Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

Collapse

Get Away Today

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • flynnibus
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by Steve DeGaetano View Post
    If you and Jay wish to refer to structures such as this as "underground," feel free:
    That's the main show building - which is set below grade, and the show scenes are at the bottom of the building, but not under other things. But what about the caverns and lift sections? Which are contained below NOS's structures?

    I can get if you want to say 'its all in basements, not underground' - but I think you are really splitting hairs about objecting to basements as not being underground when they are below grade and UNDER other structures.

    You still call the lower levels of a basement parking garage underground even if the entrance or top levels are above grade and not buried.

    Basement/underground - there really isn't a huge need to be so specific.

    Yes, POTC is sunk into the ground to reduce the building heights. Yes, the main POTC show building is standing alone, not under other things. But when you are in the show, you are below grade, and the first half of the ride is often below other things.

    Leave a comment:


  • christianAdam
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    I've been going through this thread and it has definitely been thought provoking and insightfull. I think I can offer maybe a different take on this idea/concept

    After doing some thinking about this I took a step back and thought about what makes some of those older rides so special and dear and still relevant today and it kind of struck me; I think (again this is just my personal opinion) a lot of it has to do with television and entertainment back then vs. the present day. When television was in its infancy it was like a window into an entire new world! it sparked wonder and imagination in everybody, young and old. It revolutionized our nights at home and opened doors into what we could do with technology, those old shows are what inspired people to be astronauts, exploreres, cowboys, and cops!

    The reason I bring this up is because Disney became one of the front runners to spark that desire and wonder in people. They encouraged you to run with your imagination and follow it for as long as you can. When Disneyland was built it followed in that same tradition as the Disney shows that were created; heavily influenced by the wonder and imagination element in the world at that time. One thing we have to remember about the 50's and 60's was that not everyone had a television at that time and radio shows were still pretty prevelant forcing us to use our imagination (Tarzan and Jane, The Lone Ranger, Dick Tracy, etc etc.) and then a park was built that allowed us to see EXACTLY what we imagined as kids! I think that is what makes those rides so timeless, they reperesent not just a certain theme but they a drenched in nostalgia and represent a time when America seemed a little bit more innocent.

    Now fast forward to this present day and age, 95% of people have a TV with cable and they are constantly bombarded with whatever they desire. Want to see a Caribbean Island? go to venture to Alaska? see the old west? They are all just a few clicks away on your remote control. Our ability to use our imagination has been dulled down to the fact that we simply don't need to use it anymore...we SEE everything that we used to dream about...in a way it's kind of sad. The world went from a place wonder, imagination and innocence to a cynical, sarcastic, media driven place. Where instead of using our imagination we are just a few keyboard strokes away from whatever it is we want to see. We have taken away the wonders of space and sea because there are TV shows that now take you there in High Definition.

    I know it is kind of off the beaten path but I feel like that could also be a direct relation as to why Disney is terrified to put any kind of original idea or ride into an American DLR or WDW. Those imagineers and Walt Disney himself came from a generation that thrived off the wonder and excitement of "what there could be" because as kids...all they had was their imagination and ideas; whereas todays imagineers have had been exposed television and movies all their lives and in turn could possibly hurt that ability to think of something original. Same goes for the movie industry, I mean, how many remakes have been done in the past 5 years?!

    I hope this has made sense, I will try and elaborate more if anyone wants to hear it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Steve DeGaetano
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by flynnibus View Post
    Come on Steve.. The ride is below grade and below the street level and buildings out at the park level.

    Do we not call it underground simply because it's not covered by dirt?
    If you and Jay wish to refer to structures such as this as "underground," feel free:



    POTC Construction

    Leave a comment:


  • flynnibus
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by Steve DeGaetano View Post
    Simply untrue--but a testament to the believability of the Imagineers' art.

    All the showbuildings are above ground. Yes, their floors are recessed into the ground a bit. But this does not make them "underground." Space Mountain was built the same way--and I suspect most people don't believe that ride is "underground."

    You are no more underground when passing under the train tracks on the ride than you're underground when you pass through the park's entrance tunnels.

    Come on Steve.. The ride is below grade and below the street level and buildings out at the park level.

    Do we not call it underground simply because it's not covered by dirt?

    I don't think anyone is misleading when they say a structure that goes two levels down below grade as underground when what is there is this...

    Wireframe

    Leave a comment:


  • Golden
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    What a silly idea!! More original attractions will yet have their day.

    Disney have always had a penchant for creating whatever ideas work in their minds eye. Sometimes they are right, sometimes they are badly wrong. In the case of Cars Land, their merchandising was always huge, so you know there is the almighty profits at stake. This doesn't detract from the fact that the new land has been extremely positively recieved.

