Originally Posted By mousermerf And to prove it visually: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/5kjxkm" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/5kjxkm</a> At 2:30 note the giant octopus, not to mention all the other storytelling these people obviously see while enjoying watching each other get wet.
Originally Posted By believe The Soarin film is still good. They could get a few more years by converting to digital 3D for minimal costs. $1mill to convert the film to 3D, and another $1mill to convert the theatres. (it cost about $10mill to convert Nightmare before Xmas to 3D, so it should be alot cheaper to convert a 5 minute film).
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Thanks for that YouTube of the Popeye raft ride. Look at all the money they wasted on theme-ing on that ride. (Please note: the Sarcas-O-Meter is on!)
Originally Posted By leemac <<Nope, and I want you to ride Popeye & Bluto.>> I have ridden it and couldn't stand it. I had little idea what was going on and had to jerk my head around to see it. Terrible ride that just goes on and on and on.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Mostly I get irritated by the 'it can't be done' responses - by a Disney employee no less.>> I haven't said it can't be done - if you want to do it on the cheap (think BTMRR basic AAs) and ignore the storytelling elements that are typically integral to a Disney attraction then you can. My point is that it is virtually impossible to tell a comprehensive story that all rafters can grasp. The GRR imagineering team spent two years trying to make it happen and couldn't - and for once budget wasn't an issue for this attraction. And no-one has successfully managed to get the solution - I have been to IOA precisely once (and won't be going back) - our tour guide was the lead creative from NBC Creative - when we rode that awful Bilge barges thing he spent the entire time explaining how it doesn't work how they expected. I have yet to meet anyone (even Universe AP-ers) who can explain to me what is going on. I sure couldn't tell. I can only presume you had a bad day, Jim. As you will see elsewhere on the boards by the news - it hasn't been a great day for me either!
Originally Posted By leemac (from the boat wash - in case that nuance was lost on you)>> There is a difference between nuance and obscurity - as I've said in the two previous posts I find the storytelling to be very weak and poorly communicated in that Popeye thing. It just isn't effective. Re Post 111 - if you think Bilge Barge (?) is a fantastic attraction then I won't be able to convince you that it doesn't work (which it doesn't IMO). I've lost count how many times I've tried to explain this since '01 and I guess I am foolish to think anything has changed - call it a rush of blood to the head after some jarring news today. If the armchair imagineers want to have a shot at making substantial and effective changes to GRR then I suggest you send them c/o Bob Weis at WDI - he would love to know how to effectively plus GRR and tell a story. I hope his team can solve the problem that countless imagineers have tried their hand at.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo WOw, I wish I had been here sooner. While I ill call Grizzly and E ticket, I agree there are places where animals culd impact. How about a bear or mountainlion on a tree branch over the river? Animals on the shore line that pedestrians could enjoy too. Critters in the queueline. There are numerous AA routes they could have gone and frankly ai think that would be a better use of capital than a silly goofy overlay to mullholand madness or a Mickey on the sunwheel. I was hoping we were to get that planned tran through the area. Mine Train through Nature's Wonderland used to be one of my favorite attractions as a young child. As for bad news, I am sorry to here that. I will try to look up the details as I have not seen them yet.
Originally Posted By Mr X Lee, you've mentioned not caring for Universal or ANY amusement parks for that matter, save Disney. I'm not saying that's coloring your view on this, but ARE there any attractions at Universal that you liked, or found to be impressive at least? (curious, because if you DO have any favorites that could perhaps give a better perspective of where you're coming from)
Originally Posted By Mr X ***call it a rush of blood to the head after some jarring news today.*** Sorry to hear that. Nothing TOO terrible, I hope!
