Soarin' Expansion and new Soarin' Around the World film

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Oh yeah, I get that. And even if Soarin isn't hidden completely, the fact that most guests don't notice the show building means it doesn't really matter.

I just hate that all of the foliage and additions around the mansion has really hidden the scale of the façade. Still is beautiful, though.
No argument there. I just commented on it because of the background that was visible after there have been so many that think it is a sin against nature to ever have that situation in a Disney park. It certainly wouldn't have happened back in the old days. Oh, wait... maybe it did. The more things change the more they stay the same.

Have you ever seen this overhead shot?
hauntedmansionplan-500x493.jpg
 

JenniferS

When you're the leader, you don't have to follow.
No argument there. I just commented on it because of the background that was visible after there have been so many that think it is a sin against nature to ever have that situation in a Disney park. It certainly wouldn't have happened back in the old days. Oh, wait... maybe it did. The more things change the more they stay the same.

Have you ever seen this overhead shot?
View attachment 105919
Wow!
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
No argument there. I just commented on it because of the background that was visible after there have been so many that think it is a sin against nature to ever have that situation in a Disney park. It certainly wouldn't have happened back in the old days. Oh, wait... maybe it did. The more things change the more they stay the same.

Have you ever seen this overhead shot?
View attachment 105919
Except that the landscape was all done so as to shield the view once the vegetation had been given a little bit of time to fill in. The early years also saw the establishment of a tree farm so that in the future it would be possible to avoid having to wait as long for trees to grow. The circumstances are not at all the same.
 

Otamin

Well-Known Member
They probably could, however it would probably make the scale of the buildings like those in the Canadian pavilion look small, and that would be the worse of two choices.
It definitely would if they were close to the Canadian pavilion, but I was referring to trees closer to Sourin' instead.

It's probably not ideal anyway.
 

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
Except that the landscape was all done so as to shield the view once the vegetation had been given a little bit of time to fill in. The early years also saw the establishment of a tree farm so that in the future it would be possible to avoid having to wait as long for trees to grow. The circumstances are not at all the same.
This argument is growing old. Like 44 years old. How about that awful backstage view you get near the potties on the way from Main Street to Tomorrowland that has been there since 1971 until this past year when today's inferior management finally fixed it. Or how about we revisit the whine about Bay Lake Tower being viewable from Liberty Square...along with Space Mountain since 1975.

Disney tries to make the view lines as good as possible, but sometimes it is impossible to block large show buildings from all views, especially far off views. Swolphin is more distracting from World Showcase. For me, the only reasonable solution for Soarin would have been to make it architecturally appealing to look at like other Future World pavilions which are visible from World Showcase, not to try and hide it. You can see the JII pyramids from portions of World Showcase but no one complains because they look cool.
 

Next Big Thing

Well-Known Member
Indeed it wasn't. The swatters were cancelled in 2009.

However, NFL has failed to live up to expectations within TDO and the wider company.
Talking about "Potter Swatters" is senseless. I think it will be very hard for ANYTHING to top the two-part WWoHP.

I don't say that just because Universal build kewl stuff and Disney is lame now :rolleyes:. I say it because the incredibly detailed world that JK Rowling put together through her books is very hard to match. Potter was almost perfectly made for theme parks.
 

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
Talking about "Potter Swatters" is senseless. I think it will be very hard for ANYTHING to top the two-part WWoHP.

I don't say that just because Universal build kewl stuff and Disney is lame now :rolleyes:. I say it because the incredibly detailed world that JK Rowling put together through her books is very hard to match. Potter was almost perfectly made for theme parks.
Star Wars could easily top Wizarding World if it is done right. Of course, that is an important qualifier on the end, but it's not as though Disney is inherently incapable. It'll just be expensive. I think WDI is every it as talented as Universal Creative, although more expensive.

The Star Wars universe is incredibly rich.
 

Next Big Thing

Well-Known Member
Star Wars could easily top Wizarding World if it is done right. Of course, that is an important qualifier on the end, but it's not as though Disney is inherently incapable. It'll just be expensive. I think WDI is every it as talented as Universal Creative, although more expensive.

The Star Wars universe is incredibly rich.
The problem with Star Wars versus Potter is, yes, the Universe is incredibly rich, but Star Wars has so many different planets, etc, it's hard for more to think how everything can be brought to a theme park and made to be done as good as Potter. Not saying SW can't be good, it's just Potter was perfect for a theme park because it had the train from London to Hogsmeade.
 

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
The problem with Star Wars versus Potter is, yes, the Universe is incredibly rich, but Star Wars has so many different planets, etc, it's hard for more to think how everything can be brought to a theme park and made to be done as good as Potter. Not saying SW can't be good, it's just Potter was perfect for a theme park because it had the train from London to Hogsmeade.
I agree. Star Wars will be tough to pull off. But I'm sure it can be done. Yes, Potter presents unique opportunities for a theme park. And yet, they still built rides primarily with screens. More physical effects would have been beneficial. But this is not the place for that discussion.
 

Next Big Thing

Well-Known Member
I agree. Star Wars will be tough to pull off. But I'm sure it can be done. Yes, Potter presents unique opportunities for a theme park. And yet, they still built rides primarily with screens. More physical effects would have been beneficial. But this is not the place for that discussion.
All of Diagon Alley proper was physical, not to mention the dragon atop Gringotts. Plus there's a lot of physical elements with the wand interactive game.
 

NoChesterHester

Well-Known Member
The problem with Star Wars versus Potter is, yes, the Universe is incredibly rich, but Star Wars has so many different planets, etc, it's hard for more to think how everything can be brought to a theme park and made to be done as good as Potter. Not saying SW can't be good, it's just Potter was perfect for a theme park because it had the train from London to Hogsmeade.

If they don't try to do it all, and focus on executing one place really well then Star Wars could be mind blowing. If it is a "greatest hits" of sorts without a cohesive environment then it won't even come close.
 

NoChesterHester

Well-Known Member
Indeed it wasn't. The swatters were cancelled in 2009.

However, NFL has failed to live up to expectations within TDO and the wider company.

I'd like to know how it didn't live up to expectations. Is this not living up to the creative expectations or the financial?

Creatively, I can see that. It is visually nice but at the same time unremarkable. The food additions are better then the attractions.

Financially it is hard to imagine that it isn't a smash success. Be Our Guest is an absolute cash cow. The extra rides and land area has allowed a couple more thousand people into the park. Attendance at the MK is bursting at the seams.
 

SirLink

Well-Known Member
I'd like to know how it didn't live up to expectations. Is this not living up to the creative expectations or the financial?

Creatively, I can see that. It is visually nice but at the same time unremarkable. The food additions are better then the attractions.

Financially it is hard to imagine that it isn't a smash success. Be Our Guest is an absolute cash cow. The extra rides and land area has allowed a couple more thousand people into the park. Attendance at the MK is bursting at the seams.

I believe Disney were expecting a 30% increase in attendance for NFL. Obviously that never occurred...
 

NoChesterHester

Well-Known Member
Both it would seem.

I get the feeling anything less than a car jam up World Drive would be deemed a failure.

If it isn't a financial success then they had unrealistic expectations. Or there are specific metrics it is missing. Like... the store that was part of Mickey's Toontown was a huge success. Perhaps the new store isn't collecting the crowds.
 

NoChesterHester

Well-Known Member
I believe Disney were expecting a 30% increase in attendance for NFL. Obviously that never occurred...

MK was already the busiest park on earth. The park couldn't actually handle a 30% attendance bump. I don't believe that anyone could have found that a realistic goal.

IOA was under attended. The attendance spike there just filled out the design capacity.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom