superfan passionate website that's 98% opinion driven...we toss ideas around AND opinions too. I opine all the time and so do you. So my question is, if you don't care about everyone else's opinion, what are you doing on here? I may not always agree with yours but I respect it and you certainly have every right to yours, but I honestly don't understand why you would be on here saying you don't care about anyone's opinion and then give yours. I mean nothing but respect, but you've got to explain this to me.
You obviously give a damn, because you’re constantly trying to shut down conversations by claiming you don’t care. If you actually didn’t care you wouldn’t be reading and commenting.
Again with the building? The thing isn't even finished yet, but again, it is just a themed (that's the part I was talking about) attraction that requires height to accommodate it. Reality tells me that it isn't the "theming" that is the problem it is the building and would be a problem no matter where it was located. Again I ask what would you do with it. How would you completely hid a utility that is needed to create the height needed to make it a thrill ride? It looks like it is going to be a fun experience. Why isn't that the important part? Should it be underground (likely under water) or should the track be lowered to ground level all around so that a smaller easily hidden building could be used?What's futuristic about a giant box warehouse?
Are you talking about the canopy? The canopy is fine, but the canopy doesn't hide the building from everywhere (see below picture). It only hides it from certain angles. I'm pretty sure that isn't an issue in Shanghai because it was actually designed for Shanghai, so the canopy does hide the warehouse from inside the park.
There are a variety of techniques that could have been used to not have a warehouse sitting out in the open, clear as day. The ride does not have a big drop, so it doesn’t need the height for its thrills. The ride also already has a basement level, so it could have made use of that. It could have had a designed building intended to be seen like its neighbor. The site topography could have been reshaped to support berms. All sorts of things could have been done.
Remember one thing. Disney World's four parks are called "Theme Parks". Six Flags is called an "amusement park." If it were built as an amusement park, I would 100% agree with you. But Walt Disney and the Imagineers set out to change what an amusement park is/was. The intent is to be all immersive. When you walk down towards RnRC, can you see the building that houses the roller coaster? Can you see the building from anywhere in the park? You ask why isn't the ride experience the important part? My answer; it is if you are going to an amusement park. Disney set the bar for themed entertainment, maybe they should keep up with the standard they created!
They'd rather live down to everybody else's standards. They pretty much said so when they used the "industry standard" excuse for implementing hotel parking fees.
