Three Rides to Fix DCA

[Professortango1]

I see both arguments, but I just wanted to add that part of the brilliance of Soarin, originally, was the simple presentation of it. I think it was harder to appreciate when it came out, but that straightforward sense of "this is an attraction," without the need to tell a complicated story, without the need to try to talk down to the audience or force a suspension of belief, was some welcome honesty. It encapsulated the original ethos of DCA: that something could be Disney, while talking to adults at an adult level.

It hearkens back to some of the other Disney presentations, like at the World's Fair, where something like Small World doesn't have to be explained or filled with story or where they tell you up front Lincoln is an animatronic.

Which to a degree is also why I find the CGI so grating: it's trying to make it into something it never was and never existed. It's trying to build fantasy around something that was always meant to be real.

But if you took that attraction from DCA and put it Disney Sea or Shanghai Disneyland, it's a completely different look/feel. Museum films should feel more at home at places like DCA (well at least the old DCA) and EPCOT, where something more substantial to support a fantasy would be required for the other parks.

Lincoln and Small World still had storytelling though. It wasn't like Walt opened them at the World's Fair and just focused on showing off the new tech. We don't see Lincoln's gears and wires. We are presented with Abraham Lincoln. With IASW, we have sets and costumes and music and animatroincs and gags and a progression through a story being told. Ride systems weren't left exposed, unpainted walls were not seen. Every on-stage aspect went into telling a story. For a temporary exposition. We have a permanent ride at a theme park that was built at the same time as TDS and it features a ride that wouldn't be good enough for the 64 World's Fair.

And yes, if this ride was one of the dumpy video presentations peppered around Epcot's World Showcase, I would get it. But, that's been the issue with Epcot. Future World had some incredible Edutainment rides while World's Showcase had beautiful facades but very little in terms of quality attractions. Its been failing of Epcot since the beginning with Disney having so many attractions planned for WS only to be pulled at the last minute. And now, instead of Rhine River Cruise and the Mt Fuji coaster, we're getting Fantasyland rides plopped into the country of origin.

Mediocre attractions tend to limp along for far too long and leave a spot where modern Disney can just drop an IP in there for synergy. Soarin' could had been a classic unreplaceable attraction. Instead, its an interesting concept done better by Disney elsewhere. We have Rocket Rods when we should have something more like RSR or JTTCOTE.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Zamboni: The Ride. That is all.

 

[Phroobar]

Zamboni: The Ride. That is all.

 

[el_super]

Lincoln and Small World still had storytelling though.

Not really. Neither one really told a story. The Magic Skyway did, to a degree, and certainly Carousel of Progress. Lincoln and Small World just merely existed. If there was any story presented

There's nothing wrong with not telling a story and just existing. It's not all that different from the Monorail or the PeopleMover or the Rocket Jets or any number of other Disneyland attractions that just merely willed into existence because they were cool.

Soarin and Screamin both were great attractions that now suffer with some form of storytelling applied because DCA has to offer the same fantasy as Disneyland, lest the APs stop showing up.

 

[No Name]

A ride called Mountain. It starts out as a boat ride in a Yosemite-themed area, then becomes a toboggan ride in a snowy environment, and then becomes a roller coaster in a beautiful city. All one continuous ride, all one ride vehicle. Stick some popular characters in there too and rotate them out easily. What a weird idea. Mountain!

 

[Professortango1]

Not really. Neither one really told a story. The Magic Skyway did, to a degree, and certainly Carousel of Progress. Lincoln and Small World just merely existed. If there was any story presented

There's nothing wrong with not telling a story and just existing. It's not all that different from the Monorail or the PeopleMover or the Rocket Jets or any number of other Disneyland attractions that just merely willed into existence because they were cool.

Soarin and Screamin both were great attractions that now suffer with some form of storytelling applied because DCA has to offer the same fantasy as Disneyland, lest the APs stop showing up.

Don't confuse storytelling with a narrative. These attractions feature storytelling without a direct narrative. They immerse you in an idea and take you through it using performers, music, sets, technology. Screamin is just a movie being watched on a simulator. There's no storytelling taking place.

 

[el_super]

Don't confuse storytelling with a narrative. These attractions feature storytelling without a direct narrative. They immerse you in an idea and take you through it using performers, music, sets, technology. Screamin is just a movie being watched on a simulator. There's no storytelling taking place.

But then how is that different from CircleVision? Or as you mentioned, some of the other films around EPCOT that are genuinely enjoyable? Golden Dreams was also one of my favorites at DCA, despite being just a film. Disney can be both things: a place for storytelling and narrative driven attractions, and a place where something good can just exist as is without question.

I can see a difference between storytelling and narrative. I think something like Big Thunder is good at telling a story, without having a narrative. It's designed to put you in the fantasy of the specific story it's trying to tell, the story of a haunted mine. But Small World? If the story is that you're taking a cruise around the world, there's not a whole lot there to support it right? You leave from an attraction boarding station that isn't really themed to be a port or a dock or any kind, you enter a building (which is never disguised as anything other than a building) and pass by cartoonish representations of different cultures. They don't make any real effort to disguise the wires or lights that run the show. It fails to tell a story in similar ways that Soarin does.... but all of that is OK. Small World too is a great attraction.

I know there's still a need for story driven attractions, but not every attraction has to tell a story or have a complicated narrative driving it.

 

[Professortango1]

But then how is that different from CircleVision? Or as you mentioned, some of the other films around EPCOT that are genuinely enjoyable? Golden Dreams was also one of my favorites at DCA, despite being just a film. Disney can be both things: a place for storytelling and narrative driven attractions, and a place where something good can just exist as is without question.

