Originally Posted By Doobie This topic is for discussion of the July 2 article: B.O.R.E.D. at <a href="News-ID270220.asp" target="_blank">http://LaughingPlace.com/News-ID270220.asp</a>.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Ok, one little niggly here. There is a spy attraction, it's called Moteurs Action at WDSP and a copy is coming to Florida. Now I know it's a show, but it makes Indy look like an amature production.
Originally Posted By CMM1 I think Daniel is suffering from theme park overdose or something - I think that today's theme park designers have done a great job with coming up with new and interesting attractions and Disney and Universal lead the way. Look at Disney in the past couple of decades: Space Mountain (indoor coaster), Star Tours (simulator), Splash Mountain (flume ride); Indy (motion vehicles); Test Track (high-speed vehicles in test environment); Tower of Terror (free-fall ride with theme). What about Universal: Back to the Future (big-screen simulator); Spiderman (combo 3D - motion vehicle); Terminator (combo film - live action - theater effects); Men in Black (combined vehicle - laser shoot-em-up) Boy, if these type of attractions aren't something unique and clever, you've simply burned yourself out on them - for those of us that only go to WDW or USF/IOA a couple of times a decade, they are wonderful and unique experiences to be savored every so often. Daniel, get out into the real world more often and travel the real world a bit - you'd be surprised what the real world has to offer. But if you take theme parks for what they are (or should be) as a pleasant diversion taken in moderation, you'll find those experiences all that more special and unique.
Originally Posted By Dlmusic <<Ok, one little niggly here. There is a spy attraction, it's called Moteurs Action at WDSP and a copy is coming to Florida.>> Ok, but I really think a ride would be good. <<Look at Disney in the past couple of decades>> I was looking specifically at the last 8 years. I feel that Disney hasn't been as interesting in picking it's themes and more interested in ride systems. You actually proved my point by citing ride technology as opposed to the theming behind them. Also you only mentioned one attraction from Disney in the last 8 years. Terminator 3-D and Men in Black were mentioned in my article as being uniquely themed. <<Boy, if these type of attractions aren't something unique and clever, you've simply burned yourself out on them>> In my article I stated Men in Black has one of the most clever storylines of any attractions. My point was that Disney has been a little stale lately with concepts like California Adventure and even Disney Sea to a certain extent. Are these new rides fun? Of course they are. You could say the same for the new remake of Freaky Friday. That doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer something a little more original. I think you may have misunderstood the point. I was simply commenting on recyling themes and giving a few options of theming choices that I think deserve to get the e-ticket treatment. <<But if you take theme parks for what they are (or should be) as a pleasant diversion taken in moderation, you'll find those experiences all that more special and unique.>> I prefer people not to tell me how to view something, but let me assure you I love theme parks and that fact that I visit them often has not jaded me towards them. I still feel a rush of adrenaline everytime I reach the "reveal" on Spaceship Earth and I still almost tear up while watching Reflections of Earth.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Soaring was pretty clever stuff, that's quite modern. Also, Animal Kingdom as a whole has been a fantastic move by Disney IMHO.
Originally Posted By Dlmusic <<Soaring was pretty clever stuff, that's quite modern.>> Clever technology, but not clever storyline. Unless you find seeing different vistas that innovative. Again, yes the attraction is fun, but the theming isn't that amazing. The storytelling aspect of Soarin' is lacking in my opinion. <<Also, Animal Kingdom as a whole has been a fantastic move by Disney IMHO.>> I agree I like Animal Kingdom. Certain areas are quite innovative like the Asia and Africa area. Sure the themes have been done before but the approach of going a semi-real, but yet stylized was interesting. Unfortunately, the Dino-Rama area isn't really that amazing storywise, neither is Rafiki's Planet Watch or Camp Minnie-Mickey. Animal Kingdom is probably my favorite theme park to hang out in, because of the high level of detail.
Originally Posted By Dlmusic BTW, I'm a little dissapointed with the theming choice for Expedition Everest. It's a little bland and not in keeping with the innovative spirit that Animal Kingdom has. I wish Disney wouldn't have to stick a roller coaster in every park they have. I hope the attraction's technology will make up for the fact that it's "another mountain."
