• 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 Tron coaster coming to the Magic Kingdom

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
What are you basing that on?
I recall hearing basically a similar assessment somewhere, although I can't recall where

It was accompanied by the anecdote that Space Mountain at Hong Kong initially had a lot of people walking up to it, taking a picture with it, and then walking away, thinking it was entirely sculptural and having no awareness that there was actually anything inside.

In fairness, if you didn't already know that Space Mountain *wasn't* purely sculptural, the structure itself doesn't really hint at its true purpose. Without any context it is very abstract.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
I recall hearing basically a similar assessment somewhere, although I can't recall where

It was accompanied by the anecdote that Space Mountain at Hong Kong initially had a lot of people walking up to it, taking a picture with it, and then walking away, thinking it was entirely sculptural and having no awareness that there was actually anything inside.

In fairness, if you didn't already know that Space Mountain *wasn't* purely sculptural, the structure itself doesn't really hint at its true purpose. Without any context it is very abstract.
Thanks for your answer. I hope @lazyboy97o is able to back up his statement.
 

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
It's worth mentioning that I also recall flinching at the wording of that statement - it was overly harsh and culturally unfair.

Which is to say, I believe @lazyboy97o to be relaying the wording of the message, not selecting it on his own.

There's a podcast with Tom Morris from earlier this year on the Progress City Radio Hour where he lists all sorts of things Disney executives believed about their prospective audience for HKDL that sound absurd and insulting.

Disney's low opinion of their audience obviously backfired and they're (or at least the HK government is) still paying for it.
 

ImperfectPixie

Well-Known Member
I recall hearing basically a similar assessment somewhere, although I can't recall where

It was accompanied by the anecdote that Space Mountain at Hong Kong initially had a lot of people walking up to it, taking a picture with it, and then walking away, thinking it was entirely sculptural and having no awareness that there was actually anything inside.

In fairness, if you didn't already know that Space Mountain *wasn't* purely sculptural, the structure itself doesn't really hint at its true purpose. Without any context it is very abstract.
I've heard that story before...I can't remember where, either.
 

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
Space Mountain. You're supposed to be flying through space, not riding on a track...

I have never ridden Space Mountain, can you see that track?
I think it might be fair to suggest that Space Mountain is a Non-Diegetic coaster, since you're on a track which isn't part of the story.

It just happens to be a GOOD Non-Diegetic Coaster, in that it goes to nearly every length to hide the track from your view, since seeing it would negatively impact the story.
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
I think it might be fair to suggest that Space Mountain is a Non-Diegetic coaster, since you're on a track which isn't part of the story.

It just happens to be a GOOD Non-Diegetic Coaster, in that it goes to nearly every length to hide the track from your view, since seeing it would negatively impact the story.

To me, unthemed track being visible while on the ride is minor. It varies depending on the coaster, of course, but there's an extent to which it's unavoidable depending on the type of experience the ride is supposed to convey. If the ride is well done, most riders shouldn't be looking at the track or really noticing it anyways.

It's a much bigger concern when it's visible to the surrounding area (especially when elevated); that's what can absolutely kill a theme.
 

sedati

Well-Known Member
I recall hearing basically a similar assessment somewhere, although I can't recall where

It was accompanied by the anecdote that Space Mountain at Hong Kong initially had a lot of people walking up to it, taking a picture with it, and then walking away, thinking it was entirely sculptural and having no awareness that there was actually anything inside.

In fairness, if you didn't already know that Space Mountain *wasn't* purely sculptural, the structure itself doesn't really hint at its true purpose. Without any context it is very abstract.
Spaceship Earth had that problem as well to my surprise.
 

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
To me, unthemed track being visible while on the ride is minor. It varies depending on the coaster, of course, but there's an extent to which it's unavoidable depending on the type of experience the ride is supposed to convey. If the ride is well done, most riders shouldn't be looking at the track or really noticing it anyways.

It's a much bigger concern when it's visible to the surrounding area (especially when elevated); that's what can absolutely kill a theme.
Perhaps I should have used the phrase "Well-Themed" rather that "Good", since it wasn't really my intention to make that kind of judgement.

For me personally, being able to see the track while riding Hagrids totally kills the idea that we're meant to be "Flying", since the track makes very clear that we aren't. To the point where it seems silly to even suggest that we ARE "flying". Especially when there's a ride right across the main drag that also purports to send you "Flying" but actually creates a pretty convincing illusion that you are.

Doesn't automatically make the ride "Bad", but to me it's a glaring and unfortunate lapse in the theming of an otherwise fun ride.

