Soarin' over EPCOT

[joats]

I'm all for a version of Soarin but will be extremely disappointed if they get rid of Food Rocks to do it!

 

[wtg2000]

DCA has Soarin' Over California because the park is about that state. However, EPCOT is not about Florida so Soarin' Over Florida wouldn't be exciting.

I'd like to see a diverse concept that incorporates the best the world has to offer.

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"Land is such an illogical place to put it."***

When this is what I said:

***"I just don't think The Land is such an illogical place to put
it. "***

Typical for this board. Rumor of a great ride addition - "Soarin' over Whatever" and already it is a cheap rip off clone. Unbelievable.

As for what I would like to see from it,and the land would be a perfect fit: More then one film. The ride can only last so long and there is soooo much to see in this world it can't possibly fit in just one film. Make 3,4,5,however many, films focusing on different areas of the world/country. It would be like ToT4, different ride each time so to speak.More bang for the buck.

 

[wdwguide]

It sounds like it's "that time of the year" where various teams are trying to get attractions approved for the new fiscal year. WDWMagic.com now talks about additions to the Animal Kingdom and Magic Kingdom as well.

What's interesting... if you want to celebrate Disneyland's anniversary, why not build a new attraction there (DCA doesn't count)? I don't keep up with what's happening over there, but isn't the only big thing over there the Space Mountain remake?

 

[eeyore0062]

I think that a Soarin' ride would be a great addition to The Land, however not to the elimination of the Living with the Land boat ride, which I find to be very informative and educational. Obviously, others do, as well, as there is always a line for it, and it merits a FP.

I would not, however like to see a "Soarin' Over CA" attraction, as that had absolutely nothing to do with Florida. If they are going to the trouble to place this particular type attraction, they need to make it relavent to the place in which they are putting it, regardless of which park, or which pavillion.

 

[PJesse25]

Now, when I began reading this thread, the thought never even occured to me that they would use the same film as in DCA (which is fabulous, by the way). It would make no sense to do so in the Land/Epcot setting. I just can't believe they would sacrifice Show for the sake of Budget to that extent.

I'm sure they will come up with a new film if this does come to pass. I would love it, though, if they could find a way to create this ride without getting rid of Food Rocks. I think it is so cute!

 

[Another Voice]

"and the land would be a perfect fit: More then one film. The ride can only last so long and there is soooo much to see in this world it can't possibly fit in just one film. Make 3,4,5,however many, films focusing on different areas of the world/country. "

Yes - that's how they keep 'Star Tours' so fresh and exciting isn't it. All the different places they go, all the different stories they tell, keeping the attraction up to date with the movies...Disney does a first rate job there, don't they?

 

[DC7800]

It sounds like it's "that time of the year" where various teams are trying to get attractions approved for the new fiscal year. WDWMagic.com now talks about additions to the Animal Kingdom and Magic Kingdom as well.

If you read MiceAge, this was in Al Lutz's latest column ( http://www.miceage.com/allutz/al072403a.htm ) from July 24th:

I previously told you here about the plans to add a Soarin' Over California attraction to Epcot's The Land pavilion. That new Epcot attraction is planned to be built during fiscal year '04 and opened to the public during fiscal year '05. In fact, it is planned to open in the spring of 2005 and be marketed to East Coast audiences as a "gift from Disneyland" in honor of the 50th Anniversary.

The problem here though lies in the fact that TDA's sudden plans to budget and build a major new attraction would also need to be built in fiscal year '04 and opened to the public during fiscal year '05. Word quickly came down from Burbank that only one of those two attractions would be able to receive funding, and a mad scramble was on between the executives of Walt Disney World and the executives of Disneyland to see who could get their new E Ticket attraction approved first. And right now it looks as though the more organized Florida executives will win that battle. And that leaves Tomorrowland as a world in decline.

If things do really work out this way, what Disneyland may miss out on is Buzz Lightyear's Space Ranger Spin. From what I gather, it's Food Rocks that will be removed - I assume Living with the Land is safe (???). While I often regret the removal of existing attractions, I can't really say I'll miss Food Rocks. If Kitchen Kabaret were still in that space it might be different, but with Soarin' we actually have an example of where the replacement attraction will be superior to what it's replacing (I'm thinking of JIYI when I say that).

The only real downside I see to this proposed attraction (assuming it gets final approval and then actually starts construction) is that it is a valuable addition to The Land, which remains popular already while, next door, The Living Seas practically begs for attention.

 

[wdwguide]

I don't read Miceage, mostly because I do not like Al Lutz's style of writing, and he is more often wrong than right - especially when it comes to WDW. Sites like WDWMagic have a much better track record.

 

[manning]

Too bad it can't be Soarin over the world. It would fit in with World show case.

 

[Grog]

but isn't the only big thing over there the Space Mountain remake?

The big thing right now is ToT...due to open sometime around Spring 2004.

