Originally Posted By leemac The park's executive producer Tom Morris has a phenomenal admiration for the original park and so to him it just plain made sense to go back to the originals for it's a small world. I also prefer DL's to DLP's. It is ironic as Tom also worked on Fantasyland at DLP! PotC and HM are meant to be new interpretations which works for me. I think it more important to play around with these classics rather than iasw which is iconic purely for the look as opposed to the story.
Originally Posted By leemac Adventureland is definitely the next priority. Two of the three expansion pads will be used in the not-to-distant future.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 "PotC and HM are meant to be new interpretations which works for me. I think it more important to play around with these classics rather than iasw which is iconic purely for the look as opposed to the story." Yes, I agree, since It's a Small World really doesn't have a story...it's all about the atmosphere and music. POTC and HM could benefit from a tighter story though. And I'm guessing those two expansion pads in Adventureland will be both of those attractions?
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 It's a Small World is pretty amazing, in that it was really thrown together at the last minute, and done cheaply. However, it's one of Disney's most enduring classics. I guess it goes to show that money isn't everything! If you've got creative people and enough resources, you can create masterpieces on a budget!
Originally Posted By leemac Yup, the third one was originally earmarked for Raging Spirits but it seems that someone has come to their senses and nixed the idea.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 You know...I wonder if Expedition Everest would work over there? Instead of a Big Thunder or Matterhorn. However, maybe it's just a little too close to the real Everest though. Although, I'm sure a lot of Chinese have never even seen the real Everest.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Oh yeah, and you'd have that problem of a fake mountain right next to real ones....they're really going to have to figure out good ways around that!
Originally Posted By leemac ^^ The WDI team are absolutely loathed to add a fake mountain of any sort (except Space!) due to the natural mountains behind. I think even Everest would look silly. Hopefully that means no Big Thunder Mountain either.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Hmm...that also means they will have to come up with creative solutions if they want to add any kind of coaster.
Originally Posted By LuvDatDisney "Yup, the third one was originally earmarked for Raging Spirits but it seems that someone has come to their senses and nixed the idea." That sounds like good news. This park doesn't need a short, outdoor, lightly themed coster. It needs signature attractions done with a new take like Mansion and Pirates. "The WDI team are absolutely loathed to add a fake mountain of any sort (except Space!) due to the natural mountains behind. I think even Everest would look silly. Hopefully that means no Big Thunder Mountain either." There's no reason why a coaster-type ride has to be a clone and in a mountain-type setting just because it's been done that way in the past. As for Small World, are we looking at that as a 2007 opening, Lee?
Originally Posted By leemac ^^ Yup, 2007 at present. The current target is to then get either PotC or HM open in 2008. I guess iasw is a fairly quick and easy "major" attraction to build so I guess that sounds like a reasonable timeline providing construction begins soon. I'm guessing that the service utilities were put in place before the landscaping of the area. LuvDatDisney, that is very true about the coasters. I've always enjoyed BTMRR but I don't think it tells any meaningful story so never understood why it was duplicated everywhere. It doesn't even attract a particular big crowd at DL anymore (I believe even FP is switched off during the week now too). It looks great and is fun but I'd wished they had built at least one of the four with a coherent storyline that enveloped the guest.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Well, it is kind of hard to tell a really meaningful story on a coaster that whips by the scenes at 30mph. I suppose they could work something out that is a hybrid and has slow show scenes and fast coaster parts...like Mummy or Everest. They could do one in a temple theme...but not like Raging Spirits or Indy.
Originally Posted By leemac ^^ I just always thought the point of having three lifts in a short ride like this was to tell a story on those climbs. I don't think it works at any of them. I think they could also have creative elements in the queue and scattered across the mountain itself for guests to look at. It works at HKDL's Space Mountain and these elements are visible (but I guess the darkness aids that).
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 I think what Big Thunder really needed from the start was a story in the beginning of the ride. It really should have started out like the old Mine Train Through Nature's Wonderland attraction, but the train loses control and becomes the runaway mine train we knwo today. If they had done it that way, it might have had a better storyline, but it's still a fun (and well themed) coaster now.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: What about the Peter Pan attraction for Fantasyland, leemac, duckling? Have they forgotten that they wanted to add that? Or at least SOME other dark ride in Fantasyland? There really isn't that much to celebrate the Disney characters in Fantasyland--in terms of a decent dark ride. Winnie the Pooh simply isn't enough.
Originally Posted By leemac None of the traditional dark rides are currently in development for HKDL.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: What about all that talk of Peter Pan, then? It was mentioned in a press release--plus by some here in the Laughing Place Pond and I think you, yourself, mentioned extra 'pads' in Fantasyland.
Originally Posted By LuvDatDisney ''Yup, 2007 at present. The current target is to then get either PotC or HM open in 2008."" Maybe I should pencil in 2008 as my first visit then ... "I guess iasw is a fairly quick and easy "major" attraction to build so I guess that sounds like a reasonable timeline providing construction begins soon. I'm guessing that the service utilities were put in place before the landscaping of the area." Yes ... exactly why I could not figure out why they didn't include it to begin with. Signature attraction. People-eater. Relatively inexpensive. Should have been there from Day 1 ... just like ToT at DCA. "LuvDatDisney, that is very true about the coasters. I've always enjoyed BTMRR but I don't think it tells any meaningful story so never understood why it was duplicated everywhere. It doesn't even attract a particular big crowd at DL anymore (I believe even FP is switched off during the week now too). It looks great and is fun but I'd wished they had built at least one of the four with a coherent storyline that enveloped the guest." FP is switched off often at DL (at least when I've been there). I enjoy the ride a lot. And it is eye-candy. But I still don't see the need for it to go in every MK-style park and certainly not in HK.
Originally Posted By LuvDatDisney "None of the traditional dark rides are currently in development for HKDL." Doesn't this strike you as odd for a park that is very short on capacity? Now, I'd rather see Mansion and Pirates and Small World ... but why not 1-2 dark rides ... or better yet a Pan or Aladdin ride using new technolgy ... just thinking out loud.