Originally Posted By leemac ^^ It is on Latest and elsewhere on the message boards. You can probably put two and two together. Not good news for what we have been trying to do over the past 7 years.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Lee, you've mentioned not caring for Universal or ANY amusement parks for that matter, save Disney. I'm not saying that's coloring your view on this, but ARE there any attractions at Universal that you liked, or found to be impressive at least? (curious, because if you DO have any favorites that could perhaps give a better perspective of where you're coming from)>> I'm not a movie studios park-kinda guy. Never liked either USH or USF at all - and not a single attraction I liked there (and I haven't seen the more recent stuff like Shrek, Terminator, Simpsons). I don't like seeing characters shoehorned into attraction technology - just there for the sake of it. Back to the Future was aging so let's just put the Simpsons into it. Coaster-wise I liked the Duelling Dragons thing although I don't think they did enough with it. I don't find Spiderman has amazing as others do (again I find the storytelling lacking and it did disorientate me more than I like) but can appreciate that the technology is exceptional. I'm just not a theme park guy per se. My passion for the Disney parks comes from the overall experience - the attractions, shows, parades and environment. It is enough for me without needing to go elsewhere. I don't think I've been to another US theme park for 10+ years. Not a single other one.
Originally Posted By danyoung Lee, I haven't seen your other post yet, but I do hope everything comes out well for you. Now, on with the argu ... err, discussion. >My point is that it is virtually impossible to tell a comprehensive story that all rafters can grasp.< I'm going to point you in the direction of Everest for a comparison. Yes, you're not spinning there. But you are going incredibly fast, and your view of the ONE AA on the ride is mostly a blur. But the story is set up so well by the queue and the introductory elements of the ride that the Yeti AA works very well. It's an example of how an AA can plus an attraction without having to be placed all through the ride. And there have never been accusations that Disney cheaped out on Everest. If it had just been a mountain without any AA participation, I think the crowd reaction would have been different. I simply don't believe that top flight Imagineers spent TWO YEARS working on Grizzly and couldn't come up with a way to plus the attraction with some type of AA's, which are a hallmark of top Disney attractions. Even if they had been atmospheric like BTMRR, they would have been better than NO AA's. And sightline with the seats in the rafts is simply a problem to overcome, by placing the AA's higher in the sightline. I'm not convinced that there had to be an overlying story to this. Atmospheric critters would have been much better than none at all.
Originally Posted By dshyates Leemac, I believe that you believe what you are saying, but I couldn't disagree more. Except on how poorly the backstory of GRR is communicated. I think your type logic runs rampant through WDI and is hobbling them. The reason to create such elaborat backstories is to enhance an attraction. They went as far as creating an elaborate wilderness environment, but refuse to add critters because they don't further the story. No, they wouldn't further the story, but they complete a wilderness environment. A National Park setting devoid of wildlife? They built a beautiful cake, but they didn't ice it. I think that GRR does have the same problem of Soarin' in that they tried too had to force the theme. Who here knows the story of GRR? Did anyone even know that there are 5 dead bodies submerged throughout. All who met "grizzly" ends by mining accidents or murders. Thus the name ""Grizzly" River Run. And you thought it was because its around "Grizzly Peak". Now don't you feel dumb. If you look closly you will notice the bloody stains on the equipment. And even closer you will see the bodies. Talk about bad sighlines from the raft. Try looking straight down out of it.
Originally Posted By danyoung Wow - what are we, 7 years into DCA, and this is the first I've heard of this backstory. Bad show.
Originally Posted By u k fan This is also the first time I've heard this (though I haven't been to DCA), but that doesn't sound like the most fun story to base a themepark ride on!!!
Originally Posted By leemac <<But you are going incredibly fast, and your view of the ONE AA on the ride is mostly a blur. But the story is set up so well by the queue and the introductory elements of the ride that the Yeti AA works very well.>> You aren't going incredibly fast during the main storypoints - the climb, the destroyed tracks, the projected Yeti and then the Yeti AA - that is the size of a bus so everyone can see it (and obviously the scale was important too). Ultimately your field of vision is still controlled - think about each of those scenes and then think about what you can and can't see. It is very difficult to achieve that on a raft ride. <<The reason to create such elaborat backstories is to enhance an attraction. They went as far as creating an elaborate wilderness environment, but refuse to add critters because they don't further the story. No, they wouldn't further the story, but they complete a wilderness environment.>> Backstories are not written for attractions. They are written for area development - any attraction needs to fit into the backstory. Not the other way around. <<I believe that you believe what you are saying, but I couldn't disagree more.>> And that is your prerogative. I can only communicate what I know about the development of DCA. I disagree with a lot of decisions that were made but this is not one of them. I'm not going to be able to convince any of you (name-calling aside) so I'll bow out and let you argue the points amongst yourselves. Or perhaps Soarin' - which I think is what this thread was about.
