Originally Posted By danyoung >The pure joy of Soarin' is a combination of ride system, visuals and the greatest score ever written for a Disney attraction.< I'm with you on this one, Lee. Without any one of these 3 key elements Soarin' would not be the killer attraction that it is.
Originally Posted By Charliedontsurf Soarin is a fine attraction, a can't miss if you are at EPCOT but way, way overrated with inherent glaring issues--- far from the masterpiece people say it is(as proven by its popularity). The queue royally insults and 80% of the seating has serious flaws. Sorry, but dangling feet distract/detract from the ride experience. Futhermore, what's up with all California footage---- how dumb!!! Being it's in Epcot and more specifically in the Land why not footage of global natural wonders instead.
Originally Posted By Charliedontsurf Most of you East Coasters probably never got a chance to see the walk through 3-D model, props and sets of the Cal Adven. when DL's parking lot was cleared back in '98 and '99. I seem to remember the pictures and drawings of Soarin and they indicated that the ride would be more than just a 2-D film so naturally I was sorely disappointed when I got to ride the first time.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Yes... they really destroyed Disneyland by bringing Pirates east. and Splash and Big Thunder and Peter Pan and Snow White and Haunted Mansion and Autopia and Tea Cups and Jungle Cruise... Yup. No one goes to Disneyland anymore.
Originally Posted By Charliedontsurf I'm on board with ChiMike here. Clearly the popularity/novelty/accolades of Soarin relies on the ride system much more than the score or film(although the score and film are done nicely). If the music and visuals were a notch or two inferior I really believe that Soarin would still rake in the guests. I can safely assume that pretty much no matter what theme/visuals or sound Disney would apply to this new type of ride system and technology guests would still queue up and grab as many fast passes they can get.
Originally Posted By danyoung >Futhermore, what's up with all California footage---- how dumb!!! Being it's in Epcot and more specifically in the Land why not footage of global natural wonders instead.< I'd betcha that 90% of the people who see Soarin' in Epcot don't even flash to the fact that it's California footage. Except for L.A. and San Francisco, most of it could be anywhere. The coastal stuff could be either east or west coast, the southwest stuff could be anywhere from Texas to Arizona. And the 10% of folks who do notice that it's all California probably know that this attraction came from DCA. Better to get the show out east and viewed by millions who never get to California than to wait for a new film before bringing it to Epcot. I don't see anything "dumb" about this at all.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>Yes... they really destroyed Disneyland by bringing Pirates east. and Splash and Big Thunder and Peter Pan and Snow White and Haunted Mansion and Autopia and Tea Cups and Jungle Cruise... Yup. No one goes to Disneyland anymore.<< Come off it. That's an entirely different dynamic. I never said boo about TDL, DLP, or HKDL. AND I said that Soarin' would be good for EPCOT. The biggest negative to me was the showbuilding sightlines at that was about it. I simply pointed out that the move made DCA less worthwhile for the nationwide audience. And in fact your sarcastic reference helped that point. BECAUSE WDW-MK did in fact devalue a trip to DL for the nationwide audience as well. Is that horrible? NO. And neither is EPCOT's Soarin'. But it still is true. It still is an after-effect.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>And the 10% of folks who do notice that it's all California probably know that this attraction came from DCA. Better to get the show out east and viewed by millions who never get to California than to wait for a new film before bringing it to Epcot. I don't see anything "dumb" about this at all.<< And that line of thinking I never disagreed with. I think they were very right in doing this. There was no reason to go to the trouble and expense of a new film before most of WDW's market had seen the original. I never understood why people objected to this.
Originally Posted By Charliedontsurf 1) what does flying over an aircraft carrier, people(surfers, equestrians, golfers and white water navigators) and Disneyland as well as getting caught in F-16's jet wash have to do with "the land" or the natural planet????? The answer: NOTHING, absolutely nothing. 2)All footage is from California and if you are correct about 90% of the masses being too ignorant to know that that doesn't release Disney from their obligation to keep their parks thematically consistent or relevant. Just as we don't want Indaina Jones in Tomorrowland we should not give a free pass to a California motif inside EPCOT or its Land pavilion just because it is viewed as a super headliner. I stick by my assertion: it is dumb.
Originally Posted By danyoung >what does flying over an aircraft carrier, people(surfers, equestrians, golfers and white water navigators) and Disneyland as well as getting caught in F-16's jet wash have to do with "the land" or the natural planet?????< This one simple fact - you are "soaring" over the land. Thematically it works perfectly. Offhand I can't think of another place within WDW, except perhaps the American pavilion, where Soarin' would work better. And I think maybe some people are a bit too restrictive when it comes to themes. What does a gondola ride have to do with Fantasyland? Why is a haunted mansion in Liberty Square? There are others, but you get the point. I really don't think most people are the slightest bit bothered by a stretch of theming. All they (we) care about is getting to see a new cool attraction.
