-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Star Tours Redo?
- Thread starter Disneyfan1981
- Start date
Not to long ago, I remember a rumor, that said Lucas' vision for Star Tours was that the simulator ride would stay only the "Tours" would change. They would be random and you'd take a tour of the different worlds from Star Wars Episodes 1-6. Now I've read this rumor on Intercot and Screamscape and it was around the time of Episode 2: Attack of the Clones, with the disclaimer that nothing would occur until Revenge of the Sith was released, so I was wondering if now that ROTS is on its way out within weeks if any other chatter has arisen again?
CaptainMichael
Well-Known Member
I'd love to see Star Tours rehabbed extensively. When I rode in December 2003, the attraction just screamed OLD!
Hammer1310
New Member
FamilyMan said:And why the first Star Wars teaser trailers are always before PIXAR movies.
Yeah, have to agree with Thrawn here. He mentioned the EpIII trailers and I can't think of many Pixar connections with the films before either. "The Phantom Menace" trailer opened before "Wing Commander" (the only reason it made a dime) and if you're refering to the "Robots" connection with the new one...well, that's not Pixar either. That's made by Blue Sky, creators of "Ice Age".
"Attack of the Clones" was the only SW trailer premiered before a Pixar film (Monster's Inc.) as far as I know. The only connection shared with the other two films was that both "Wing Commander" and "Robots" were distributed by Fox, as is "Star Wars".
Anywho...as for Star Tours....
I've been looking forward to seeing an entirely new Star Wars attraction for some time. I have to say though, I was suprised on my visit to MGM last month how much I enjoyed it. I've ridden it many times but it just seemed better than I remembered. Maybe it's because it's so much smoother to me than Body Wars or Universal's head-ache-inducing Back to the Future ride.
Or perhaps it's paranoia over seeing more and more good older attractions get the boot. I would still love another Star Wars ride, but i'm not sure messing with the one we have is the answer and i'm afraid of losing all the great Death Star footage in favor of something from the prequels.
Unless of course we can end each ride by landing on Jar-Jar....:animwink:
StitchCrazy626
New Member
They should redo it and use the same technology in the StormRider ride at Tokyo DisneySea. They could shoot a new video and it would probably be a much better ride.
Lynx04
New Member
Master Yoda said:
I would second you on that. The other day I was thinking what other attractions could they do with Star Wars. One of the thngs I thought of was a Star Wars themed Spider Man attraction. It could take place in the city during Episode II and then end up flying through the city. Having said all of that, I would prefer a completly original experience rather then some that already exists
Goofy23
Member
Considering Star Tours' storyline doesn't make any sense and the rumors of a refurb & redo have been around a long time, I've come to the following conclusions:
1. Star Tours will never be changed.
2. George Lucas will continue to change the original movies and "update" them, yet he just keeps messing them up more. Better technology does not equal more scenes, George!
3. I gave up on this ride a long time ago, even though I am a huge Star Wars fan.
Basically what I'm saying is: I'll believe it when I see it. The best part of this ride is the queue. How sad is that?
1. Star Tours will never be changed.
2. George Lucas will continue to change the original movies and "update" them, yet he just keeps messing them up more. Better technology does not equal more scenes, George!
3. I gave up on this ride a long time ago, even though I am a huge Star Wars fan.
Basically what I'm saying is: I'll believe it when I see it. The best part of this ride is the queue. How sad is that?
Mad Stitch
Well-Known Member
I would like to see Star Tours redone to be like The Star Trek Experience in Vegas. It would be cool to have the cast members dressed like Jedi and escort you into the Jedi Council chambers where there is an animatronic Yoda.
CenterLine
New Member
It would be nice to see an update, but I agree with Goofy23, I'll believe it when I see it.
Dayma
Well-Known Member
Man people make this ride sound so bad. I had a friend read this thread that never went to MGM before. After reading it he was suprised how junky the ride sounded. I personally think that people are being a tad hard on this ride. All they need to do is update the Movie,Video and freshen up the queue.
Mad Stitch said:
I agree and why not just go all the way. You are escorted to the Jedi Council chambers, and Yoda gives you a mission to a specific planet. The transport
you take depends on the planet you have been sent to. There are what, 4 or 6 actual "vehicles". Do a few different films to make the ride more random.