 

[KNWVIKING]

*** "Yes - that's how they keep 'Star Tours' so fresh and exciting isn't it. All the different places they go, all the different stories they tell, keeping the attraction up to date with the movies...Disney does a first rate job there, don't they?"***

Yeah, nothing like snide,sarcastic comments by a bitter employee about an unrelated topic. Really adds to a discussion.

 

[mrtoadslastride]

Originally posted by KNWVIKING
Yeah, nothing like snide,sarcastic comments by a bitter employee about an unrelated topic. Really adds to a discussion.

I think AV's point is valid. Look at all of the movie based attractions in WDW. Has any of them ever been updated? China and Mexico after 20 years are the only two that I can think of. Based on their track record can we expect them to make a new film for Soarin?

 

[d-r]

In Epcot, Honey I Shrunk the Audience replaced Capt. Io. The circle of life movie in the land is newer. Ellen's Energy Adventure is new film, It isn't all film based but a large chunk is.

I haven't seen the movie in Mexico, before or after it was updated.

They could use a new movie in the living seas. I think it would be so great if each of the ships in star tours had a different film and different motion sequence.

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"I think AV's point is valid. Look at all of the movie based attractions in WDW. Has any of them ever been updated?" ***

Those points are very valid- although I would prefer them without the sarcasm- if we were discussing the state of current Epcot attractions.

But we are discussing the possiblity of a "Soarin" attraction at The Land. I posted my opinion of what I would LIKE to see the ride become.

 

[mrtoadslastride]

I think Disney has missed a great opportunity with movie based rides. All they hae to do make a new movie and they instantly have a new attraction! Not only that, but they could bring back the old versions of the rides for nostalgic types like me!

 

[mrtoadslastride]

Originally posted by KNWVIKING
***"I think AV's point is valid. Look at all of the movie based attractions in WDW. Has any of them ever been updated?" ***

Those points are very valid- although I would prefer them without the sarcasm- if we were discussing the state of current Epcot attractions.

But we are discussing the possiblity of a "Soarin" attraction at The Land. I posted my opinion of what I would LIKE to see the ride become.

I can understand that, but maybe calling him a "bitter employee" isn't the best way to get him to see that.

 

[Another Voice]

It took a lot of hard work and years to earn both the "ex-" and the "bitter", but in the end I decided to work for quality and for what thought was right rather than to lower my standards. Being called names is a very small price for that.

I see things differently from most on these boards. I don't look at Disney's parks as simply my vacation destination and about all the magic I'm going to buy. I look at Disney from the other side of the curtain – and I know how extreme diffiucult it is to create that magic and make people want to buy it. My comments about the company are not based on "I like this, I don't like that" vein, but from the "is this the best way Disney can continue" direction.

The fan base seems to have convinced itself that opening up unfinished parks and "letting them grow" is both historical and a good thing. It's not. The real history and philophy behind Disney is very different and the attendance figures on the smaller park demonstrate without question the public's attitude.

The fans seem to believe that a trip to WDW should be an experience in shared sacrifice. That Disney has a right (if not responsibility) to cut what they wish, whenever they wish and we should be happy "just to be there in the magic". Again, the attendance figures show the public wants value for their money. They are not as "magic" driven as the average poster and will not accept further declines.

So now the fans are trying to convince themselves that opening shoe-horned, unfinished, "we'll make it good later" attractions is an acceptable thing. Their also trying to tell themselve the public will accept "something instead of nothing".

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The public wants Disney to lead. They want them to produce amazing experiences unavailable anywhere else. They want Disney to provide a coherent resort where both the attractions and the parks tell a complete story.

They do not want Disney to provide the "where does this fit" experience of cheaper parks or to treat WDW like it was nothing but a big 'Rollercoaster Tycoon' scenario. The public wants "WOW!!!!", not a lecture on investment-to-return ratios.

Thinking, imagination, talent and skill are the four core elements of the Disney Brand. The more Disney actually uses those four essentials, the more the public will flock to the resort. The more Disney falls short (or fails to even try) to achieve each of marks then the entire Disney experience slides into a marginal hobby for a shrinking collection of "fans".

 

[OnWithTheShow]

You said it AV!!

 

[KNWVIKING]

I would like to apologize for the "bitter employee" comment. It was uncalled for. I do not know you well enough to make a statement like that.

I get frustrated on this board. When DW and I were at DCA, it was easy for us to see that DCA needed a lot of help. But one of the rides we truely enjoyed and hoped WDW would someday get was Soarin'. Now rumor has it we might just get our wish. We all also seem to agree that Epcot needs help. M:E soon to be open, Spain possibly coming and now Soarin' are all signs of hope for this park. AV, do you find anything positive in this ? Are you truely convinced that Soarin' will be a cheap clone based on past history or are you taking this negative position because that is what certain posters always do on his board ?

I don't think anyone who posts here knows what Soarin' will end up being. Conceptually and mechanically it's a great ride. If Disney goes ahead and spends the money to make this ride, I can't believe they would be dumb enough to just use the Ca. film. At this point, until more facts are availible, I'm willing to give them the benifit of the doubt.