Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<I have to agree with Hokie, Goofy. You're falling into the Everest trap with the idea of literal stories for each attraction. They should hang a big "The End" banner at every unload. The older attractions were designed by former movie men for the most part. They didn't have stories as much as synopsis. Most scripts or screenplays are sold with a pitch or synopsis attached. It is my belief that the pitch or synopsis was all that the designers felt was needed for their creations. At which point the audience, CMs, environments would take over to fill the blanks. Like many interpretations of the past recently at WDI, the current crack pot crew of designers completely misunderstood this central notion and for the last 7 years we have been overly subjected to "story" "story" "story" from everything to field guides to Discovery channel shows. From Pirates, to Haunted Mansion, to the examples Hokie gave, most things up until 1994-1995 can be summed up by a two sentence introduction. Even ToT. The modern inclusion of the video preshow has certainly also caused this shift, ToT being at the genesis of it for the most part. ToT straddled the line between abstract preshows such as Flight to the Moon, Tiki, and Haunted Mansion* to post ToT shows including Indy that were far more literal.>> Great post, even though I don't necessarily dislike the more literal approach.
Originally Posted By ChiMike Speaking of which, if you want to see what truly inspired POTC, look no farther than Robert Newton's Blackbeard. I believe produced after his role in Treasure Island, one can see how badly the Golden Age WED geniuses "borrowed" from that film. Straight down to the Red Head. The reason I bring this up, not to take away from POTC or its creators, but to show that they easily could have borrowed more from the film and make the ride a story based on Blackbeard. They chose not to. They chose to stop far short of that. In doing so shows their genius, their creative temperament. It is a credit to their craft. The exact opposite of the rudimentary, pedestrian products WDI has come up with in the last years - all with a healthy budget.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>Is there a backstory to "Soarin"?<< A great point Tom. I'm no huge fan of Soarin', especially EPCOT's installation. However, a huge redeeming quality of Soarin' is that it is a modern attraction where something DOESN'T go terribly wrong. It is a modern day attraction that, notwithstanding its heavy-handed preshow, is comfortable being exactly what it is. Something without any narrative, explanation, or justification. That goes a long way for me in making up the issue with sitting in front of a giant movie screen in a barren IMAX theater with a dirty projection and no themeing elements anywhere else.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>Great post, even though I don't necessarily dislike the more literal approach.<< Thanks. Hey, when it works, it really works. Like with Indy or Spiderman. I would hate to see the same treatment placed on something like Jungle Cruise however. No African Queen treatment, thank you very much. I'm sure the new movie they are trying to produce on JC, will probably at one point co-opt the attraction.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >> Even ToT. << This is an attraction that actually could use a little more story. The set-up is fantastic, but there's no "Twilight Zone" twist or moral at the end.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<Is there a backstory to "Soarin"? How about HM or Hall of Presidents? Why can't you just enjoy the ride without having to be "briefed" about it first? >> As Mike said, story isn't always the best word. That being said, Soarin's story is that you're on a hangglider flight over California and the queue is themed to an airport.
Originally Posted By ChiMike ^ Because as we all know, when you want to go hanggliding over California you have to go through security at LAX first.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<Thanks. Hey, when it works, it really works. Like with Indy or Spiderman. I would hate to see the same treatment placed on something like Jungle Cruise however. No African Queen treatment, thank you very much.>> Oh, definitely. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. One example of where it definitely doesn't work for me is Star Tours II. The story and point of the attraction really handcuffs the proceedings for me.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<I'm sure the new movie they are trying to produce on JC, will probably at one point co-opt the attraction.>> Yea...the JC movie is an internal struggle for me. I want a good one to be made, because anything that gets the JC more exposure is great...Yet in no way do I want the ride to become focused on a movie and lose what makes it special.
Originally Posted By Manfried If I could have killed off one thing while at Disney, it would have been this over obsession with PRESHOWS! Make the darned attraction work without one all ready!
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>That being said, Soarin's story is that you're on a hangglider flight over California and the queue is themed to an airport.<<< OK, I can see that. One question...Isn't Test Track a story about riding in an experimental vehicle on a test track with the queue themed as a car factory leading to the test track? Actually a more realistic Test Track then flying over a film in Soarin? Just wondering! And to comment on Space Mountain once again. My point was that it didn't take much themeing imagination on Disney's part to put a standard roller coaster up and then run it in the dark as if to be in space. The only visible theme was the wait for launch, yet it is loved by all. They must have spent a fortune on props. Go figure!
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<.Isn't Test Track a story about riding in an experimental vehicle on a test track with the queue themed as a car factory leading to the test track?>> I guess. Doesn't change the fact that it's a piss poor premise and execution. It was an excuse to use the technology. Nothing more.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> That goes a long way for me in making up the issue with sitting in front of a giant movie screen in a barren IMAX theater with a dirty projection and no themeing elements anywhere else. << But it's Soarin', Mike!!! I had an Epcot manager tell me before the ride opened that guests in Cali called it a spiritual experience. You mean it's just an IMAX movie?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<If I could have killed off one thing while at Disney, it would have been this over obsession with PRESHOWS! Make the darned attraction work without one all ready!>> I kind of disagree. I really enjoyed the pre-show at Cranium Command, enjoy the pre-show at Ellen's Universe, and think the pre-show is essential to Mission Space... it lets you know that you will be in simulator-based astronaut training rather than trying to claim you are doing the real thing. As training it works (for me)... as the real thing it would not.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>I love listening to Walt's narration in that attraction.<<< It's fantastic. Shame it didn't survive the WF64
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>EE, I was strictly speaking toward SM. That the attraction intentionally was void of story. It certainly was inspired by 2001 and Black Hole, but the story development only went as far as my first synopsis abov<<<< Oh, I know. Just sayin'
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>If you ever get evacuated out of TT (or if you ever get a view from the GM lounge of the interior of the ride), you'll notice how little there is to it. It's just a warehouse with a few props.<< You don't even have to do that. When the ride is beginning, and you climb up the tall hill and then go down over the blocks, look behind you (or to the right while you're on the blocks) and you'll get a great overview of everything. Even the lounge! I knew it was a pretty sparse environment, but I was shocked at how big and empty it really was when I did this for the first time many years ago. Definitely one of the best uses of 'darkness' to create a more impressive environment than what's really there!
Originally Posted By ChiMike And that's what makes it all the more sad when you think of all the AAs that use to fill the second floor while you ride around in your vehicle. Highest count for an attraction. Sometimes I think they would have been better off demo the show building and starting from scratch.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Funny, Disney thinks that too. Many of the problems that they had getting the attraction open (a whopping 18 months late) and cost overruns came from trying to fit the new ride system into the existing structure. Why do you think they were so eager to build a completely new building for Mission:Space next door just a couple years later?
Originally Posted By leobloom Ferret, mentioning the 18 month delay in TT's opening reminded me of the time I went to Epcot several months before the ride opened and talked to the CM stationed outside the ride to tell people it wasn't open yet. Anyway, I must've kept asking the guy questions or something, because he eventually took my family inside and let us look around the queue and even took us to the GM lounge to see the layout of the ride inside. I mention this for a couple of reasons: 1) I was so excited about seeing an unopened attraction that I was totally excited about what I saw. The "exclusivity" bias, you might call it. I think this crops up with a lot of early reviews of attractions. 2) I can't imagine a CM doing something like this nowadays. I don't know if management would've approved of what the CM did for me back then, but with all the fan sites and discussion boards today, I'm sure management would have a fit if a CM did something like this for a random family of guests.
