Horizons: Was it Worth Saving?

[Conure]

I believe it was. Horizons was enjoyable enough for everybody except thrill-ride addicted Universal fans. Again, as I have said again and again, much to the dismay of some people, Disney needs to be accessible to eveyone, of every age, background, and race to be what it is supposed to be. A lot of people didn't care if it was "up - to - date" as long as they enjoyed it. If people care about how scientifically accurate it is, they probably aren't enjoying their "vacation" very much. Disney isn't supposed to be that serious. It's supposed to be fun. And that's exactly what Horizons was.

 

[hopemax]

I think the concept was worth saving: Family style ride which explored the necessity of innovation and possible innovations; "if we can dream it, we can do it."

I don't think the 80's style costumes, color pallette, style of music, and the way the "family" was presented (too Leave it to Beaver-ish) needed saving, which I think were the biggest turn-offs to the ride. But those are pretty minor issues. I also think these were the types of things that made the Imagination redo a good idea, but they didn't need to ditch Figment in the process.

 

[daannzzz]

I agree with Hopemax. I was lucky in that I got to see Horizons ( My first trip was in 96) a few times before it left. I think the concept was great and the exicutions was fine for its time but did look tired and dated. They could have kept the ride system (does everything have to move at the speed of light?) and redone some of the sets and animatronics. I know I would have been happy. It's replacement will most likely be off limits for me as I get motion sick pretty easy.

 

[Planogirl]

Yes, they could have saved it! All it needed was updating and cleaning up IMO.

Disney always lets the rides they lose interest in get really ragged and run-down which in turn seems to drive away more people. Then they justify their neglect by saying that the ride doesn't attract enough people to justify the cost of refurbishing. A bit of cart before the horse philosophy IMO.

To me Epcot is supposed to teach and enlighten and do so in an entertaining way. Horizons could have examined issues that concern us all and toyed with ideas of how best to solve these problems. The potential was staggering. I would have appreciated keeping the concept if for no other reason than to continue to hear the wonderful music but at least they continue to play the Horizons theme at the entrance to Epcot.

The Horizons building was attractive too IMO and I find it ironic that the tin can continues to survive while the far more attractive structure next door becomes rubble. A sinkhole? Yep and I have some property in Florida I'd like to sell ya...

 

[Eeyore2U]

I think the concept was worth saving: Family style ride which explored the necessity of innovation and possible innovations; "if we can dream it, we can do it."

I love when you got to pick the ending. They did a rehab that really was not successful before it was closed. Maybe Mission Space is an updated version?

 

[Bob O]

No it wasnt worth savingin the least!!!!! Disney has more than enough family rides as it is!!! It was ok when new but as time went by it was almost always a walk on when i was their and unlike some rides that age well, it just became more boring. Test Track is a good replacement, it is a family ride itself and not a thrill ride.

 

[Planogirl]

I know of people who are terrified of Test Track. I hardly think that anyone was scared of Horizons.

By the way, Test Track replaced It's Fun to be Free not Horizons. So far, nothing has replaced Horizons but it appears that the replacement will be a thrill ride.

 

[Uncleromulus]

Didn't Test Track replace the World of Motion?? Which by the way was another attraction I'll miss.
And I do miss Horizons!!!

 

[smjj]

I prefer both Horizions and World of Motion to the thrill rides they are putting in. You can get those at any amusement park. That was what put Disney Epcot on my favorites list. Oh well, I at least have them on tape to watch. Test track is wait forever, get on ride and get off 3 minutes later. I can get that at King's Island!!!!

 

[WDWHound]

I loved Horizons, but I recognized that it was no longer popular. Also, the building had serious structural problems. There was no way Disney could keep this ride.

My problem is that it was the last of its kind. WDW used to have the House of Future Living at the end of Space Mountain, then they had Horizons. Now there is no ride or attraction that speculates how we will live in the future. Yes, there is the walk through in Innoventions, but that is about new technology available today, not how we might live in 20 or 30 years. Disney's visions of how we would live in the future was one of my favorite things about Disney world and its sad that they no long do this.

