The Spirited Seventh Heaven ...

flynnibus

Premium Member
Not saying you have to like it personally, but the failure of the collective to acknowledge it exists shows an unhealthy obsession with a company that purport to hate, rather than a love of theme parks in general.

Or just a general disinterest in gore horror... No matter where it's done.

It could be the best on earth... But just like a massive Christian pop show... I have zero interest to read about it or talk about... No matter where it's held.
 

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
Just so I'm clear on something, is the hourly capacity for Maelstrom actually 1000 people an hour as Wikipedia quotes? Less than notoriously bad ones like Soarin' and TSMM?

Is the goal to make families not realize how stagnant Epcot has become by having them spend half the day in line for the ride and the other half in line for the Meet and Greet? They are pure maniacal geniuses over at TDO!
 

CDavid

Well-Known Member
.
Most of the legendaries are derived from global folklore and myth

The great stags, the eagle and root gnawing serpent on the World Tree Yggdrasil in Norse Mythology became the most recent legendaries.
pokemon_wallpaper__xerneas_yveltal_and_zygarde_by_fruitynite-d6pyvqc.jpg


Behemoth, Leviathan and Ziz


Phoenixes both Asian and Western Civ

The golems of Jewish folklore
tres_regis.png


The list goes on and they're all more interesting then how everything on Pandora is just blue six-legged versions of Earth animals.

If you stretch far enough, you can make just about anything fit in Animal Kingdom, because nearly everything either has animals (of some sort) or else takes place somewhere in a 'natural world'; By such an extreme interpretation Frozen, Star Wars, and even Big Hero 6 would all fit just fine. You could even get the rights to do a Star Trek ride in Frontierland (hey, it's the final frontier).

Of course, none of those would actually 'work' in Animal Kingdom - and neither does Avatar, I'd argue, but especially not Pokemon. Frankly, that's just a silly idea. I suppose there is no harm in your 'armchair imagineering' all you want, but you must realize its a nonsensical suggestion in reality.

Are you sure this isn't April 1st? :confused:
 

PhotoDave219

Well-Known Member
Just so I'm clear on something, is the hourly capacity for Maelstrom actually 1000 people an hour as Wikipedia quotes? Less than notoriously bad ones like Soarin' and TSMM?

Is the goal to make families not realize how stagnant Epcot has become by having them spend half the day in line for the ride and the other half in line for the Meet and Greet? They are pure maniacal geniuses over at TDO!

12 people per boat… depends on how fast you dispatch. If you can dispatch every 30 seconds, that's 24 people per minute, say 25 just so I can give Math a hell of a lot easier, so that makes 1500 an hour.

1000 people per hour seems entirely realistic and plausible.
 

CDavid

Well-Known Member
Just so I'm clear on something, is the hourly capacity for Maelstrom actually 1000 people an hour as Wikipedia quotes? Less than notoriously bad ones like Soarin' and TSMM?

Is the goal to make families not realize how stagnant Epcot has become by having them spend half the day in line for the ride and the other half in line for the Meet and Greet? They are pure maniacal geniuses over at TDO!

12 people per boat… depends on how fast you dispatch. If you can dispatch every 30 seconds, that's 24 people per minute, say 25 just so I can give Math a hell of a lot easier, so that makes 1500 an hour.

1000 people per hour seems entirely realistic and plausible.

Which would also mean that Maelstrom, described as the least popular attraction in the park, really couldn't accommodate many (if any) more guests than were already experiencing it, and that a Frozen redo (assuming the ride system is retained) will prove no more "popular" than was Maelstrom (again, in terms of ridership per hour).

This is going to make Midway Mania look like a walk-on in comparison. Thematic issues aside, what are they thinking?
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
Which would also mean that Maelstrom, described as the least popular attraction in the park, really couldn't accommodate many (if any) more guests than were already experiencing it, and that a Frozen redo (assuming the ride system is retained) will prove no more "popular" than was Maelstrom (again, in terms of ridership per hour).

This is going to make Midway Mania look like a walk-on in comparison. Thematic issues aside, what are they thinking?
To ask that one would have to assume they were thinking at all, which I think they weren't.
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Which would also mean that Maelstrom, described as the least popular attraction in the park, really couldn't accommodate many (if any) more guests than were already experiencing it, and that a Frozen redo (assuming the ride system is retained) will prove no more "popular" than was Maelstrom (again, in terms of ridership per hour).

