Soarin' Over the World: My Review...One World: Unacceptable

[DisneyPrincess5]

So if it's distorted, how did it get this far? Is the problem the actual video or the screen or both? Or is the problem only from the perspective in which its viewed?

Wasn't it tested extensively? If it was tested, and theres no way it was not, what happened from there? "Well dang, it's not right but we've got to deliver by X date"? "This is the least of our worries so it'll have to do!? "It's the type of screen, gonna happen no matter what we do"?

 

[Magenta Panther]

And for the benefit of the now millions of people that have no idea who Ed Sullivan was... Google is your friend!

Or they could watch Aladdin again.

 

[Virtual Toad]

Add me to those who had a "meh" reaction to the new Soarin'. I really want to like it better than the original, but there just doesn't seem to be as much repeat value in it for our family.

Three issues that stand out for me: first, overuse of CGI gives it a cheap, cartoonish look. At the very least it's distracting, at its worst it's embarrassingly bad. Would expect to see this in a B-park, not as a headliner at WDW. The original relied almost entirely on great cinematography, not CGI tricks, and as a result had much more authenticity. When you spend your time trying to decide what's real and what's not, it totally takes you out of the experience.

Issue #2: Lack of smells. The beach, the orange groves, the rafting scene in the original all had excellent scents that tied in perfectly and added to the immersion. Can't name a single smell in the new version but YMMV.

Issue #3: It's not just the awkward off-center distortion that bugs me. It just seems like nearly every shot is a straight-on approach with limited twists and turns. The swooping down over the Great Wall is fantastic but the cinematography in the original seemed much more evocative and daring.

Bottom line for me, I really did want to like the new version (really!), but if they were trying to out-do the original, the effort falls disappointingly short. It's a pleasant distraction but no longer as big a deal as they'd like it to be.

 

[ford91exploder]

That's my problem with it. If there are physics problems with using said images, pick different locations or be more creative to solve the problem. The "we have to get the Eiffel Tower in" mantra sacrificed the overall show. It's just not good enough.

It's not like they could not have corrected the optical effect, As usual TWDC was 'TOO CHEAP' to do so, As a photographer who uses a view camera https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View_camera Not applying a correction to this is simply lazy and offensive especially since Disney is a media company who theoretically employs people who know how to do this type of correction.

Once again Disney demonstrates that they no longer care about SHOW.

 

[Chef Mickey]

It's not like they could not have corrected the optical effect, As usual TWDC was 'TOO CHEAP' to do so, As a photographer who uses a view camera https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View_camera Not applying a correction to this is simply lazy and offensive especially since Disney is a media company who theoretically employs people who know how to do this type of correction.

Once again Disney demonstrates that they no longer care about SHOW.

This HAD to have been discussed and another reason for not doing/fixing it. I suspect you're right and they just had some additional cost they didn't see "worth it." As you said, they are a media company and should understand basic concepts in film.

It's just a disgrace and embarrassing.

 

[awilliams4]

I enjoyed the new Soarin'.

 

[Hakunamatata]

I can't wait to see the new disgrace and embarrassment next summer. I'd even buy a tshirt if it had "Soarin' over Disgrace".

 

[epcotisbest]

I can't wait to see the new disgrace and embarrassment next summer. I'd even buy a tshirt if it had "Soarin' over Disgrace".

 

[Hakunamatata]

View attachment 163391

Take my money!

 

[Tony the Tigger]

I saw the title of this thread recently and purposely avoided reading it because I knew I would be riding Soarin' today and did not want any preconceived notions.

I'm not going to be as dramatic as the OP (no offense) but it was pretty disappointing for the reasons he mentioned.

We sat on the left side, middle row. I noticed a few scenes looked a little distorted, but the Eiffel Tower was hard to gloss over. It was seriously bent to the right, not just a little. That really takes you out of the illusion. It wasn't just the Eiffel Tower, but that was the most noticeable example.

I really don't think I'd bother standing in line for that on future trips - whereas I would have with the old version. We had fast passes today and were mainly here for Food & Wine, so it's all good.