In a way, I understand why Disney has moved away from this. As a society, we no longer look forward with excitement to the changes progress will bring to our lives. At one time, we considered progress to be good and didn't really investigate the environmental and social costs. Now it seems the pendulum has swung the other way. We have lost the excitement and become fixated on the costs. Think about it. When was the last time you saw an article or saw a TV special on what it will be like to live in the future. Yes, the are some, but nothing like the number we saw in the fifties, sixties and seventies. There are lots of specials on dealing with the problems caused by technology however .

Don't get me wrong, I am glad that we have become aware of the problems we are causing on this planet and I believe we should do our best to address these problems. I am just sorry that this new awareness seem to have been at the cost of our excitement towards the future. We have lost our innocence. Until we can strike a balance between futurism and concern for its effects, I feel we will not see another attraction like Horizons.

 

[OnWithTheShow]

Doesn't Spaceship Earth talk about how we will live and communicate in the Future, and what about innoventions? As for Horizons, I also agree that it was not worth saving. Even Walt himself realized that attractions would need to be replaced as time went by.

 

[Another Voice]

‘Horizons’ was important to save because it was the clearest reflection of the message of park – there are choices we can make that will affect the future. The goal of the original EPCOT Center was to show what’s just around the corner. But the world got to that corner and the place became Epcot, and all about fattening wallets in the here and now.

The intent was to continually update ‘Horizons’. But that costs money. And it didn’t help either when Disney went out and bought a network that competes directly against the one owned by the pavilion’s sponsor. In the end though, the pavilion fell victim to the desire to sell easy tickets. It’s much easier to sell motion-induced nausea than it is to appeal to the imagination.

And speaking of ‘Test Track’, I’m going to pull a pirate. Frankly, the process of testing autos is the subject for a twenty minute industrial film you have to watch in the sixth grade (the day when the teacher forgot to bring the lesson plan and has to fill up the time). And zipping around in a fake car at the impressive speed of fifty-five mile per hour is what most adults call “the morning commute”. Granted that ‘World of Motion’ was little more than an ode to the internal combustion engine, but it wasn’t as bad as ‘Test Track’. Worse still is that Test Track has yet to explain why, with all this impressive mega technology and engineering magic – why hitting a pole at 5 mph cause $750 in damage to a car!!

 

[Bob O]

I was wrong, Test Track did repalce world of motion, but the line for Horizons was non-extistent and the ride was its life course and shuold have been replaced. And i disagree with the notion that test Track is a thrill ride at all. It does show the process that auto's go thru but the speeds it travels are slower that most people drive while on the expressway enroute to disney if you drive or come from the airport. To me TT is a family attraction and not a thrill attraction at all!!

 

[OnWithTheShow]

65mph

 

[Werner Weiss]

World of Motion was a flawed attraction. It had some really clever, entertaining scenes -- but it also had a bunch of filler ("speed tunnel" movies) and an ending that in no way matched the tone of the rest of the rest of the attraction. (How did that glowing, abstract city of the future relate to the humorous minor transportation mishaps and other funny scenes that made up the majority of the ride?). The "Transcenter" after the ride had some clever work -- "Water Engine" and "Bird & Robot" were both very well done -- but the "Transcenter" did not carry forward the tone and theme of the ride. As a result, the World of Motion was disjointed and ultimately failed to create an immersive experience or tell a compelling story. Although it was a big ride with lots of AA figures, it just didn't attract repeat visits the way that "Pirates of the Caribbean" does.

My school-age daughters loved Horizons. It appealed to their sense of imagination. It let them think about what their future might be like. But Horizons, too, was flawed. Okay, I know it was supposed to have three distinct parts -- (1) the future as visualized in the past; (2) impressive Imax Dome movies; (3) essentially, the Carousel of Progress family in the future living in the desert, underwater, and in space. It must have seemed like a good idea when it was designed, but it hurt the attraction's ability to tell an engaging story.

Unfortunately, Future World opened with a lot of attractions that were disjointed. Some have been improved; other have not. "The Universe of Engery" and "Living with the Land" (formerly "Listen to the Land" were redone in the 1990s to make them more cohesive experiences. Let's not talk about Imagination. And who knows what will happen to the Living Seas?

The World of Motion and Horizons could have been redone by a new generation of Imagineers to bring them up to their true potential. But I can also see where the folks who make the financial decisions did not want to invest new money in attractions that were "losers" in terms of attendence. It's a shame, but Test Track and Horizons were probably the right decisions from a business perspective. Of course, as a park guest I would have liked to have seen World of Motion and Horizons updated, and Test Track and Space built as additional attractions.