Originally Posted By u k fan I think that a flight over California has probably more to do with "The Land" as food singing about nutrition does. Shouldn't that have been in "Wonders of Life" across the way?!!!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Come off it. That's an entirely different dynamic.>> No it isn't. A good attraction in one park is a good attraction in another park. Orlando is 2,500 miles from Anaheim. For they most part they attract different audiences. Except for hard core Disney freaks like us, very few people visit both parks. Besides... do you REALLY think someone is going to say "Well, I had planned to visit DCA, but now that I've gone on Soarin' at Epcot I don't think I will."?
Originally Posted By Charliedontsurf "ou are "soaring" over the land. Thematically it works perfectly." no, it does not work. The ride was designed for Condor Flats in DCA based on aviation/flying. Flying over California sites and activities. If the point were about the land there would have been few if any people, no F-16s or golf balls as a main focus. And I noticed that you skipped right over my very compelling point about flying over an aircraft carrier and Disneyland's Main Street both of which have nothing to do with natural vegetaion, terrain or physical earth features. It is clear:to save money Disney recycled a western winner and tried to force fit it into a tired area of EPCOT.
Originally Posted By Charliedontsurf "Besides... do you REALLY think someone is going to say "Well, I had planned to visit DCA, but now that I've gone on Soarin' at Epcot I don't think I will."?" Not to be too picky here but I have definitely done this with Universal's Mummy. I wanted to see the ride so badly that I would have flown to Orlando from LA(it's only $195) but since Universal Studios Hollywood had their version I just stayed in my backyard.
Originally Posted By u k fan <<And I noticed that you skipped right over my very compelling point about flying over an aircraft carrier and Disneyland's Main Street both of which have nothing to do with natural vegetaion, terrain or physical earth features.>> So using that theory, if we had "Soerin' Over The World" for example we wouldn't fly over the Pyramids or the Taj Mahal or The Statue of Liberty or any city at all. I get what you're saying, but these places are part of our modern landscape and would therefore be appropriate as would, imho, people. I think it would be a nice idea to have a new film at Epcot, but as long as the footage is well shot and interesting to look at I don't think it matters where you're looking at. I still think it fits the theme fine!!!
Originally Posted By Charliedontsurf I'm not so sure that you get what I'm saying u k fan so I'll try it another way. Condor Flats at DCA is about California aviation/flying. Soarin' Over California is first and foremost about being airborne and while being up there we get to see the splendors of California be it topographical sights(mountains and deserts), outdoor recreation(golfing, surfing, white water rafting, horse riding) or man made things(LA traffic, Disneyland, F-16's). The Land Pavilion at EPCOT however, is about the physical terrain(deserts, mountains, rain forests ect.), weather, and agricultue/soils/dirt--- in short, the natural environment. Again, aircraft carriers, golf balls, jet fighters/helicopters, Sleeping Beauty's Castle do not belong in The Land pavilion. They are grossly misplaced. So looking to bridge the overt differences or reconcile between the two themes of "California flight" (DCA) and "land" (EPCOT) Disney simply drops the "Over California" part from the attraction name and replaces pictures of aviation with pictures of natural settings--- a quick fix! The result: still a fine and fun attraction with a very high popularity but at its core most insulting.
Originally Posted By u k fan I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this. Where you say that The Land is about the natural environment I would be more inclined to say it's about the environment in general and how man affects it. To me recreation, tourism, traffic pollution, agriculture etc. fit perfectly well themewise. Perhaps not as it's represented in Soarin', but overall I think that the examples you give above fit fine!!!
Originally Posted By danyoung Charliedontsurf, I think I'm also hitting the agree to disagree wall. I don't really disagree with many of your points. Yes, the flying theme was what Soaring Over California was originally all about. But why does that have to be the only theme? Can't it be also about the scenic beauty of a detailed and varied part of our country? And I don't know what to say about you finding insult in the placement of WDW's Soarin'. Insult to me is the abomination that's now playing in the Imagination pavilion. Insult is closing down the perfectly viable and entertaining Wonders of Life. Insult is the new Pooh playground in the MK (I threw that one in just for you, vbdad!). For me (and for most people) Soarin' in The Land is an incredible attraction, is most popular, and is in no way an insult to us or anyone within the Disney decision making structure.
Originally Posted By Charliedontsurf u k and dany I respect your "agree to disagree" stance and I appreciate your civility here.
