Original Submarine Voyage's Satellite Sub?

[filmfreak11]

So this youtube video has a "satellite sub crossing bow" from 1:48-1:56. I don't recall this element of the original attraction. Was this taken out and never returned?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDolfiZ4e-s

NOTE: Just keep to the topic which means nothing about FNSV.

[k_peek_2000]

The sub voyage was amazing when it was built, im sure they removed alot of the origional stuff over time. Notice how everything worked when it was built? haha.

[Nautilus]

This was one of the earliest changes to happen to the Submarine Voyage. The "mother-ship" and "Satellite Sub" were removed in 1961 from the Graveyard of Lost ships. The reason for it's removal is unknown.

[filmfreak11]

^ Ah, thank you. Maybe MCer SeaWolf would have an answer?

[Outlander]

Did they change the recording over time? That is a different voice over then I've ever heard. Was it just for the broadcast? And I know this is probably obvious,but those real fish were just edited into the footage, right?

[PA*]

Wow, that was so much better than Nemo! Thanks!

[aznshrek88]

Did they actually have REAL fish in the original ride? Cuz I don't think that's possible.

[Eric5675]

No, no real fish

[Disneytwins]

Originally Posted by aznshrek88

Did they actually have REAL fish in the original ride? Cuz I don't think that's possible.

Real fish can't live in heavily chlorinated water.

[Walt Jr.]

That old attraction is far more interesting to look at then Nemo will ever be. With the 21st century technology, they could have made the existing story with a few nemo twists be such a delight. Course they don't have the imagination to think of things like that so....

[Ghostbuster626]

Originally Posted by Walt Jr.

That old attraction is far more interesting to look at then Nemo will ever be. With the 21st century technology, they could have made the existing story with a few nemo twists be such a delight. Course they don't have the imagination to think of things like that so....

It's because of this reason I dont put much faith into either Tony Baxter or John Lasseter. They both claim to be huge fans who understand the parks yet Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage is so neutered and barren compared to the classic version. Theres very little in the way of show pieces and the projetions look really lame.

[Walt Jr.]

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster626

It's because of this reason I dont put much faith into either Tony Baxter or John Lasseter. They both claim to be huge fans who understand the parks yet Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage is so neutered and barren compared to the classic version. Theres very little in the way of show pieces and the projetions look really lame.

I really don't either. They can do good work on movie rides, like the Castle. But when they touch an original story, its a disaster.

POTC: Why won't the mayor tell where Jack Sparrow is if he is stealing the town's treasure?

FNSV: Nemo's lost again? A 17 minute ride through the same movie and virtually little interesting sets. Can you get any more redundant? Plus, the entire original sea serpent set is still there and nothing is going on, couldn't they just bring him back for old time's sake, its better then looking at nothing.

IASW: Sure, corporate characters really have all to do with Children at peace in the world.

[karen_c]

I thought that the script for the Nemo Subs was pre-Disney's acquisition of Pixar. I kinda remember readin' something about how Pixar animators were so disturbed by the dialogue their characters were spouting in the early stages of the redo's development.

This would mean that it was WDI creating the whole "Nemo's lost again" theme.

And someone correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't PotC modifications pre-Lasseter WDI?

- kc

[techskip]

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster626

It's because of this reason I dont put much faith into either Tony Baxter or John Lasseter. They both claim to be huge fans who understand the parks yet Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage is so neutered and barren compared to the classic version. Theres very little in the way of show pieces and the projections look really lame.

I don't think it would be fair to blame any one individual for the perceived failure. While the individual talent of various members of WDI could be called into question, as a collective group they are considered among the most talented people in Disney. What likely contributed to the "failure" is the insistance by Corporate that the attraction be firmly tied to Nemo. The reopening cost a great deal of money, so in order to open the subs the "Nemo Compromise" as likely made. WDI agrees to tie it into Nemo and Corporate green lights it and provides the funds necessary to reopen it. So from a creative standpoint, the "theme" was likely decided before the check was even signed.

What can be called into question is the creative execution of this theme. But even that execution was likely very closely watched by Corporate. In the end Corporate claims victory because they have an attraction that advertises a successful franchise, possibly boosting already decent sales. WDI claims victory because they developed new technological effects, and reopened a beloved classic albeit with major modifications. The public cheers at the sight of the new subs, and everyone appears happy.

The sad reality is that so much more could have been done with the theme and THAT is the sticking point I call in to question. Nemo was a requirement, but the rest of the canvas including the storyline, was a clean slate. I can not claim it with 100% certintiy but I am fairly confident that WDI chose the "lazy" path of simply rehashing the movie, not Corporate. It can be argued that Corporate controlled the budget and this "lazy" option was both time and cost savings.That to me is troublesome because this would have been a perfect exercise of creative thinking... of thinking outside the box and modifying a square peg so it's round and fits seamlessly into a hole it would otherwise be unable to occupy. They relied heavily on special effects instead of classic Disney storytelling. While the model is almost exactly the same as those dark rides of 50 years ago, the storytelling is a far cry from the amazingly detailed stories one encountered back then.

There are multiple concepts that have been pitched on this board ranging from minor modifications to complete blue sky. While it would be impossible to incorporate everything, some of those ideas would likely have been both a great enhancement and cost effective. I'd welcome anyone to do a search and read what is on here, then compare it to what we were given. Personally I see the concepts as being a great deal better then either Disney's Nemo concept, or WDI's finished product.

[Goofy-Fan]

NOTE: Just keep to the topic which means nothing about FNSV.[/quote]

Originally Posted by Walt Jr.

That old attraction is far more interesting to look at then Nemo will ever be. With the 21st century technology, they could have made the existing story with a few nemo twists be such a delight. Course they don't have the imagination to think of things like that so....