But OP is not exaggerating. It's surprisingly off.

 

[WEDwaydatamover]

I have yet to see version 2.Eww. I have seen the footage many times over and it does seem to lack the charm and WOW! factor of the original. The CGI does look cheap and ridiculous.

It hardly seems like a dud but I will wait and see.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

I have yet to see version 2.Eww. I have seen the footage many times over and it does seem to lack the charm and WOW! factor of the original. The CGI does look cheap and ridiculous.

It hardly seems like a dud but I will wait and see.

I wouldn't call it a dud - just kind of a bummer.

 

[WEDwaydatamover]

I think Epcot should run the original film in one if the 3 theatres. I'm not sure they would like a true back to back accounting of which show is better. Even 2/1 theatres stacked against the original. Over time I think the original would prevail.

 

[JohnD]

I think Epson should run the original film in one if the 3 theatres. I'm not sure they would like a true back to back accounting of which show is better. Even 2/1 theatres stacked against the original. Over time I think the original would prevail.

I was really looking forward to the new version. Really was. Who wouldn't want a film of around the world instead of just over California? That having been said, for pure production value alone, the original is better.

 

[unkadug]

It's not like they could not have corrected the optical effect, As usual TWDC was 'TOO CHEAP' to do so, As a photographer who uses a view camera https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View_camera Not applying a correction to this is simply lazy and offensive especially since Disney is a media company who theoretically employs people who know how to do this type of correction.

Once again Disney demonstrates that they no longer care about SHOW.

And once again you have proved to be a man with no limits to your expertise. It's absolutely amazing that you have time to post here with all of your many professions.

 

[Magenta Panther]

Frankly, I've always found Soarin' to be meh. After I rode it for the first (and last) time, I couldn't understand what the fuss was about.

 

[Figments Friend]

I recently experienced it out at Disneyland after remaining 'spoiler free' for months since the updated version opened.

My general thought after my first ride with the new film was that it was nice, but more fitting for EPCOT then California Adventure.
I think it would have been cool to keep the 'Soarin' Over California' original experience out West and have the 'Soarin' Around The World' update be at Epcot.
It just fits better thematically, in my opinion, but can understand Anaheim wanting the new film.

Anyway, back to my actual thoughts on the new version of the Attraction....

I liked the film.
Picture quality was a nice upgrade.
Although you could spot the CGI 'enhancements' it was still enjoyable and had some nice scenes.
The best part was the new finale showcasing the updated flyover of Disneyland Park.
The original with all the Christmas decor I always found a little jarring since the Park was in 'seasonal mode'.
The transitions from scene to scene were noticable to me, but that was likely only because I was so familiar with the flow of the original film.
Upon a second viewing I didn't notice it as much.

The music I also liked.
Nice to hear that the original theme is still present.

I felt the motion of the ride vehicles was not as 'expressive' as the previous version.
The gliders didn't seem to really move much, and the only time I really felt any kind of sensation of being 'in the air' and actually moving was during the Great Wall segment.
The ride mechs did not seem as active as they were during the previous film.

Ditto on the scents.
I only noticed two on the first ride, and there were none present on my second ride.
This also seemed to reduce the experience in my opinion.
There were many more scents used previously it seemed.

Overall?
I liked it, but miss the movement and scent variety of the previous version.

-

 

[Johnguelff]

Rode it for the first time two days ago. Despite MANY scenes having a bad bend effect to the right, me and wife loved it enough to ride again. Both times the ride received a full ovation from those aboard. The bending/warping is bad. Really bad. But was still neat overall.

 

[lostpro9het]

Both times the ride received a full ovation from those aboard.

If you starve people long enough they will applaud the sight of a stale cracker and an old mustard packet...

 

[THEMEPARKPIONEER]

Don't forget... California is one state and they can take off and return to the same base every nigh. They took footage from all over the world, there probably wasn't as much time and accessibility to get this done. They had much more of an advantage filming around one state. The work they had to do just to get that footage takes extensive traveling and when something doesn't come out right they can't just go over seas to fix their footage.