Horizons '83
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
You also answered you own question there. They have so many projects going on a once whereas Universal has just a few at most so progress is made at a faster pace.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Soarin' Expansion and new Soarin' Around the World film
- Thread starter danlb_2000
- Start date
You also answered you own question there. They have so many projects going on a once whereas Universal has just a few at most so progress is made at a faster pace.
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
This feels kind of like saying "Why are bathrooms cleaner at Universal?" and someone coming back with "Do you know how many bathrooms Disney has across property compared to Universal? Do you realize how much more work it is to clean all those Disney bathrooms?!"
I'm not saying that Universal has cleaner bathrooms than Disney but the comparison makes the validity of the argument that this should matter more obviously flawed. A larger operation should by simple scale, have more people to manage projects.
It's not like Disney suddenly had a growth spurt in developed land over the last decade that makes their construction/project needs suddenly a surprise. If Disney is genuinley finding themselves stretched thin, they could have avoided some of it by breaking ground on the 3rd theater half a decade or more earlier back when it was apparent to a first time visitor from Tanzania that they had a capacity problem with this attraction in Epcot - just like TSMM at Hollywood Studios. It isn't breaking news to anyone visiting the parks so why act like management had no choice but to approve these attraction expansions in the middle of real new development across property?
Furthermore, there are a limited number of construction resources available in Central Florida but if that were an issue, we wouldn't see other people building at the pace they are.
Disney in recent times has also moved much more heavily to outsourcing aspects of attractions that were previously strictly in-house so that argument on volume doesn't really hold much water, with a lot of what might have previously fallen under Imagineering, either.
The fact of the matter is, Disney moves at the pace that they do because they choose to. Do they need to explain or justify that to us? Probably not.
Do we have to like it? Absolutely not.
note2001
Well-Known Member
I have yet to actively notice it in person, but it's in a ton of my photos.
Can't fool the camera.
MississippiBelle
Well-Known Member
I wasn't thinking they should paint it a different color. From the beginning, the parks were designed to keep sight lines uninterrupted to immerse the guest into the land or area they were in, so I understand why they would try to blend the building into the background by painting it blue. However, in light of recent park expansions, more often than not you are going to be able to see new buildings no matter what, so might as well make it something interesting to look it IMO. Flex the creativity muscles and what not.
That's funny.
But please take the park vs park to the appropriate thread. It gets boring very quick.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
Seen the pics of Haunted Mansion in 1971?
The difference isn't really how attractions are built. It's how many pictures we take of WDW nowadays, post to social media, and overly-analyze.
WondersOfLife
Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
But the many projects that Disney has going for them right now are things like track and theatre expansions and closings without replacements. Honestly the only big thing guaranteed right now is Avatarland, also on a delayed schedule, which in competition with King Kong, I'd probably rather go see King Kong.. Fantasyland Expansion has 7 Dwarves going for it, but even with that hardly anyone on these threads are impressed with it compared to "what it was originally supposed to be." So FL Expansion kind of immediately sank against Harry Potter. The only thing close to competition between Disney and Universal new additions is Star Tours II vs. Despicable Me. That's a pretty close call popularity-wise. So Disney's adding an expansion to Toy Story Mania and Soarin.. Big Woop. Did Disney see that Universal massively upgraded Spider Man's film a couple of years ago and finally decide to say "Oh hey.. They're on to something!" (/_-)
I love Disney World. I just wish it had the management that Disneyland has.
Disney's money is going into Disney Springs.. Which, last I checked, nobody really even cares about.. Heck, most don't like the changes going into it in the first place.
cspencer96
Well-Known Member
That's one sexy mansion.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Build time on Kong is pretty long actually. Universal isn't ridiculously quick with their construction either except in the case of Transformers.When I was there in July with NYFA, we parked right next to the third theatre construction. It was just the frame and concrete. Nothing has been added according to the photo just posted.
How is it that Universal can do this in a couple of months
But its taking Disney SEEEVERAL months to construct a warehouse? Not even done with the exterior...? It makes me sad XP
WDWLover#1
Well-Known Member
Couple of points:
-why go see king kong? King Kong is just a ride, not a land, and looks to have the usual screens inside. Apparently the que will be amazing.
-NFL is not built to be a "Potter Swatter" It's was never supposed to be and is not built to the same target audience.
-I think, last time I checked, a lot of people are very excited for Disney Springs as it will look amazing and have more unique shopping and dining than it did before. You only have to see whats been released and finished so far to see how good it looks. Many would argue its a big upgrade to Downtown Disney. I haven't seen one person hate the changes at all.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
Guess it seems much quicker cause new projects start before others are finished.
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
I know a lot of people are happy about Disney's mall expansion. I'm certainly happy that after more than a decade of issues, they have fixed the parking problem and the garage that is open is great - love the way they tell you what spaces are open. It's way better than sneaking into the Market Place parking lot marked "full" and driving around like a maniac trying to follow people leaving to their cars to get a space before one of the other three dozen cars trolling the lot, do. I'm happy about this. They're definitely doing it right!
That said, if I had to choose between parking at La Nuba and missing out on a bunch of new mostly third party establishments that are neither exclusive to Disney nor thematically tied to Disney* vs. cutting a third off the wait time for Soarin' and/or opening fast passes up to more people, I'm pretty sure I'd go with the simpler option of the Soarin' expansion.
*There is a reason you could almost always find parking on the West Side. Sure there was more of it and that was part of why but the other part was that the majority wanted to go to Marketplace. You could easily see it by the level of congestion trying to walk around that area vs. the total lack of congestion on the West Side, most of the time. Why is that? What was different about Marketplace from West Side? Does most of what this expansion seems to entail seem more like an expansion of the Marketplace level of shops or the West Side? Just something to ponder.
ABQ
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.
WondersOfLife
Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
Why go see king kong? Because that's what I'd rather do... It's more attracting to me than Avatarland is.
I never said NFL was built to be a "potter swatter," I just meant to point out that the final project was underwhelming compared to what Universal promised its fans in which they receive.
And I guess we've been reading different threads on Disney Springs. Last I checked I was reading about how the prices have drastically gone up with the new openings that have been announced or have opened drastically cutting out middle class from being able to afford to even go to DD anymore.
--I'm done with this argument now... My original post was just supposed to ask why it's taking so long to get the soarin' theatre done while giving a comparison of a speedy construction.
PorterRedkey
Well-Known Member
Just saw the digital upgrades for Soarin' Over California in DCA. It was much better than the giant dust flakes that plague the Epcot version. The only downside I saw was that the hang-glider and other digital effects like Tink, stood out a little more. The new movie will take care of those problems.
Does anyone know for sure they are going to keep showing the original version? It would make sense, because it would make it more re-rideable. However, I don't think they have made it official.
PorterRedkey
Well-Known Member
Universal just doesn't announce attractions are being built until they are already being constructed, even if the online community knows what is happening. At the other end of the spectrum is Disney who announced Avatarland for AK, without having any plan at all for what the land would be several years before they even started construction. This just make the build seem longer than it really is.
ChrisFL
Premium Member
Wait....I can see it now "Soarin' over Arendelle"
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
However, to the point, look in the background of that early picture and what do you see. It took over 40 years to completely hide that view of the HM. It's only been 10 years since Soarin showed up.
cspencer96
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.