Originally Posted By Simon-ParkOtheK- Hello everybody ! (First of all, sorry for my English) This article draws my attention because Doobie spoke about a spy-themed ride. I'm the author of several reports about a new project in France : Spyland. The world of spies and special agents will take place in the South of France. Some dar-rides, coasters and special effects shows will be in this "new generation park" . Here are some drawings (first drawings that don't show the real kind of rides... motocoaster, watercoaster, mad-house, interactive dark ride with 6 seats per cars, raft rides, and a museum with nearly 10 animatronic-shows inside. The link to the serie of articles : <a href="http://parkothek.free.fr/spyland/sommaire.htm" target="_blank">http://parkothek.free.fr/spyla nd/sommaire.htm</a> (articles only in French.. but if you have any question don't hesitate to ask me. The Spyland concept is planned to be reproduced in other countries.
Originally Posted By ctdsnark If you want an underwater attraction--and I certainly do--they should bring back 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea,but not as a ride that actually goes under the water,rather as a flight simulater ride,using every special-effects trick in the book to simulate the sights,sounds,even the scents of an underwater voyage. As for a self-mocking comic attraction,I've always thought MuppetVision 3*D filled the bill--but if you want a humorous 3-D movie that pokes fun at itself as well as other 3-D films,go to themedattraction.com,look in the message board "Imagination Forum",under "MST3{-D}K movies"--a recent creation of my own!
Originally Posted By Pokkito Actually, there was a James Bond 007 ride created. It was showing in one of those motion simulator theaters that they have a the Paramount theme parks. As far as motion simulator rides go, it was pretty bad, but not nearly as horrible as Days Of Thunder. The James Bond motion simulator attraction was all shot from first person perspective and it involved jumping out of an airplane, riding fast in a boat, riding fast in a motorcycle, and I think there was a helicoptor part too. Don't remember all the details. It was a few years ago and only tolerated the ride once.
Originally Posted By BrigmanMT 2 They had that ride at Ontario Mills too, but it looked pretty hokey.
Originally Posted By CMM1 Dl: I think you downplay some of the originality of attractions like Test Track or Indy or Mission: Space or Back-to-the-Future or Spiderman - each of these was truly different and unique when they first appeared and, although a couple of them have been "cloned" in some ways, they are still pretty interesting. As for EE, what else can you do with a Mountain attraction in Asia or Africa? It's got to be Everest or Kilimanjaro or something along those lines ..... As for the need for a coaster in DAK - I think it is a big one. Coasters tend to be the kind of attraction that brings customers back again and again for the visceral thrills and thus extends the visit of those guests in the park.
Originally Posted By aracuanbird This is a really interesting topic, Daniel. I agree that it seems the recent spate of attractions from Disney, a little less maybe from Universal, have felt worn. One question I have is how much of this is about theme/genre and how much is about approach and execution. Reflecting back to the late 1980's, when it seemed the whole Adventure/exotica approach was just tired and done (everywhere). But then you have an Indiana Jones attraction open that changes the whole idea of how these experiences can be executed...with a higher degree film-realism and a more complete immersion. I'm speaking primarily of the queue here. Circa 1995, I was blown away that Disney has constructed what was in essense a protracted "line" and--instead of creating a very frustrating thing--instead imbued it with all the sense of exploration and adventure and fun that Adventureland had lacked for so long. Many recent attractions just come off as retreads of models introduced over a decade ago, when Tower, Indy, and Muppetvision were blazing new trails. I love Spider-man and like M:S but how, in terms of the structure of the guest experience, are these monsters all that different from their forebears? They are refinements, surely, but what makes them exemplary? (Spidey I suppose is just so wham-bam and tightly integrated that this alone makes it a standout, but--aside from great new tech--what makes it altogether different to Indy?). And how is MiB's transition "behind the scenes" any more than a rerun of Star Trek: The Experience? I really think the future success in theme parks relies on breaking the increasingluy-static experience set now offered. To my mind, Disney did this with the Mermaid Lagoon show at TDS, which is among the most impressive theme park attractions ever. It's a bit of Vegas-cirque in an otherwise very predictable (though well-executed) park. Park designers need to be looking at venues that are already softening the definition of themed entertainment. I haven't been to the Spy Museum in DC but this is a case where attempts are made to not just throw guests into a spy-feeling-environment but to make guests spies. Models exist for mystery experiences that are not simply local theater troupes in Italian restaurants trying to figure out who killed the Big Don. And, hey, after saying all this...I love theme parks! Don't no one go knocking me as some crank.
