• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

News Space 220 Restaurant dining experience at Epcot's Future World

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
I generally like Universal’s Twitter jabs but I think they could use some self-awareness when talking about screens.
Yeah, why can’t they move away from screens with rides like Rat… er… Smugglers Run… um… MMRR… wait… Tron… you know what, never mind.

(For the record, I think MMRR is pretty close to a masterpiece, but the “screen” line will remain no matter what the two resorts actually build.)

Also, do people really prefer Disney’s PR tone - over-inflated self-important faux reverence and a hypocritical exploitation of the nostalgia they otherwise ignore - to Uni’s silly snark?
 

Bullseye1967

Is that who I am?
Premium Member
Yeah, why can’t they move away from screens with rides like Rat… er… Smugglers Run… um… MMRR… wait… Tron… you know what, never mind.

(For the record, I think MMRR is pretty close to a masterpiece, but the “screen” line will remain no matter what the two resorts actually build.)

Also, do people really prefer Disney’s PR tone - over-inflated self-important faux reverence and a hypocritical exploitation of the nostalgia they otherwise ignore - to Uni’s silly snark?
You forgot Flight of Passage that's not a....... Nevermind. :hilarious:
 

Hawg G

Well-Known Member
Yeah, why can’t they move away from screens with rides like Rat… er… Smugglers Run… um… MMRR… wait… Tron… you know what, never mind.

(For the record, I think MMRR is pretty close to a masterpiece, but the “screen” line will remain no matter what the two resorts actually build.)

Also, do people really prefer Disney’s PR tone - over-inflated self-important faux reverence and a hypocritical exploitation of the nostalgia they otherwise ignore - to Uni’s silly snark?

At least Rise doesn’t have any...

But wait, MMRR is a masterpiece?
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
At least Rise doesn’t have any...

But wait, MMRR is a masterpiece?
Eh, Rise isn't screen-reliant - it integrates them well. River Voyage, however...

And yeah, I thought MMRR was shockingly great. It belongs in the Animation Courtyard and GMR should still be around, but it FELT like WDW in a way a lot of modern WDW rides don't - and not just because it has Mickey in it.
 

Hawg G

Well-Known Member
They need to grow up. The attempt at humor isn't very good IMHO. Reminds me of Samsung taking shots at Apple, and it isn't a good look.

Well, I guess Toothsome doesn’t have a room you go in where Jacques is brought to life by Penelope, on. Screen. But I’ve been sitting inside a giant, steampunk, chocolate factory for many years. And have paid much more reasonable prices.

I was expecting a LOT more than basically 3 screen that show part of Earth on the very bottom, then a bunch with just a star field. Seriously, Toothsome uses three screens too. And you can see them on both sides,

But, why the hell doesn’t Disney talk to Crizal about some anti reflective coating? I mean, glare is ONE of the major fails in Smugglers Run. Now it seems to have significantly impacted the design of this place. Not that zero glare would have made this restaurant worthy of the prices.
 

Surfin' Tuna

Well-Known Member
We ate tonight at sunset and were able to watch the sun set across earth, and I thought that was pretty cool. The wait stuff were in character talking about living in space - much like GE was originally. We will see how long this one lasts. The food as you know is pricey, and we ended up spending far more than I had anticipated. There were a few drinks and some add-ons, but it was $350 all-in for two adults and two kids. A bit steep, but we wanted to try it.

The food was better than any of the Disney restaurants, but I don't think that's surprising. I still think it was a little bland overall for those prices. The earth does seems a bit too small, but I think it works in the space. The astronauts were way too fake looking and too cutesy at times with all the flips, a selfie taken, and the light sabre fight. Then again, if we were really living in a time when there is a resort and a restaurant in space, why wouldn't they be doing that stuff outside? I just wish they could have done a better job with the astronauts and made them less fake. It took away from the atmosphere a bit.

I'd definitely go back for lunch.
 

Hawg G

Well-Known Member
Eh, Rise isn't screen-reliant - it integrates them well. River Voyage, however...

And yeah, I thought MMRR was shockingly great. It belongs in the Animation Courtyard and GMR should still be around, but it FELT like WDW in a way a lot of modern WDW rides don't - and not just because it has Mickey in it.

I didn’t even notice Finn the first time, the first Kylo and Hux could have have been on a screen and no one would have cared. The final Kylo is the only AA that is important in the ride. The ride is INSANELY reliant on screens. How can you even say it’s not?
 

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
Also, do people really prefer Disney’s PR tone - over-inflated self-important faux reverence and a hypocritical exploitation of the nostalgia they otherwise ignore - to Uni’s silly snark?
Yes, I prefer companies concern themselves with themselves rather than trying to elevate themselves by looking for gotchas and belittling their competition. It gives off an air of insecurity.
 

waltography

Well-Known Member
My only MINOR nerdy complaint is that earth appears too small. I think they got it right in this concept art below where the surface of Earth was stretched across the entire width of the window. This is likely what the actual view would be like, no?

