What other purely backstage buildings have colored patterns on them?
Same words used for GotG. Look how well they hid that project.
They now have a banyan tree they need to put somewhere.
No, no.
That's because either the facade of Horizons was larger then the show building which was behind it or the show building was low enough to be hidden. Besides that the Omni-max screens were not as high as the lift setup at Soarin which' was much larger to enable it to be above the screen looking down unlike Horizon which was viewed from ground level. The need for height is what requires a larger building to house it. That along with the demand for "longer" more elaborate rides just plain requires more space. Since Florida is essentially flat and they cannot go underground after the original design is built and established then you get a building with go away ski blue box. Can sometime we understand the physical reality required to give you your fantasies. Unlike other parks in the world you are looking at a partially camouflaged building and not an ugly track structure. I don't really know why I defend it all since I don't like coasters anyway, but I also hate to constantly hear people complain about sight lines that we are not supposed to be looking at to begin with but also ignoring the Physical realities that are needed to create our fantasies. I'm the one that should be upset because they ruin my "sightline" and I get no benefit at all from it. The rest of you at least get a fun ride.
Horizons didn’t have a facade. The whole entire show building was visible.
Nice rhetoric but you know that there is a limit to just how far they can go without creating massive expense that would prompt them saying scrap that idea and then just put in another Buzz Lightyear. Spin it anyway you want, but it still is an improvement over what was there and the minor notice of a building is such a none important part of it that is isn't really worthy of all this angst. Plus I'd like to know exactly what sightline it is hiding.
You’re the one declaring it impossible. That’s not true. Even the expense is dependent on the specifics of a site. You say you don’t care and yet you keep going on, so you care about something.
Why is it a factor whether my shorts are in a knot or not? I have an opinion and I am expressing it. You yourself keep making statements about the physical ground and sub-ground condition of the area it is built in. Where is all that geological information coming from? I'm just mystified about why so many can be so concerned about so little. It makes no sense at all. But, you are right, if you folks feel like uselessly crying crocodile tears over something that you cannot control and just enjoy the attractions for what it is and not what it is housed in, the by all means. I will bow out and you folks can whine on. Again I will ask, what magnificent sight-line is it blocking.
I 100% get that we are toys, or maybe even ants haha, in a backyard amongst giant (to us) toys.
Whether or shorts are in a knot is a factor because you are clearly being disingenuous. You come to these types of threads berating people for discussing something you claim not to care about. That you read and respond shows you obviously care about something related to the subject. Why are you so bothered that people are discussing something you don’t care about?
What else could it be? There are plastic piece holders, instruction manuals and toy boxes with 90s green price tags (my favorite nostalgic part of the land).
Scale and space. The land does not define either. It’s a big things in a field without a relationship between each other or the viewer.