Originally Posted By andyschubert The most effective themes have always been those which we find most distant from our own lives. Whether the distance is geographical (far away exotic locales like jungles, ice-covered places, or outer space), or timeline-related (the distant future or past historical settings), we enjoy the themes which are most unlike our own daily lives. With time, however, the "exoticness" has become more common place. Movies, the internet, and an educated populace with means to travel have rendered some of the distant places as now more familiar, and as a result, less intriguing. Like the alchemist who finally learns how to turn lead into gold - only to see the value of gold plummet as a result of its plentifulness, the traditional theme park themes survive more due to memories of one's own childhood than from their innately exotic nature. In other words, your parents and grandparents found Frontierland to be exciting because it reminded them of a distant exotic era in history. You, perhaps, find it exciting because you remember the excitement of Disneyland as a child. To build a "new" Frontierland of sorts would lose both types of exoticness, becoming neither nostalgic nor rooted in your own childhood. Perhaps a new generation will find it intriguing, but themeparks can hardly afford for a whole generation to grow up on the hopes that they will. A better approach, I believe, is to introduce some of the initial trepidation that past generations would have felt. DO create a new attraction for Adventureland, for example, and DO play on the idea that the old curse surely must have been so much superstition on the part of uneducated misfits of an earlier naive time, and play up the idea that all is "safe". And then bring out the twist, when you are deep within the cave, that maybe the curse was real after all, and that YOUR fears or reservations were justified after all. There are a huge number of untapped cultures, points in time, and themes to be explored, if we are willing to indulge in some subtlety and lose some of the generalities. Adventureland, historically, encompassed ALL of Asia, Micronesia, Jungles of the World, Central America, and other places in a single locale in the theme park. Handled differently, making the distinctions might reveal the opportunities of two distinct places even within that broader group. Think of the differences between the Japan and the China pavilions at Epcot, just as an example. With literally 1000s of themes available, we seem to dwell on repeating 6-7 as "proven" while rendering them less effective with each repeated manifestation. And if we TRULY seek to create themes that endure for decades, we've GOT to move away from theming them after the movies. It's as simple as that.
Originally Posted By Dlmusic <<Dl: I think you downplay some of the originality of attractions like Test Track or Indy or Mission: Space or Back-to-the-Future or Spiderman>> Indiana Jones Adventure, Spiderman and Test Track were all very original attractions. I don't contest that all. Mission: Space's originality stems only from it's technology, as the whole "we're going to space theme" as been done a billion times. Not only that but Mission: Space in my opinion does less to set up it's show than even Mission to Mars/Flight to the Moon did with it's mission control room. Without the centrufuge Mission: Space wouldn't be so much as blip on the radar. About Back to the Future, it's theming is pretty generic "office-ish" theming. It themes to the films decently but isn't a particularly noteworthy effort theming-wise one way or another. <<As for EE, what else can you do with a Mountain attraction in Asia or Africa?>> Why does there have to be another mountain?? I guess with the naturalistic setting it's the only way to do a tall ride but there are ways of making thrill wouldn't going tall. Animal Kingdom already has an icon, the Tree of Life, it doesn't really need a huge mountain. Now is EE going to be enjoyable? Almost assuredly so, but it still is disappointing that it's not a completely original concept. <<As for the need for a coaster in DAK - I think it is a big one. Coasters tend to be the kind of attraction that brings customers back again and again for the visceral thrills and thus extends the visit of those guests in the park.>> Aha! But you can get thrills in many ways besides a roller coaster. Why couldn't Animal Kingdom keep it's unique nature intact? Just a disclaimer, I'm still holding out that Expedition Everest is going to be unique enough to overcome it's cliched storyline. <<One question I have is how much of this is about theme/genre and how much is about approach and execution. >> It's a combination of both. Mission: Space to me just wasn't that uniquely executed. It felt like the retread theme that it was. Revenge of the Mummy felt a little too much like a retread of Indiana Jones Adventure. For a dramatic example, imagine how much better the Paradise Pier concept would have come off had they done amazingly intricate architecture like the ornate buildings of the era? Or if the queue to California Screamin' had been themed to a funhouse complete with cute little tricks to entertain guests. You can overcome a bland theme with great execution. But it's the attractions that use a unique theme and have great execution that really push forward. That's one reason why Tower of Terror and Indiana Jones Adventure (for modern attractions) consistently get put high on people's lists.
Originally Posted By Zazu Nice list of underused themes. I would respectfully add one more: a romantic attraction. Perhaps one themed to the romatic scenes from one or several movies would work. All I know is that my wife has never completely forgiven Disneyland for closing Adventure Thru Inner Space. <g>
