Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I think using CGI technology you could create a very immersive, engaging version of Soarin'. Imagine Soarin' through history -- a dry desert grows into Los Angeles of today as you glide overhead. Orange groves morph into Big Thunder and Sleeping Beauty's Castle. San Francisco goes from a sandy peninsula into a goldmine Barbary Coast, to the crazy 60s and into a high tech marvel. And then, we zoom into space to see just how high the cost of living goes in the state! : )
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt ^^ LOL Now you've got me thinking about how cool a Soarin Into Space movie would be.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Maybe it's just impassible.<< Phew! All of these references to nothing being impossible got me thinking about the Doorknob from Alice in Wonderland, but I was thinking I was the only one!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I can't believe that most people would not recognize the Soarin' locations as being in California. But on the other hand, I guess it is very possible given the overall stupidity and lack of curiosity of people today. I know I'm an old fart, but I grew up with a strong interest in our National Parks system. I knew well what most of them looked like, even though I had only been to 3 or 4 of them at the time.
Originally Posted By Ifzorro68 I always enjoyed the theming of condor flats and would have loved it if the land was not so small. Hopefully many of those desert plants are saved and kept to be used again somewhere else. I really loved the landscaping in that area especially when several of those desert plants were in bloom. At the same time I am looking forward to the changes because it will most likely enhance the area even more. Hopefully during these changes they are considering extending the Soarin building facade. I think it would be so much better if they extended the facade so that it hid the monorail tracks behind it. They could create a nicely themed tunnel for the track that maybe allowed guests riding a glimpse of the land but also mostly hide the monorail from guests exploring the area. A new extended facade would also allow them to use the ground level as an indoor queue protected from the harsh sun and cold winter days. It would also give them more inside area for props and theming. Right now there are actually a few feet of unused space between the queue and existing facade that could easily be used for some period appropriate props and theme. It would definitely eliminate the need for the hanging tarps that get dirty easy and do little to protect guests from the hot sun during summer months.
Originally Posted By Bellella If they can have the current film up with a sharper image and no lines, spots, etc., can't complain. I don't really understand why they're turning Condor Flatts into Grizzly Airfield. At least they're not doing Propwash Junction.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Outside of true Disney Geeks, no one understood the "Condor Flat" back-story.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA No one, Disney Geek or not, should have to know what any land's backstory is. Backstorys are for Imagineers and should stay in Glendale. It's like an actor writing up a whole 'backstory' about a particular character he's creating in a play. That's all well and good, but that actor doesn't stand before the audience or put a blurb in the program explaining who his character is. The actor performs his role, and, if he's skilled and understands his craft, those elements of his character come through. Same with a land at a theme park. If done well, it requires no explanation.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros There just wasn't enough space for Condor Flats to make sense as a theme. It was vaguely desert-ey, but because it was right up against Grizzly Peak, the tall trees up the hill overshadowed all that. Granted, I agree that it doesn't make any sense as a forest air strip either, but at least it will allow the area to have a fully fleshed-out theme It also doesn't help that the desert theme was done better by Carsland across the way, so there's really no need for Condor Flats to be strictly tied to that concept any more That said, I'm somewhat concerned with the variety of eras used for the park's theming. When the park first opened, nearly everything was set in contemporary times and it was bland. With all of the recent work, nearly everything is being set in the first part of the 20th century and I worry that it could be equally bland throughout the course of the day. Paradise Pier is the 1900's/10's, Buena Vista Street is the 1920's, Hollywoodland is the 1930's/40's, and the newly-expanded Grizzly Peak area is the 1940's; arguably Carsland, a bug's land, and the Pacific Wharf are using a contemporary setting. Compared with the wide window of timeframes used throughout DL, it seems rather monotonous IMO
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I actually liked DCA 1.0, but that was one of it's major problems... too much nodding and winking involved in the design of the park.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "There just wasn't enough space for Condor Flats to make sense as a theme" I agree. Plus there's now a much bigger and more immersive desert over in Carsland. "Compared with the wide window of timeframes used throughout DL, it seems rather monotonous IMO" You might be over-thinking it a bit. It's unlikely that any Disney park will have as a broad of a set of storytelling realms as a magic kingdom park.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <It was vaguely desert-ey, but because it was right up against Grizzly Peak, the tall trees up the hill overshadowed all that.> And those trees are getting taller all the time. The last couple of times we stayed at the GCH, we've had a room on the second floor, with a view of the back of Mermaid or the corn dog castle. This time, I asked if they had anything higher when we checked in, and they gave us a room on the fifth floor. It was mostly a view of trees.