 

[smjj]

When it is not broken down(quite often) Test track just reminds me of one big commerical. Its way too short for the line and preshow you have to go thru. If this is the way Epcot and the rest of the parks is headed(M. Eisner) then I can save a lot of money and stay close to home and go to Kings Island or Kentucky Kingdom....smjj

 

[Lesley]

Test Track is definitely not a family ride.....

How many of us here have had to sit and wait what seems like forever while doing a child-swap at TT? I've done it multiple times. Its an enjoyable ride...but not one the whole family can enjoy. But really there aren't that many family rides at WDW outside of the MK...just more than are at your average Six Flags.

Horizons appealed to a sense of wonder and optimism about the future...there was story going on there of some of the best kind...the kind where your imagination is challenged to consider the possibilities. If updated it could have continued to inspire generations to come. Now we'll get yet another ride that will require a lengthy break in a child swap waiting area for many families, and will most likely not kindle that same sense of "possibility".

You know, it takes a whole lot more talent to create a great family ride than to create a ride that has a more limited audience...there was a day when the time and effort were taken. None of the recent family rides has been what I could call "great" (all are enjoyable...but there are no WOW experiences). It seems that creativity has been traded for loud noises, scary stuff, and lots of motion. There are many newer experiences at WDW that, with some creativity, could have really been truly family attractions. Does ITTBAB really have to be so scary and loud to be enjoyable? Actually, I think if it weren't so darned loud it wouldn't be nearly as scary to little ones.

Don't get me wrong...a few thrill rides aren't a bad thing...but when the focus of all the creative elements in ride design is on thrill it will eventually change the feel of the parks entirely.

Of course I'm probably the only person who will dare speak up for the under 5 (or more timid older children) crowd and their parents...most people seem to like to pretend that tiny people don't exist, or deserve barely the same respect as the family pet. (Sorry...that's my child advocacy side popping out!) Hmmm...what was it Walt wanted for his parks? A place where parents and children could have fun together? I don't think that statement was qualified with "over 40" tall"

Oh, what was the subject? Oh, yeah....Horizons. We miss that one a lot...my kids never got to see it.

 

[Bob O]

Lesley-My 4yrold daughter rode TT so the height limit isnt all that outlandish and what good would ITTBAB if you take out thre lemenets that make it a enjoyable show!!
I also see little proof that it takes more talent to create a great family ride as compared to a great thrill type ride. All great rides take creativity be they family or thrill orientated!! And i think more people on this board are catering to the family/child type ride than thrill rides which are in abundance at wdw. I would love a section of one of their parks to have as many thrill rides as disney has in fanasty land or toontown. Disney has catered to family rides which im not against but has done little for people who want something more exciting and a park can be all things to all people if it cares too.

 

[Planogirl]

Uncleremus, It's Fun to be Free was the name of the ride portion of World of Motion. There was also an area that displayed cars and info about cars which most people zipped by just like they do today.

 

[Lesley]

What I mean is that it is definitely harder to make something wonderful within certain parameters than to go..."oh, let's do this" with no regard to who it excludes...its harder, takes more creativity, to make an attraction that will appeal to everyone than it does to make one that only needs to appeal to a more limited audience. It certainly would take more creativity to make something like ITTBAB a show something everyone could enjoy...creativity to rework the Hopper part a bit...then this would be a fairly suitable show for everyone (okay, and maybe a strong suggestion that small children sit in an adults' lap) Does noise and being tossed about violently really make the story of most attractions better? The experience?

And its not just small children who are excluded from many things...its also people with certain disabilities, pregnancy, etc...

Family rides in Toontown? Um, there are none....only Barnstormer which is a coaster and has restrictions. MK does have most of the excellent family rides though...like POC, HM, JC, PPF...all which manage to be worthy of many repeat visits w/o being extreme. Admittedly my 7yo will not go near the HM....but he's never even tried it to know that its more funny than scary. MK is very family oriented...the other parks are much less so (jury is still out on AK...for now its fairly family friendly...but there's not much to go by, is there?)

My main complaint is that Disney has not put any real effort into making truly family attractions for a long time....all their best efforts have been in the area of "thrill". Families get spinners. Sure, my 2yo enjoys them, but they bore the rest of us pretty quickly.