Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<Someone did suggest that water rides that drench riders shouldn't be in a Disney park.>> Then I stand corrected. While I personally haven't really enjoyed these types of rides since I was a kid, I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be in a Disney park. With that said, I do think that lame, barely themed versions shouldn't be allowed in Disney parks. If Disney is going to do one of these rides, then they should knock our socks off with it. Sadly, that hasn't been the case with the two attempts so far.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Hmph. I go away for one night, and come back to find 100+ posts to wade through. (And I HATE wading through threads and spending the rest of the day posting in wet clothes...!) So, post 171... still trying to breathe after that one. But it's WRONG. So wrong. Also wrong: the mean spirited hectoring in this thread. (You know of whom I speak.) For goodness sake, when someone disagrees, it doesn't mean they are wrong. When they get their facts wrong, they're wrong. Figure out the difference. That said... I don't want a ride in a Disney theme park that is designed to soak people to the skin. That's why I appreciate the effort at GRR, and agree it needs some more scenic oomph. It is just wet enough for me. And it is definitely set to different levels, based on the temperature and sunshine. It can be quite wet, or it can be relatively dry. As for Popeye's River Dunk at IOA, everyone who goes in understands (or certainly should) that the whole point is to get soaking wet. As the Spirit sensibly pointed out, this is a GOOD IDEA in central Florida. It is a BAD IDEA in southern California.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <As the Spirit sensibly pointed out, this is a GOOD IDEA in central Florida. > Well, sorta. It certainly feels good on a scorching hot and unbearably humid day. The trouble is, the humidity means you dry out even SLOWER. The big dryer is actually a good idea, though charging 5 bucks for it rubs me a bit the wrong way.
Originally Posted By tashajilek "The big dryer is actually a good idea, though charging 5 bucks for it rubs me a bit the wrong way." Wow, get you wet then pick your pockets lol.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <The big dryer is actually a good idea, though charging 5 bucks for it rubs me a bit the wrong way.> Totally agree. What would it hurt to just allow people to use it for free?
Originally Posted By pwrof3 What will they do with all of the old theming? I could use some of that stuff!
Originally Posted By FerretAfros As for the driers, I remember my first trip on Kali at DAK was on Thanksgiving weekend, and they had little heaters set up by the exit. They were kind of like the things you see on the sidelines at football games in the colder months to keep the athletes from getting crapms. They weren't going to completely dry you off, but they would get you dry enough that you were comfortable walking around the park for the rest of the day (it was a little cool, but hardly what I would call cold).
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>>> This whole water discussion cracks me up. This is what it sounds like to me: "Why would Disney put something like the Teacups in the park? Those rides make me sick and those spinner rides have no business at a Disney park. Who wants to walk around feeling like they are going to barf for 3 or 4 hours afterward? And the sombrero ride at Knott's is 10 times better anyway. The DL version's storyline is weak and the thing is plopped right in the middle of Fantasyland, doesn't fit with the theme of the Matterhorn, and takes up too much space. I don't know what they were thinking" Yep, that's what this discussion sounds like. <<<< More like: It's 1955: Walt made the Jungle Cruise to get guests very wet .. in a park very light on major attractions. Which makes the park one less attraction for those who don't like getting wet, which ultimately leaves people with fewer attractions to enjoy. Tea cups bad example anyway. At least with the tea cups I have control over whether I want it to spin or not. Unlike GRR where I have no control over how wet my raft gets. GRR = Taking up a large footprint รท park short on the famous type of rides that made Disney theme parks famous for 4 decades = one less ride to enjoy = a "minus" in the opinions for some people.
Originally Posted By oc_dean No one ever complains or did complain with SS Rustworthy, the Irrigation Station water play area in Bountiful Valley Farm, or even Princess Dot Puddle Park in FFF. These little water play areas aren't meant to draw large crowds .. and be "big people" drawers. Then you get one frikin huge size ride meant to draw large crowds. But only one type of crowd. The "I don't care if I'm soaked to the bone" crowd. If I was able to create a rule back when DCA was on the drawing boards - I would have wrote: Theme park ride implementation 101: If you are designing a park short on large scale attractions. Make sure THOSE FEW are designed to attract the most people possible. Not just one "I like getting very wet" demograph.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Tea cups bad example anyway. At least with the tea cups I have control over whether I want it to spin or not. Unlike GRR where I have no control over how wet my raft gets." It's a valid example because at the very least someone is going to get dizzy from all that spinning. Besides, this conversation hasn't just about getting wet, it's also been about storytelling and GRR's compares to similar attractions at other parks, among other things.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Let's try that again: It's a valid example because at the very least someone is going to get dizzy from all that spinning. Besides, this conversation hasn't just been about getting wet, it's also been about storytelling and how GRR theming compares to similar attractions at other parks.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Well, somebody here keeps throwing a monkey wrench into the conversation by claiming that anyone who doesn't like the GRR is a pansy who's afraid to get wet. I like the GRR; I think it would benefit greatly from enhanced show value; I don't enjoy getting all wet while touring a theme park.
Originally Posted By tashajilek "Well, somebody here keeps throwing a monkey wrench into the conversation by claiming that anyone who doesn't like the GRR is a pansy who's afraid to get wet." Well obviously thats not true, so dont even bother to listen to it. We were just saying that some rides arent for everyone and some people should just avoid the rides they dislike. Its very hard to create a ride EVERYONE will be happy with. Having one water ride per park isnt really that unreasonable.
Originally Posted By CuriouserConstance I certainly don't think anyone is saying anyone is a "pansy" for not liking to get wet. I did, however, wonder if Dean is a kitty cat. Then he started hissing and meowing, so no pansies, but one kitty.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo I hope they do include AA's, after all, Universal Studios in Singapore has a Jurasic Park Rapid Ride full of AAs. >>But if I ever decide to stay at the Grand Californian for a night or two .... I'll take you up on your advice Constance. <<< One of the many reasons why the GCH is so great, we can ride the amazing Grizzly without worrying.