    I'm not sure why its necessary to look at movie-themed attractions as bad and original attractions as good (or vice versa). I don't care which it is, provided the attraction is Disney-great! If attractions based on movies is really something that bugs you... I'd say thats more your problem than Disney's (the crowd levels generally speaking seem to agree). If something like Pirates or Haunted Mansion doesn't work for you because it isn't tied in to a movie... same thing.

    One thing I think is a true and fair criticism, is that a complete retelling (see, Finding Nemo submarines) doesn't work well. This isn't because it's based on their own movie; its just because a retelling of the movie doesn't make a Disney-great attraction in the first place. Indeed, I think much of the issue people are taking at existing IP being used for attractions is really directed at the quality of the attractions. We shouldn't get these two reasons for being disappointed confused.

    Leave a comment:


  • ww12345
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by StevenW View Post
    The attraction isn't based on the movies. The ride is a totally new adventure. The only thing that resembles the movie is the rolling boulder. The snake, poison arrows, skeletons, spiders, and the temple are elements from the movies that were presented in a completely different way in the ride.

    This new adventure makes the ride timeless, which is why I think it will last well beyond the popularity of the movie series itself, which apparently imploded after the last movie installment.
    Spot on, Steven. That was the point I was trying to make, over and over, so it is great to see that somebody got it!

    Leave a comment:


  • StevenW
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by ww12345 View Post
    Sorry to double-post, but I wanted to hit on this, too. I think that part of the success of Indy is that you don't have to be familiar with the movies to enjoy the ride. It fits into a classic stereotype which allows you to enjoy the experience of a pre-war expedition into a lost temple. That ride was one of my favorites before I had even seen the movies - I just assumed it was another ride like HM or PotC, experiences with a light back-story.
    The attraction isn't based on the movies. The ride is a totally new adventure. The only thing that resembles the movie is the rolling boulder. The snake, poison arrows, skeletons, spiders, and the temple are elements from the movies that were presented in a completely different way in the ride.

    This new adventure makes the ride timeless, which is why I think it will last well beyond the popularity of the movie series itself, which apparently imploded after the last movie installment.

    Leave a comment:


  • JMazz
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by Steve DeGaetano View Post
    Simply untrue--but a testament to the believability of the Imagineers' art.

    All the showbuildings are above ground. Yes, their floors are recessed into the ground a bit. But this does not make them "underground." Space Mountain was built the same way--and I suspect most people don't believe that ride is "underground."

    You are no more underground when passing under the train tracks on the ride than you're underground when you pass through the park's entrance tunnels.

    Oh good grief.
    I mentioned the graded section of NOS.
    I mentioned the trench effect.
    I didn't get into the way that NOS was built (layers).
    I also mentioned the word "basement" a few times.
    I also mentioned that it was based on how you look at it or what you consider "underground".
    I clearly have a grasp on the mega-structure, in no way did I suggest it was some series of tunnels dug into the earth.


    The bolded section of your post is quite untrue. This is one of those facts that gets mis-reported by many fact books about the DLR. If the entrance tunnels at main st. are "zero", the cross-under of the RR tracks on POTC is is nearly a -2 (minus two) about 14' below the RR tracks (+/- a couple feet). There is quite a diff. There is no trench under the RR tracks at Main St; one is simply walking thru the berm with a very small amount of grading on the path. There is major excavation for the entrance of showbuilding #3 (or #2 if you consider BB scene and caverns to be one showbuilding with two levels). This excavation is carried thru most of this outside-the-berm showbuilding.

    I also quoted someone who professed that the boats were "For literally one second it dips below the train tracks to get backstage, that is hardly what I would consider an underground attraction, the Imagineers back then just fooled people into thinking so." And I wanted to give Jarrod props for commenting that it is a remarkable ride and is even moreso considering it is underground. Jarrod, from now on, if you want to be very acurate, it is a ride cruising thru portions of a trench with man-made walkways, ceilings, planters, plumbing, earth/dirt etc on top. Jeeze. I said under NOS, I never said that it was 30, 40, 50 feet below the main level of NOS.

    Your comparison to Space Mt is weak. It doesnt have elaborate layers, walkways, retail/restaurant. Aside from the riders and CMs, no one can use this space for anything but a coaster. It is a hole in the ground with a dome. This is why ppl would never call it "underground".

    I don't know if ppl rank out others to flex their DLR fact-muscles or what... but you must expect it to be directed at you if you correct someone and are wrong. In this case, two ppl made grave mistakes in their "facts" and someone is harping on semantics... all b/c another member called it an underground ride.