Originally Posted By danyoung I hate it when people bow out of interesting discussions. I don't think there was any need for name calling from any side of this. And I'm sorry if your feelings were hurt by some overactive typists with foolish fingers. I for one always enjoy your participation, Lee. I don't see any problem with people agreeing to disagree with smiles on their faces.
Originally Posted By leemac <<This is also the first time I've heard this (though I haven't been to DCA), but that doesn't sound like the most fun story to base a themepark ride on!!!>> I'm guessing that dshyates is being sarcastic as that isn't the backstory at all. Let me explain: German emigrant Jakob Probst discovered gold at Grizzly Peak in the mid 1880s. But far from being a genius, Probst's discovery was by pure chance. Frustrated at failing to get his mule across Grizzly River, Probst threw his hat into the river and trampled it. Picking it up and putting it back on his head, he discovered a one-pound gold nugget had fallen inside. Probst immediately staked a claim he later sold for millions to the Eureka Gold and Timber Company. Nicknamed "The Pride of the Sierra", the Company was a successful business throughout the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Gold was extracted from the mountain and shipped to San Francisco. A company office and adjoining store were built right next door as well. But by the early 1950s the mine was tapped and Eureka Gold & Timber closed down. The structures stood empty for years - only the office and company store remained in use - converted to an outdoor supply store. The land itself was sold to the government to create the Grizzly Peak Recreation Area. Over the next few decades the land was reborn with trees growing back and rivers clearing up. Eventually, California's rafting enthusiasts discovered the whitewater thrills of Grizzly River and the word got out about the crystal-clear waters and Class V rapids there. By the 1980s, that hobby had grown into a business with several companies offering guided raft trips to customers. One of those companies was run by a savvy young group of entrepreneurs. They purchased the old mining structures to use as their base of operations. The Grizzly River Rafting Company was born. We had all of the backstories in Issue 5 of Tales: <a href="http://www.talesfromthelaughingplace.com/www.talesfromthelaughingplace.com/TalesfromtheLaughingPlaceIssue5.html" target="_blank">http://www.talesfromthelaughin...ue5.html</a>
Originally Posted By leemac BTW this is the Condor Flats backstory: According to Disney Legend, Condor Flats was once a Mecca for pilots and aeronautical innovators. The area brought the California aerospace industry from the beginning of the Age of Aviation to the beginning of the Space Age. Rumor has it the Lockheed Company built some of its top-secret fighters here before moving to Skunkworks and Jack Northrop did the prototype testing of the Flying Wing here. From the mid-40s to the late 60s the area became the hub of rocket research and jet testing. As the aviation industry moved into more sophisticated jet, rocket and radar research, it moved into more sophisticated headquarters, but the old hanger remained. Slowly, pilots and aviation enthusiasts began to move back to this Mecca of flying. One of the retired experimental pilots from the Flight Test Center's heyday returned and set up Condor Flats Scenic Air Tours in the old motor pool. And then a group of younger aviation enthusiasts found out that the old test site was still around. The hangar is now home to a new generation of fliers, and their logo stands out among all the faded images of years gone by. This group of dedicated aviators developed a sort of "flying theater," a simulator in which everyone can experience the exhilaration of flying. It was designed by the best young aeronautical minds, and then installed in the revered Condor Flats hangar.
Originally Posted By leemac <<And I'm sorry if your feelings were hurt by some overactive typists with foolish fingers. I for one always enjoy your participation, Lee. I don't see any problem with people agreeing to disagree with smiles on their faces.>> Honestly - it takes a lot more than that to hurt my feelings, Dan! I just don't see I can contribute any more to the discussion. I can only point out what I know and what my convictions are. The second this turned into a "WDI doesn't know what they are doing" discussion it was time for me to bow out.
