Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I think details are important, but great attractions always have great details." But what about the spaces and features inside the park that aren't necessarily attractions? You know, like the landscaping, pavement, street furniture, light fixtures, architecture, etc? External elements are just as important and integral to the Disney theme park experience as the details inside the rides. Given the elaborate detail of the Cadillac Range it seems almost ridiculous that they wouldn't at least adorn the backsides that are viewable from inside the park.
Originally Posted By CuriouserConstance Hans, you better wait to see what they decide to do with it, I wouldn't want you embarrassing yourself like you did back with the park benches in paradise pier.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 It seems almost ludicrous that Disney would spend all that money and effort creating such a detailed area as Carsland and NOT make sure that it was detailed properly from all sides that are visible within the theme park. I can understand not wanting to worry about what is visible outside the berm, but if it can be viewed from within the park, then it should be properly themed to blend-in. I'm hopeful that Disney knows this and will make sure it blends in well. But I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<I can understand not wanting to worry about what is visible outside the berm>> One thing about this though - I'm surprised that Disney doesn't want to treat this as a "weenie" visible from outside the park - like Matterhorn or Space Mountain. One of the cool things about this mountains is that you see them as you approach the Resort - and it gets you excited to visit. Carsland could be something similar if properly themed on all sides.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <However, its not the details that make the attraction great, its the basic concept that should be great to start with. Add the details as the design is flushed out. Don't let the details get in the way until later.> In a word -- 'bull' Disney Imagineering always used to brag about the beautiful transitions between lands that they develop for their theme parks. So, 50+ years later, when they don't do it -- we're supposed to just roll over and say 'okay, that's fine.'
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Hans, you better wait to see what they decide to do with it, I wouldn't want you embarrassing yourself like you did back with the park benches in paradise pier." LOL... well, like I said earlier, we'll see.
Originally Posted By gadzuux It seems strange to me that people are getting mighty indignant over 'missing' elements on an attraction that isn't even yet half completed. Yes, I know there's a yawning chasm with exposed skeletal steel (right now) and people have jumped to the conclusion that whatever eventually covers that space will somehow be substandard and not up to disney quality. It's not likely that it will be more of the textured rockwork on the front face, but there's all kinds of 'surface treatments' available that might be just fine. We just don't know.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt The last time I checked this was a discussion board. Geez. The conversion is about the possibility of the rock formations stopping abruptly at the backside of the elaborate mountain they are building. It should be obvious that at this point the discussion is 100% pure speculation.
Originally Posted By Manfried Armchair Imagineer wannabes. Gotta love 'em. Always fun to read all the second guessing and holier than thou stuff.
Originally Posted By tashajilek "The last time I checked this was a discussion board. Geez. The conversion is about the possibility of the rock formations stopping abruptly at the backside of the elaborate mountain they are building. It should be obvious that at this point the discussion is 100% pure speculation. " I agree Hans!! I havent seen anyone saying Carsland is going to "suck" if you see a flat wall. People are just wondering "if" the wall will change. Theres no need for anyone being rude when nothing wrong is being said.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt You two only need to defend me when I'm right. Which is pretty much all of the time, of course.
Originally Posted By gadzuux What I was responding to were generalizations about how disney is slipping, the detail oriented nature of attractions isn't what it used to be, imagineering can't measure up to earlier efforts - that kind of thing. I'm not trying to stifle conversation, just remarking that some are being a 'mite previous' as Jed Clampett would say.
Originally Posted By Ohana <<<Yeah. Not much is actually all that visible from most of Paradise Pier. They do need to address the view from the Wharf though.>>> This is COMPLETELY wrong. I was just three this week and took a view from everywhere on the pier just for this purpose. You can see this unfinished wall from all vantage points from the food court, the WOC viewing area, Mermaid, Mulholland Madness, Fun Wheel (ground level), Midway Mania, Screaming, basically anywhere in this 1/4 of the park. People who are diminishing its significance are VERY wrong. There's no amount of trees that will cover this expanse.
Originally Posted By cheesybaby This is totally reminding me of 2001/2002 when people were complaining about the "cheap, Home Depot shed-style" construction of the WWTBAM building before it was even finished.
Originally Posted By avatarmickey115 Oh ya. Thanks...ahahah Well, isn't a hollywood studio supposed to look like a home depot-ish kinda building? Theyre all flat boring buildings shaped like a plain-old cube. So i dont really see the flaw in disney detail here...