That the track is so visible from the surrounding area doesn't help either, but I don't really give them a pass for the on-ride visibility just because the ride is still fun despite it.
 

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
Spaceship Earth had that problem as well to my surprise.
It does make sense, when you think about it. Nothing about the names Spaceship Earth or Space Mountain give any meaningful indication of what kind of experience you could expect inside, if any. If you didn't already know what kind of thing was in there you wouldn't get much closer to figuring it out by just seeing the building or hearing the name.

Not to mention that the design of those buildings themselves are pretty gloriously impractical - the buildings are so spectacular, such engineering feats on their own, it might almost seem like too much to expect there to also be an actual RIDE inside.
 

skypilot2922

Well-Known Member
I would love a Flynn's arcade, and it's in practically the same location where they already had an arcade.

This is the kind of touch Imagineering of old would have done, you would have entered Flynns gone down rows of classic arcade games till you finally got to the interface and with an optical effect like the old entry to dreamflight or Body Wars. you would take your on the game grid
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
Perhaps I should have used the phrase "Well-Themed" rather that "Good", since it wasn't really my intention to make that kind of judgement.

For me personally, being able to see the track while riding Hagrids totally kills the idea that we're meant to be "Flying", since the track makes very clear that we aren't. To the point where it seems silly to even suggest that we ARE "flying". Especially when there's a ride right across the main drag that also purports to send you "Flying" but actually creates a pretty convincing illusion that you are.

Doesn't automatically make the ride "Bad", but to me it's a glaring and unfortunate lapse in the theming of an otherwise fun ride.

That the track is so visible from the surrounding area doesn't help either, but I don't really give them a pass for the on-ride visibility just because the ride is still fun despite it.

That makes sense with re: Hagrid's. I'm not sure building a roller coaster for a ride that's supposedly showing off magical creatures was the best idea.

But that's why I said it's dependent on the type of ride experience they're going for. While I haven't been on Hagrid's (and it doesn't actually look very good to me, but I don't have much interest in coasters as a general rule), I imagine I'd have the same opinion as you based on watching a ride video. But I think Universal placed a heavier emphasis on the thrill involved than the theming. It's not that the theming was an afterthought, but that it was secondary to the physical experience they wanted.

I don't disagree that seeing the track while on the ride can screw up the theming. I just think it's hard to build a roller coaster that's especially well-themed and/or effectively tells a story in general -- unless it's in a box more or less in the dark or very specifically involves something that would be on a track anyways (train, mine car, etc.). Generally, though, I'm more concerned with the effect it has on the surrounding area, because that can screw up far more than just the ride itself.
 
Last edited:

jpinkc

Well-Known Member
Having ridden Hagrids I can see your point about the track, its a good ride. I think Disney could have done a much better job on the whole experience, but it is good, not great but good. (Gringots and Forbidden Journey are better) I wish Disney had not gone cheap on their offer to Ms Rowling. Imagine if Disney had built a Wizarding World!! It would have fit well in HS. But Uni did a very good job on both parts in my book. Closest feeling of being at a Disney Park I think outside of a Disney park.
 

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
That makes sense with re: Hagrid's. I'm not sure building a roller coaster for a ride that's supposedly showing off magical creatures was the best idea.

But that's why I said it's dependent on the type of ride experience they're going for. While I haven't been on Hagrid's (and it doesn't actually look very good to me, but I don't have much interest in coasters as a general rule), I imagine I'd have the same opinion as you based on watching a ride video. But I think Universal placed a heavier emphasis on the thrill involved than the theming. It's not that the theming was an afterthought, but that it was secondary to the physical experience they wanted.

I don't disagree that seeing the track while on the ride can screw up the theming. I just think it's hard to build a roller coaster that's especially well-themed and/or effectively tells a story in general -- unless it's in a box more or less in the dark or very specifically involves something that would be on a track anyways (train, mine car, etc.). Generally, though, I'm more concerned with the effect it has on the surrounding area, because that can screw up far more than just the ride itself.

Having ridden Hagrids I can see your point about the track, its a good ride. I think Disney could have done a much better job on the whole experience, but it is good, not great but good. (Gringots and Forbidden Journey are better) I wish Disney had not gone cheap on their offer to Ms Rowling. Imagine if Disney had built a Wizarding World!! It would have fit well in HS. But Uni did a very good job on both parts in my book. Closest feeling of being at a Disney Park I think outside of a Disney park.
I dare you to get off Hagride without a smile on your face. Its fun so who cares?
 

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

Top Bottom