    Leave a comment:


  • Steve DeGaetano
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by JMazz View Post
    About 1/3 of the ride is under NOS.
    Simply untrue--but a testament to the believability of the Imagineers' art.

    All the showbuildings are above ground. Yes, their floors are recessed into the ground a bit. But this does not make them "underground." Space Mountain was built the same way--and I suspect most people don't believe that ride is "underground."

    You are no more underground when passing under the train tracks on the ride than you're underground when you pass through the park's entrance tunnels.

    Leave a comment:


  • bigwavedave
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    I agree but disagee. Just look at DCA 80% of the attractions are non movie based. Infact they created a whole new land that has nothing to do with any movie, "Buena Vista Street"! Also if rumors are true there is a good chance a new attraction in Disneyland's FL will have nothing to do with any movi, but based on rivers and their exploration. I agree a lot of new rides are based on movies and I am hoping Disneyland Resort will take a breather from any new Pixar attractions. That said without Pixar we would still have any empty lagoon in tomorowland, and I have a feeling with any changes and the success of nemo Baxter will get his way and get what he really wants in the lagoon an updated version of the original attraction. I love the subs and I am ok with Nemo!
    We also need to remeber Disneyland needs to make a profit and these rides that are filmed based help to increase those.
    Last edited by bigwavedave; 07-16-2012, 08:35 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JMazz
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by Seawolf View Post
    For literally one second it dips below the train tracks to get backstage, that is hardly what I would consider an underground attraction, the Imagineers back then just fooled people into thinking so.


    Jerrod, you are correct when you say it is underground (altho, the city portion is not - but this depends on how you look at it - see below).

    About 1/3 of the ride is under NOS. This part of the ride is the second showbuilding and one of the original two showbuildings... they comprise the Blue Bayou scene and caverns respectively. Once they realized that it was going to be a ride-thru and not a walk-thru, the third showbuilding was created outside the berm. So from the first drop (to get the boat into the "basement" of NOS), and the second drop (further underground - still under NOS), is all under a good portion of the park. UNDERGROUND INSIDE THE BERM/PARK...

    The drops are not there to get riders "under the RR tracks", they are to get you under NOS which is the second showbuilding. Punching thru into the third showbuilding was easy from there since the boats are already about 2 stories underground. When you come upon the battle scene, this is the entrance to building #3. It is still at the bottom level, but this structure is now passing thru an excavated chunk of earth. It could be considered underground, but really it is more like a trench with walls around its rim and a roof on top of those walls. It is like being in the basement of a house and being able to look up at the attic roof.

    People get the drops (and their purpose) mixed up w/ the elevator's purpose at the HM. Anyone who makes this mistake is in good company tho, many guide books and trivia articals promote the drops on POTC as a "way to get the ride under the RR tracks", when really they exist to get the boats under the graded section of NOS. In fact, when you pass the very end of the BB scene and while the boat is facing the talking skull, you are essentially running parallel w/ the RR tracks. After the two drops, you are winding your way under the shops of NOS. You cross under the RR tracks just before the ship/battle scene. You cross them again at another point in the ride just before the lift or during the lift, but exactally where, I am still not sure.

    Leave a comment:


  • doppio
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Avatar was pretty to look at but it stops there. The characters were so flat and predictable. The only dimension in this film was the special effects.

    ---------- Post added 07-15-2012 at 11:52 PM ----------

    If we must have a new Tomorrowland, can't it be bright and optimistic? Better than, learn from your evil ways human beings. God. So tired of this premise.

    Leave a comment:


  • ww12345
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by Seawolf View Post
    There are many differences between Pirates and Indiana Jones, they are nothing alike. Pirates is also time tested and is definitely more repeatable. How many threads on Micechat have you seen asking when Indy is going to get a refurb? How many have you seen for Pirates?
    No, this is not what I was saying. I wasn't talking about the ride mechanics at all, simply the ideas behind the rides. Part of my dislike for the new version of Pirates is based on their eschewing of the classic "experience" and turning it into a definite story. That was what I was trying to illustrate comparing Indy and Pirates - Indy is an experience with a very thin story: Don't look into the eyes of the idol, or this is what happens, whereas Pirates now is more of a story-based ride tying back into the movie which it inspired. You can have good rides with absolutely no story or a barely there, basic story. (See also: Space Mountain - a ride through space; the Matterhorn - a ride through a mountain; or the Jungle Cruise - a ride through the jungle.)