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance Seems silly to have a land with one ride. At least now it'll be an extension of another land that really only has one ride too. Two parts coming together to almost form a whole.
Originally Posted By leemac <<I think it would be so much better if they extended the facade so that it hid the monorail tracks behind it. >> It was always lazy design to have the entire monorail track through DCA visible. It single-handedly takes you out of the time and place to have that hunk of metal zipping past - particularly in the Hollywood Pictures Backlot. It should have meandered outside the DCA berm.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Seems silly to have a land with one ride.<< But Condor Flats wasn't a land unto itself; it was a zone within the Golden State district of the park, like the Pacific Wharf, Bountiful Valley Farm, and Golden Vine Winery, all of which lacked actual rides. At least that's how they justified it... When it opened, DL's Adventureland only had one attraction, the Jungle Cruise. It wasn't until 1995 that it got another *ride*, with Indiana Jones (though it got additional attractions with the Tiki Room and Treehouse in the early 60's) >>It's unlikely that any Disney park will have as a broad of a set of storytelling realms as a magic kingdom park.<< TDS easily has as broad a range as DL, with the Mediterranean Harbor set in renaissance-era Italy, the American Waterfront at the turn of the 20th century, and Port Discovery set in the future, plus several other lands set in eras in between (and a purely fantasy-based Mermaid Lagoon). Although it's an odd setup, you could argue that Epcot also reflects centuries past and the future Part of what always made the Studios in WDW seem so lame to me was that the whole park felt the same. Hollywood Blvd and Sunset Blvd are supposed to be 2 distinct spaces, yet feel shockingly similar with their "Golden Age of Hollywood" setting. They're both very well executed, but they're so similar that the novelty sort of wears off
Originally Posted By leemac <<No one, Disney Geek or not, should have to know what any land's backstory is. Backstorys are for Imagineers and should stay in Glendale.>> Very true - except when it comes to execution. My preference is for open narratives but DCA is full of closed narratives. Condor Flats has a great backstory that really drives home the impact that California had on aviation and space innovation but it just isn't fully reflected in the placemaking. Condor Flats should have been peppered with elements that reinforced that narrative - not necessarily about specific people but about the impact of the location on innovation. The three elements that comprise this section - Soarin', Taste Pilots' Grill and Fly 'n' Buy do have some elements but they are too generic in my view. The problem has always been the footprint sadly. It is just too small to really have any true sense of discovery. It was merely a transition between Sunshine Plaza and the rest of Golden State - easier to transition from asphalt to yet more asphalt. Condor Flats was never a land - just an element of Golden State. I've always loved this section of DCA1.0 but it needed more of a sense of discovery - particularly around Grizzly Peak. Guests should have had more ability to roam around the Peak much like you can Redwood Challenge Creek.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Hollywood Blvd and Sunset Blvd are supposed to be 2 distinct spaces>> If I recall correctly they are the same timeframe so entirely homogeneous. I can't separate them in terms of architecture or time and place.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros ^^The only difference I've ever been able to determine is that Sunset Blvd tends to have more reproductions of old movie theaters, while the Hollywood Blvd buildings are more diverse and feel slightly more like a real city. But they're so similar that it's tough to really say that either has a distinct personality
