Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Oh I don't know. TO me the backstories can really plus a place - Frontierland at DLP, Harambe DAK. When done well, they can be awesome.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA ^^^Hey dave... Are you saying that DLP Frontierland has a written out, read-able backstory? And DAK's- Harambe section? I can safely say that until thet were pointed out to me, I had never seen the backstory to Paradise Pier or Condor Flats. It reminds me of that backstory to Pleasure Island, with Captain Merriweather Pleasure and all that. Again, if, as designers you want to bring that out in the design -- fine. But posting a backstory? Strikes me as 'Hey, if you don't get why all these buildings are here -- this is the deal.'
Originally Posted By barboy ///If it has to be posted up somewhere and explained to the guests -- it hasn't been executed very well/// you summed it up well. That is why every ride based attraction should have a detailed queue; a well done queue will offer the guest proper context and perspective of the main event.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>They are willing to wait for Dumbo. They are unwilling to wait for Grizzly.<, You've never been to DCA on a hot day, huh.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA So.... that's it on this topic? I was really enjoying this discussion too.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "People choose not to wait for Grizzly, they choose to wait for the experience on Dumbo." This is probably the silliest argument I think I have ever heard.
Originally Posted By Hista98 None of the new changes in the 1.2 billion dollar DCA overhaul really reflect a "California" theme per se. Even Carsland Radiator Springs theming takes place in New Mexico/Arizona, right? Yes they do, look at the new entrance 1920's L.A. and the new pier area too, the theme of DCA is getting stornger in the artwork, so why would they change the name?
Originally Posted By ni_teach Hista98 said: Even Carsland Radiator Springs theming takes place in New Mexico/Arizona, right? Car's takes place on route 66 which has a very long history with California. <a href="http://www.historic66.com/" target="_blank">http://www.historic66.com/</a> Radiator Springs could easily be any part of the high desert of CA.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros In the movie, while in Radiator Springs, there are several lines where Lightning McQueen says something along the lines of "I need to get to California". He never says a specific city, but always the state, which would imply that he is not in California, which makes it an odd choice for a theme park about California. We don't know where exactly it's supposed to be, but we do know that it is not California.
Originally Posted By Hista98 Actually i did not say that ni tech my post was below that, i was responding to htat post.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 But you have to remember those lines from a movie not everyone has seen to make that true... considering some of the liberties Disney has taken with theming over the years, sliding Radiator Springs 50 miles to the west to make it the CA desert rather than the AZ desert seems pretty modest.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros It doesn't matter if people have seen it or not, they decided to base their land in the world of the film, so they should stay true to it. This kind of goes back to the TSI argument from another thread, where an attraction can be strong without a guest knowing the whole backstory of it. Very few kids today (well, a few years ago, when it was still based on the book) have read Tom Sawyer, yet the island was done well enough that they were still able to enjoy it. People enjoy Mr Toad, even though few have actually seen the film. If the Imagineers do a good job with the backstory, guests will need no prior knowledge of it to enjoy it. How many guests know the backstory to Big Thunder? I'm not so sure it's really a modest change either. The entire point of the film is that McQueen isn't where he wants to be, and can't get to California. The film ends in California. There are scenes that they could have used to create an appropriate area in the park. Yet they decided to go for the area that we know isn't right. I'm sure that it will look nice and it will be popular, but between the ill-placed setting and the awful name, I'm just not so sure I'll be able to get over it. They were the ones who wanted to go all out on the Cars idea, so I think they should. They just need to come up with a darn good reason that we are in a park about California, and the big new multi-million dollar land is about a place that is specifically not in California.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 I'm sorry, I just can't get that worked up about it. To me, it's far less egregious than TSI, or putting Pooh in the frontier, or even some things that were done in DL's heyday (like putting a retrospective show about American music in TL). Route 66 and the kinds of things the concept art show for the area are VERY in place in the CA desert. Cars themselves are often referred to as part of "California culture." In fact, the place will look "more California" than much of DCA. Caribbean pirates on an island in a Missouri river doesn't make sense whether you've read Tom Sawyer or not. Cars and Route 66-type architecture in California? They belong. If the script had been different and the McQueen character had simply said "I've got to get to... (name a specific CA racetrack here)" - suddenly the whole objection goes away. If that's all it takes, it's not much of an objection IMO.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss I'm just wondering why this thread was brought back from the dead, and not even to wonder whatever happened to the idea that Disney was working on a new film for Soarin'.
Originally Posted By believe >>>>The entire point of the film is that McQueen isn't where he wants to be, and can't get to California.<<<< Wasn't McQueen talking to himself when he says he wants to get back to CA? And in fact, he really didn't know where he was at? Remember, he was asleep when he got to Radiator Springs. The other cars never said what state he was in. So it's possible that RS is in CA.
Originally Posted By danyoung Does anyone but me think that this discussion is kinda the same as "Is Murphy the dragon male or female?"
Originally Posted By Ohana i know people keep debating Cars maning AZ or CA, but has anyone said where Little Mermaid fits into California?
Originally Posted By danyoung Other than the fact that it's a movie, and it was made in CA, there's not much logic to it. I don't really care - I'm just glad to see new stuff coming in!
Originally Posted By trekkeruss Forget about Cars or Little Mermaid debate! What's the word about a new movie for Soarin'? Was it all just a fanboi rumor???