Think about it zipping through the traffic on Corusant, chasing Jango &/or Boba Fett through an asteroid field, or speeding through the forests of Endor.
fiftiesdean
Active Member
ok, here's my $.02 cents and an answer to some questions....
ILM invented a computer for CGI and dubbed it the PIXAR computer. As for starting Pixar, Lucas did not...they sold the technology and the name. To prove the idea of this, Lucas wasn't ready for CGI/Dgital until 1996 when he made changes to his films.
As far as making it HD, that means nothing. The attractions as Disney that use FILM can crush HD, HD's limits are at 1080progressive....film is theorized at more than 4 times that. Captain Emo, which was 70mm, was even better than that. I'm not sure if Star Tours is film or video based....and belive me, it can be film as most motion rides used a system where the projector was stationary and it was filmed with the ride in mind...so the image would move around. There are a LOT of projectors around Disney's/Universal's properties. To name a few; Tough to be a Bug, Hall of Presidents, Haunted Mansion (they were, not too sure if they replaced with video), Terminator and Back to the Future @ Uni, Captain Emo and Horizons (15/70mm Imax Dome) for those who remember, Phillharmagic, and the list goes on...
Lucas may preach about DLP technology, but it's definately not stable enough to run all day everyday ona ride, they had problems at ShoWest with ONE show; I saw the Incredibles @ Pleasure Island and the show locked up twice, then has to switch to the print that was running in tandem.
Maybe I'm just a film geek (I work here up @ school as a projectionist) and I realize how much technology Disney has used in the past/present, but they have HAD the technology for years and it just comes down to $$$. Also, the Star Tours's footage is 1/2 ripped from the films anyways. And isn't the contract for Star Tours only for that ride. Funny how MGM/Disney have the rights to it when he could go elsewhere after the ride is done....but he won't.
ILM invented a computer for CGI and dubbed it the PIXAR computer. As for starting Pixar, Lucas did not...they sold the technology and the name. To prove the idea of this, Lucas wasn't ready for CGI/Dgital until 1996 when he made changes to his films.
As far as making it HD, that means nothing. The attractions as Disney that use FILM can crush HD, HD's limits are at 1080progressive....film is theorized at more than 4 times that. Captain Emo, which was 70mm, was even better than that. I'm not sure if Star Tours is film or video based....and belive me, it can be film as most motion rides used a system where the projector was stationary and it was filmed with the ride in mind...so the image would move around. There are a LOT of projectors around Disney's/Universal's properties. To name a few; Tough to be a Bug, Hall of Presidents, Haunted Mansion (they were, not too sure if they replaced with video), Terminator and Back to the Future @ Uni, Captain Emo and Horizons (15/70mm Imax Dome) for those who remember, Phillharmagic, and the list goes on...
Lucas may preach about DLP technology, but it's definately not stable enough to run all day everyday ona ride, they had problems at ShoWest with ONE show; I saw the Incredibles @ Pleasure Island and the show locked up twice, then has to switch to the print that was running in tandem.
Maybe I'm just a film geek (I work here up @ school as a projectionist) and I realize how much technology Disney has used in the past/present, but they have HAD the technology for years and it just comes down to $$$. Also, the Star Tours's footage is 1/2 ripped from the films anyways. And isn't the contract for Star Tours only for that ride. Funny how MGM/Disney have the rights to it when he could go elsewhere after the ride is done....but he won't.
While I am no were as versed in film technology as FiftiesDean what I perceived as the biggest advantages for shooting in digital were this:
1. Fewer reshoots. The director can immediately see what was just shot within minuets after so if something was wrong it can be corrected immediately
2. No conversion needed. There is no time lag converting a print medium into a digital medium and the back again. This would really only pertain to movies like Star Wars where virtually every frame will have CG added elements.
3. The media never degrades. Film quality degrades with time where as the digital does not.
4. Quicker turnaround from studio to theater. Film needs to arrive at the theater several weeks before the release date where digital only needs to get there about 7-10 before release. This is why the digital version of Episode 2 was slightly different than film version. The same will hold true for Episode 3 it has even been suggested that the digital version will have up to 2 minuets of extra footage than the print version.