    ---------- Post added 07-15-2012 at 12:41 PM ----------

    Originally posted by Seawolf View Post
    I never said Indy was a bad ride, quite the opposite, just don't think it will last as long. You just described the problem in a nutshell, it relies too heavily on technology which is advancing at an extremely fast rate and has a theme which banks on guests being familiar with the movie. My point is that overall, great attractions not based on a franchise have a greater likelihood of experiencing a longer life cycle than great attractions which do have a tie-in.
    Sorry to double-post, but I wanted to hit on this, too. I think that part of the success of Indy is that you don't have to be familiar with the movies to enjoy the ride. It fits into a classic stereotype which allows you to enjoy the experience of a pre-war expedition into a lost temple. That ride was one of my favorites before I had even seen the movies - I just assumed it was another ride like HM or PotC, experiences with a light back-story.

    Leave a comment:


  • Seawolf
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by JerrodDRagon View Post
    ^I thought it had to go under the train tracks? That's why the drops are at the beginning of the ride
    For literally one second it dips below the train tracks to get backstage, that is hardly what I would consider an underground attraction, the Imagineers back then just fooled people into thinking so.

    I think Indy is a good ride just needs to change some of the effects to make the ride more realistic and eye opening
    I never said Indy was a bad ride, quite the opposite, just don't think it will last as long. You just described the problem in a nutshell, it relies too heavily on technology which is advancing at an extremely fast rate and has a theme which banks on guests being familiar with the movie. My point is that overall, great attractions not based on a franchise have a greater likelihood of experiencing a longer life cycle than great attractions which do have a tie-in.
    Last edited by Seawolf; 07-15-2012, 11:18 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JerrodDRagon
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    ^I thought it had to go under the train tracks? That's why the drops are at the beginning of the ride

    Maybe....but if Generation...after generation keeps going on it as kids then why would they not like the ride if its a good ride? I think Indy is a good ride just needs to change some of the effects to make the ride more realistic and eye opening

    Leave a comment:


  • Seawolf
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by JerrodDRagon View Post
    ^of Course Pirates is better because it is still the top dog of Rides EVER built.....for gods shake its a city under ground....there is a HUGE Pirate Ship firing at people on the land....it's going to be hard for any ride to beat this
    You do realize Pirates is not underground?
    If Indy got a redo and had its effects fixed...and put some more money into the sets...I'd say it would be a ride most people would never want to get rid of as much as Pirates or HM
    I disagree, you could upgrade the attraction all you wanted, it wouldn't stand the same amount of time Pirates or Haunted Mansion will simply because of the concept and relation to a movie. After a theoretical refurb, the tech will be outdated in another 10 years and the same threads will start popping-up again. Although unlikely from our perspective, if at any time the Indiana Jones series is forgotten or loses popularity with a new generation, the attraction will be in trouble because Disney would be unwilling to invest in another costly upgrade. Pirates and Haunted Mansion do not rely on fancy technology to sell itself, Indy does.
    Last edited by Seawolf; 07-15-2012, 11:04 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JerrodDRagon
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    ^of Course Pirates is better because it is still the top dog of Rides EVER built.....for gods shake its a city under ground....there is a HUGE Pirate Ship firing at people on the land....it's going to be hard for any ride to beat this

    If Indy got a redo and had its effects fixed...and put some more money into the sets...I'd say it would be a ride most people would never want to get rid of as much as Pirates or HM

    Leave a comment:


  • Seawolf
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    Originally posted by ww12345 View Post
    Great point - that is what I was trying to say earlier. You can have rides based on ideas in movies, or even characters in those movies, but I don't think anyone here would be hard pressed to find the difference between IJA and PotC - one is a definite "story" that, to me, gets in the way of show (PotC, or "The Search for Capt. Jack Sparrow), while the other simply uses a character to enhance an existing idea/experience.
    There are many differences between Pirates and Indiana Jones, they are nothing alike. Pirates is also time tested and is definitely more repeatable. How many threads on Micechat have you seen asking when Indy is going to get a refurb? How many have you seen for Pirates?

    Leave a comment:


  • JerrodDRagon
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    ^at least Pocahontas has good music....and the fact that the movies does not end by saying....we are (Americans) the bad guys but some men are greedy and that we should live in peace not just kicked out the people who came to the new land

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Weaver
    replied
    Re: Cars Land was the last nail in the "Original Attraction" coffin...

    The solution is complicated, expensive and difficult:
    If you don't like Avatar, then don't go to the land based on it.
    (And don't watch Pocahontas, either.)

    Leave a comment:

Get Away Today Footer

Collapse
Working...
X