Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<But other than the example you sited above, which I agree with, what is new and ground-breaking ant bar-setting at DAK? >> DAK's fantastic architecture and landscaping create a stronger sense of place than is found at any other Disney Park, including DL's Main Street. The Pangani Forest Trial and the Maharajah Jungle Trek are at least equal in size, scope and immersion to anything else Disney has created. Are we supposed to downgrade those attractions simply because we walk through them rather than taking an Omni mover? Because the animals are real instead of AA? I could go on and on. Do you want me to? ;-)
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 ^^No Trippy, please spare the rest of us your homespun, frozen since Halloween drivel. But I have already said I agree. DAK's best attribute is the way it transports you through its landscaping and architecture. But even that is just building on what's been done before ... it started in Adventureland in 1955 after all.
Originally Posted By mousermerf No, you need not continue - because its fairly easy to see they're not as "entertaining" (equally, if not moreso, important as immersion and theme) as past ventures and don't have the guest attention that is needed for them to really be considered a success.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<No, you need not continue - because its fairly easy to see they're not as "entertaining" (equally, if not moreso, important as immersion and theme) as past ventures and don't have the guest attention that is needed for them to really be considered a success.>> A poor indicator of quality if you ask me. By that token the restrooms between Adventureland and Frontierland are the absolute best attractions at WDW. ;-)
Originally Posted By mousermerf You just ignored that whole "entertaining" being the most important aspect..
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Everest may have a an uber-kewl Yeti AA (don't ask Joe where the money went for the other one you don't see) that is state-of-the-art, but as an attraction how does it set the bar higher. >> I would include the track switching mechanism that allows the train to traverse forward and backward between different track sets a technical innovation that sets this ride apart as well. There are other coasters that provide for both forward and backward motion, but they are rare and few involve actual track switches as complex as the one on Everest.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 ^^It was done on Universal's The Mummy before ... and in both cases doesn't take the experience to another level. Maybe if it happened in the dark ... with a real AA Yeti on the track in front of you instead of a plastic bird on a stick ... I dunno. It just is cool. It is isn't groundbreaking.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip If you come right down to it everything is based on the freaking wheel so nothing Disney has ever done is groundbreaking. You really are pushing what something needs to be 'groundbreaking'. Anyone who could compare Adventureland with the AK is stretching to make a point.
Originally Posted By jonvn "I'll give you a hint, you could buy A-Rod's contract out from the Yankees for that!" I don't know who A-Rod is. I imagine I really ought to. "And I'd much rather hear it than your opinions about lazy morbidly obese Americans or even Al Lutz (although it can be entertaining!)" I talk about all sorts of things. There are only so many times you can argue over whether or not SSE is an OmniMover. But I know quite a bit about Al, as well. I know you don't believe me...
Originally Posted By mousermerf *pokes roadie* You should give a good study of Performance Thoery a try. It explains how performance, theater, etc.. have evolved over time. AK harkens to naturalism. It wants to recreate and lose you in a created realm. There was a distinct move away from this style in theater many years ago, but it has been revisitted since. Essentially, it is thought there are better ways to express things then through naturalism. Naturalism allows the audience to not think, or rather, often inhibits thought and engagement with the subject. A good way to think of it/explore it is to look at Epcot and AK. AK tries to painstakingly recreate a location - Epcot creates theme buildings which are only contextually significant (the form of the building really has no defined meaning outside of Epcot). One is an artistic expression of an idea, one is a recreation. You have to think about one, the other is able to be looked at superficially. Now, which conveys what? That's all very ambiguous, and the bane of semiotics, but in short we all interpret it differently, but there are general norms which begin to emerge and are recognizable to many. Long story short, to discuss certain topics you need engagement from the audience. Passive observance (inherent to immersion) really wont work, you need reflective intellectual distance. You strive to break the immersion, force the spectator to think about what is being presented. That's Brecht's idea. Anywho, immersive recreation isn't everything.
Originally Posted By jonvn "would include the track switching mechanism that allows the train to traverse forward and backward between different track sets a technical innovation that sets this ride apart as well." That really doesn't affect most customers. I mean, it's nice, but the public doesn't really care. When the Matterhorn was built, it was the first tube steel coaster ever. Is that what people rode it for? Of course not. They rode it because it was a fun and exciting adventure. These things are great for people like us, but the general public could not care less.
Originally Posted By mousermerf A quick note to make the above seem less vague and foreign: Imagine if the buildings in Epcot were literal or more realistic translations of their themes. The Land as a rocky mound, World of Motion as a giant wheel, Spaceship Earth as a large globe with the continents in realistic detail. Think about how that presents a different idea and engages you in a different way then what is in the current look of Future World.
Originally Posted By Simba12 For Spirit of 74, since DAK has a tenth annivesary next year, can we look forward to any major new attractions in the next couple of years? Have you heard of any new rides/lands etc.?
Originally Posted By TDLFAN >>You don't think a WDW Restroom is entertaining??<< Well.. we know the ones at the Minneapolis Airport sure are.
Originally Posted By nbodyhome <<I mean, wouldn't you like to know how MILF >> What????<< I thought they meant the wife in COP. Denise
Originally Posted By nbodyhome >> Not sure anymore. Certainly not when it comes to Hotels and Restaurants anymore. I can have a better quality roon, service and at a lesser price with Marriott than Disney. And the MVCI offers much better value than the DVC. << I've a favorite Bed and Breakfast in London that gives better service, a nice bed and a great breakfast for $104.00 or so per night US. Probably slightly more now, but still cheap! It is like having concierge with a free fully cooked breakfast included. Disney IS doing better in upgrading their rooms, though.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Well.. we know the ones at the Minneapolis Airport sure are.>> We Minnesotans just love giving our visitors a toe-tapping good time!!