This is going to make Midway Mania look like a walk-on in comparison. Thematic issues aside, what are they thinking?
I suspect that they haven't run that ride at capacity speed for a long, long time. Fewer boats, more time taken to load and unload, etc. I'll bet they will speed it up. That said, I have ridden Maelstrom many times and have never had to wait over 5 minutes to get on, even as recently as last year.
 

PirateFrank

Well-Known Member
I suspect that they haven't run that ride at capacity speed for a long, long time. Fewer boats, more time taken to load and unload, etc. I'll bet they will speed it up. That said, I have ridden Maelstrom many times and have never had to wait over 5 minutes to get on, even as recently as last year.

Thats odd. Last november, during the week preceding thanksgiving, I waited an agonizing 55 minutes for Maelstrom. Waste of time. While I will gladly join in the choruses of folk who bemoan the coming of frozen, maelstrom was never that great of a ride...,
 

Cosmic Commando

Well-Known Member
.


If you stretch far enough, you can make just about anything fit in Animal Kingdom, because nearly everything either has animals (of some sort) or else takes place somewhere in a 'natural world'; By such an extreme interpretation Frozen, Star Wars, and even Big Hero 6 would all fit just fine. You could even get the rights to do a Star Trek ride in Frontierland (hey, it's the final frontier).

Of course, none of those would actually 'work' in Animal Kingdom - and neither does Avatar, I'd argue, but especially not Pokemon. Frankly, that's just a silly idea. I suppose there is no harm in your 'armchair imagineering' all you want, but you must realize its a nonsensical suggestion in reality.

Are you sure this isn't April 1st? :confused:
Ooh boy, OK, here we go.

Pokemon is a better thematic fit in Animal Kingdom than Avatar. However, I wouldn't use it as a Carsland-level land that Avatarland seems to want to be. I think a land like Toy Story Playland, but with a nice D ticket ride as a centerpiece, would be more fitting for the franchise.

Pokemon isn't a story that just happens to take place where there are some animals; the existence of all these wacky animals is the defining characteristic of the Pokemon universe. The pokemon make Pokemon Pokemon. That is a pretty big difference from Avatar or Star Wars. The banshees are important to Avatar, but the story would basically function just fine without the animals of Pandora. Star Wars would still be Star Wars without tauntauns or dewbacks. Focusing a land on banshees, weird six-legged panther-dog thingys, etc. feels like you're missing the focus of Avatar. Disney tries to bring it all together for Avatar based on the "conservation" angle (which is also there in Pokemon). Focusing a Pokemon land on the pokemon is the entire point.
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Thats odd. Last november, during the week preceding thanksgiving, I waited an agonizing 55 minutes for Maelstrom. Waste of time. While I will gladly join in the choruses of folk who bemoan the coming of frozen, maelstrom was never that great of a ride...,
Well, that could be what happens when they aren't running at capacity and a surprise crowd shows up. I remember a line when it first opened, but, after that it was always pretty much a walk on whenever I went on it.
 

PhotoDave219

Well-Known Member
I suspect that they haven't run that ride at capacity speed for a long, long time. Fewer boats, more time taken to load and unload, etc. I'll bet they will speed it up. That said, I have ridden Maelstrom many times and have never had to wait over 5 minutes to get on, even as recently as last year.

Yeah, to sustain 1500/hr you would have to sustain one boat every 30 seconds and no gaps, averaging 25 guests/minute. Looks great on paper but I dont think thats something realistic. 1000/hr sounds closer IMO.
 

PeterAlt

Well-Known Member
Given Malstrom's low capacity, here's my prediction of what's going to happen. The new Frozen ride will be emensely popular and the low capacity of the ride means there will always be lines for TDO to justify doing more overlays like this through out EPCOT.

Expect Ratatouille in France, Meet the Robinsons in Canada, and so on....
 

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
Thats odd. Last november, during the week preceding thanksgiving, I waited an agonizing 55 minutes for Maelstrom. Waste of time. While I will gladly join in the choruses of folk who bemoan the coming of frozen, maelstrom was never that great of a ride...,

It was a 25 minute wait on the afternoon of September 8th.

Ride broke down earlier that day too which is another variable when it comes to capacity
 

PeterAlt

Well-Known Member
I wonder what TDO is gonna do in response to Uni having that free One Direction Concert in Citywalk in November with the Today Show also being filmed there. That's gonna be a massive draw to Universal.
Raise ticket, food, and merchandise prices. "Hey, we can't beat them, so we might as well sucker our pool of loyal customers to help pay for the loss..."
 

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

Back
Top Bottom