What they ended up with makes it seem like the space station is tilted and WAY out in space. Almost next to earth instead of on top of earth. It just doesn't line up in my brain
You're absolutely right; it's an amazing effect, but it's one that feels a little bit off because of how you can see almost the entirety of the Florida peninsula in the view but you're supposed to be above it after just having stepped off the elevator.

It's not the end of the world for me, I guess a more prominent curvature means you get the effect more easily than if it were like the concept art.
 

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
Yeah, why can’t they move away from screens with rides like Rat… er… Smugglers Run… um… MMRR… wait… Tron… you know what, never mind.

(For the record, I think MMRR is pretty close to a masterpiece, but the “screen” line will remain no matter what the two resorts actually build.)

Also, do people really prefer Disney’s PR tone - over-inflated self-important faux reverence and a hypocritical exploitation of the nostalgia they otherwise ignore - to Uni’s silly snark?

You're missing the key difference in that screen rides are not the majority at Disney but they are at Universal and for a while it was all Universal was building.

Also, it's not fair to include rides that use screens as set dressing (Rise of the Resistance, Na'Vi) with rides where the screen is the ride.
 

nbar

Well-Known Member
5:45am and cant make any reservation at Space 220 or any other Disney restaurant. Maybe it is 6am? Maybe it is Disney IT?

Edit: for the days of my resort stay. They opened up this morning.
 

awoogala

Well-Known Member
5:45am and cant make any reservation at Space 220 or any other Disney restaurant. Maybe it is 6am? Maybe it is Disney IT?

Edit: for the days of my resort stay. They opened up this morning.
They are pretty much booked through November now. What dates are you trying for?
 

rkleinlein

Well-Known Member
No it isn't, first of all. Usually when you say "family of four" you mean two adults and two kids. That would be $220.
Um. Yes it is. And I did, in fact, mean a family of four with two adults and two kids. Kids over 9 are kids, not adults.

For a family of four with two kids over 9 (not a rare occurrence at WDW) the cost would be would be over $400 ($320 + drinks + tax + tip).

But you are also right: a family of four with two kids under 9 ordering from the kids menu would be a bargain at around $300 ($220 + drinks + tax + tip).

Anyone wanting to pay about what it cost to get in the park (maybe more) for a 20 second elevator ride and a meal next to giant screens have at it. I'll pass.
 
Last edited:

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
You're missing the key difference in that screen rides are not the majority at Disney but they are at Universal and for a while it was all Universal was building.

Also, it's not fair to include rides that use screens as set dressing (Rise of the Resistance, Na'Vi) with rides where the screen is the ride.
And now it’s all WDW is building.

And I didn’t mention Rise. In fact, if you look above, I defended it. But come on, Na’Vi has a whopping one AA. It’s screen based.

And as for Uni having a higher percentage of screen rides - that’s interesting. The least screen-based park in Orlando is MK, with only 10% of its attractions reliant on a screen. But the next is IOA with 22% screen-based attractions. And Universal Studios is the most screen-reliant park, but only because it has one fewer attraction overall then MGM or EPCOT - all three parks have 8 screen rides. The difference comes out to 53% for US and 50% for the two WDW parks. Resort-wide, Uni is more screen reliant (but screen-based rides are nowhere near a majority), 36% to 22%, but that’s entirely due to MK. Compare Uni to the three newer WDW parks, and Uni is significantly less screen-heavy.

So yeah, WDW doesn’t have a huge amount to gloat about on the screen front.

PS: I forgot Rat! When that finally opens, EPCOT will be tied with Universal Studios as Orlando's most screen-based park!
 

Hawg G

Well-Known Member
And now it’s all WDW is building.

And I didn’t mention Rise. In fact, if you look above, I defended it. But come on, Na’Vi has a whopping one AA. It’s screen based.

And as for Uni having a higher percentage of screen rides - that’s interesting. The least screen-based park in Orlando is MK, with only 10% of its attractions reliant on a screen. But the next is IOA with 22% screen-based attractions. And Universal Studios is the most screen-reliant park, but only because it has one fewer attraction overall then MGM or EPCOT - all three parks have 8 screen rides. The difference comes out to 53% for US and 50% for the two WDW parks. Resort-wide, Uni is more screen reliant (but screen-based rides are nowhere near a majority), 36% to 22%, but that’s entirely due to MK. Compare Uni to the three newer WDW parks, and Uni is significantly less screen-heavy.

So yeah, WDW doesn’t have a huge amount to gloat about on the screen front.

The reason all Universal built for a while was screen based rides was because Universal was actually BUILDING new rides. If you compared screen ride percentages of rides built this century, I wouldn’t be surprised if Universal has less.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Yes, I prefer companies concern themselves with themselves rather than trying to elevate themselves by looking for gotchas and belittling their competition. It gives off an air of insecurity.
The jist of the jab wasn't about the use of screens people... stop being so literal.

The jist of the joke is Space 2020 is still just a restaurant with video screen windows. It's a cutdown about the hype of it, and what it basically is. It's a jab at hype vs reality.
 

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

Top Bottom