I can see a difference between storytelling and narrative. I think something like Big Thunder is good at telling a story, without having a narrative. It's designed to put you in the fantasy of the specific story it's trying to tell, the story of a haunted mine. But Small World? If the story is that you're taking a cruise around the world, there's not a whole lot there to support it right? You leave from an attraction boarding station that isn't really themed to be a port or a dock or any kind, you enter a building (which is never disguised as anything other than a building) and pass by cartoonish representations of different cultures. They don't make any real effort to disguise the wires or lights that run the show. It fails to tell a story in similar ways that Soarin does.... but all of that is OK. Small World too is a great attraction.

I know there's still a need for story driven attractions, but not every attraction has to tell a story or have a complicated narrative driving it.

Small World has the story on the marque and the first show scene. "The happiest cruise to ever set sail." We're sailing around the world and the children of the world are singing a uniform song showing how cultures may vary, but humanity is universal. The ride is stylized, but there's storytelling taking place. We see gags and relationships, characters and settings.

Golden Dreams didn't survive because the in-theatre effects were cut. It was just a movie. But, at least Golden Dreams was telling that story. We are going to a theatre to watch a movie on the history/spirit of California. With Soarin, we are venturing into an airport hanger to board a flight of some kind and then load into a warehouse with hang glider-like simulators and watch an IMAX movie.

 

[TP2000]

I find the transitions to be too repetitive and gimmicky. Between the two, I prefer the jump cuts. Speaking of, when will Soarin Over California come back? I’m guessing early Summer.

I never understood the concern over the "jump cuts" up into the clouds. I thought they worked fine.

But there's a couple of gimmicky tricks they could probably do once or twice. A billow of snow from a jerky skier doing a skid turn. Or surf spray off Santa Barbara. Or something. But use the gimmick sparingly.

Mostly, just going into a cloud bank for a few seconds always seemed to be just fine to me.

 

[TP2000]

Golden Dreams didn't survive because the in-theatre effects were cut. It was just a movie. But, at least Golden Dreams was telling that story.

Golden Dreams had so much potential. Early on, it was going to be a Carousel Theater, a California version of Tokyo's Meet The World with in-theater effects and animatronics.

Paul Pressler and Eisner saw to it fairly early on that kind of wild expense was cut.

But what could have been would have been great...

Luckily, Soarin' took on the mantle of the park's marquee "California!" attraction. Heck, if it weren't for Soarin', DCA circa 2001 would have been an unmitigated mega disaster. As it was, with Soarin', DCA was only a giant disaster.

 

[Phroobar]

Giant Whoopie statues are scary.

 

[Brer Panther]

Giant Whoopie statues are scary.

View attachment 617484

Between this and her animatronic in Superstar Limo, Disney's California Adventure was not kind to Whoopi Goldberg.

 

[EPCOTCenterLover]

DCA 1.0 wasn’t kind to anyone - especially paying guests.

 

[No Name]

Giant Whoopie statues are scary.

View attachment 617484

What is this from? I assumed this was Superstar Limo on first glance but the comment below makes me think not.

 

[lazyboy97o]

What is this from? I assumed this was Superstar Limo on first glance but the comment below makes me think not.

Golden Dreams.

 

[DrAlice]

I like the "people eating", 10+minute long boat ride idea. Definitely something that is missing from DCA.

I also like the idea of a fun, family-friendly roller coaster. Something along the level of theming and thrill-factor of Big Thunder. Alternatively, how about a dark ride/coaster along the lines of The Dragon at LEGOLand California?

Here is a ride-thru of video of Dragon. Obviously, I think Disney could plus this tremendously, but I always felt this ride was cute.

 

[Phroobar]

I like the "people eating", 10+minute long boat ride idea. Definitely something that is missing from DCA.

I also like the idea of a fun, family-friendly roller coaster. Something along the level of theming and thrill-factor of Big Thunder. Alternatively, how about a dark ride/coaster along the lines of The Dragon at LEGOLand California?

Here is a ride-thru of video of Dragon. Obviously, I think Disney could plus this tremendously, but I always felt this ride was cute.

The Dragon is a must ride whenever we are at Legoland.

 

[Brer Panther]

I think a Muppets dark ride would be a nice addition to the park. Are Monsters Inc. and Little Mermaid the only "traditional" dark rides (as in, no added thrill elements or outdoor portions like Radiator Springs Racers) in the park?

 

[mickEblu]

I think a Muppets dark ride would be a nice addition to the park. Are Monsters Inc. and Little Mermaid the only "traditional" dark rides (as in, no added thrill elements or outdoor portions like Radiator Springs Racers) in the park?

Yup and you really feel it when you’re there with grandma and the kids. I was at DCA today with a party of 10 that included my 82 year old grandma, and 3 kids, 2 of them 3 and under. Monsters and Mermaid aren’t cutting it. With that said, my grandma and parents all kept saying what a great time they were having at DCA and that they feel more relaxed there than at Disneyland which they all visited with us back in September. So go figure. They don’t really care about rides though so I can understand where they re coming from. The park, with its wider walkways and just having less to do both attribute to that. The fact that it’s more “new” and fresh to them probably also contributed to their opinion. Grandma loved walking into Cars Land from the Pacific Wharf entrance which I think is what kind of just sealed the deal on her opinion of the place because that when she was sure to get my attention and tell me how much she liked the park and was enjoying the day.

Of course I’m sure they would have liked it even more with a nice family friendly boat ride.

 

[mickEblu]

Turkey legs have been great at the parks lately. Not overly salty or soggy. Moist on the inside and well cooked on the outside. I rarely get one as it’s just too much meat and my wife doesn’t like them. But today we got 3 of them and a fresh sourdough baguette from Pacific Wharf Bakery and had a delicious lunch outside Flo’s making Turkey sandwiches.