As far as the ride goes…when it was new it was the coolest thing ever but now the technology is just plain old. I’ll say again gut it and create something we have never seen before.
1. Fewer reshoots. The director can immediately see what was just shot within minuets after so if something was wrong it can be corrected immediately
2. No conversion needed. There is no time lag converting a print medium into a digital medium and the back again. This would really only pertain to movies like Star Wars where virtually every frame will have CG added elements.
3. The media never degrades. Film quality degrades with time where as the digital does not.
4. Quicker turnaround from studio to theater. Film needs to arrive at the theater several weeks before the release date where digital only needs to get there about 7-10 before release. This is why the digital version of Episode 2 was slightly different than film version. The same will hold true for Episode 3 it has even been suggested that the digital version will have up to 2 minuets of extra footage than the print version.
As far as the ride goes…when it was new it was the coolest thing ever but now the technology is just plain old. I’ll say again gut it and create something we have never seen before.
fiftiesdean
Active Member
fewer reshoots? when they film something, it's also shot on a video system so they can literally jump from the scene, and the director can show the actors seconds later.....you can even see this example in a lot of "making of" documentaries.
if we are comparing time it takes, when lucas shoots the film in digital he films it with a Digital HD Camera with tons of blue/green screens, and then spends over a year addding stuff. The principle shooting for Episode III was DONE in September 2003....
Um....the film gets to the theatre less than 24 hours before it goes to the public, sometimes even less. That gives us time to build it up (approx. one hour per print), and then screen it (and fix or order a new print if nessesary). When we do advanced screenings, the print gets there less than 2 hours before the screening....just enough time to build it up....did I mention that Security personel are watching this whole process for advanced screenings. Films arrive this late to stop pirating. The only time I've had a print arrive as much as 3 days early was "The Passion of the Christ" Lucas is VERY STRICT about his prints, they will arrive locked, with a code name (not star wars III) printed on the can.
if, by chance, you were talking about the printing process vs. digital copying than that's a different animal. the printing takes some time, but movies are done WAY before they come out in theatres, so that doesn't matter one bit.
The problem with digital (other than the contrast problems, color problems etc.) is that it's run off a computer. They lock up quite often, and they are not reliable (see Test Track). And as for the print degrading over time, they have spare prints, but the guys @ disney modify the projectors to be very gentle on the film. The only time I've seen a poor presentation was at the end of a Hall of Presidents Life cycle. They have replaced the print since (or maybe even to digital).
If you want to see how good a print can look, go to the Terminator atraction or It's Tough to be a Bug.
edit: and for those who think Lucas is done, he plans on making all 6 films 3D for an IMAX presentation in 2007 :-(
if we are comparing time it takes, when lucas shoots the film in digital he films it with a Digital HD Camera with tons of blue/green screens, and then spends over a year addding stuff. The principle shooting for Episode III was DONE in September 2003....
Um....the film gets to the theatre less than 24 hours before it goes to the public, sometimes even less. That gives us time to build it up (approx. one hour per print), and then screen it (and fix or order a new print if nessesary). When we do advanced screenings, the print gets there less than 2 hours before the screening....just enough time to build it up....did I mention that Security personel are watching this whole process for advanced screenings. Films arrive this late to stop pirating. The only time I've had a print arrive as much as 3 days early was "The Passion of the Christ" Lucas is VERY STRICT about his prints, they will arrive locked, with a code name (not star wars III) printed on the can.
if, by chance, you were talking about the printing process vs. digital copying than that's a different animal. the printing takes some time, but movies are done WAY before they come out in theatres, so that doesn't matter one bit.
The problem with digital (other than the contrast problems, color problems etc.) is that it's run off a computer. They lock up quite often, and they are not reliable (see Test Track). And as for the print degrading over time, they have spare prints, but the guys @ disney modify the projectors to be very gentle on the film. The only time I've seen a poor presentation was at the end of a Hall of Presidents Life cycle. They have replaced the print since (or maybe even to digital).
If you want to see how good a print can look, go to the Terminator atraction or It's Tough to be a Bug.
edit: and for those who think Lucas is done, he plans on making all 6 films 3D for an IMAX presentation in 2007 :-(