People mover not coming back, Subs staying?

[Bronco21]

... If Tony says it can't be done, I believe that it won't happen. Could it be possible? Maybe, but I'm sure the hundreds of millions of dollars it would take would not be worth it. They already spent hundreds of millions to bring back the subs... And every bags on how awful it is compared to the original. If a company is going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars, they want a substantial increase to make up for it. Keep moving forward applies very nicely to this situation. People mover still exists in WDW and not having it here is not the end of the world.

[chesirecat]

He said he would love to bring the CBJ back and thinks they would look great in DCA around Grizzly.

CBJ was a classic ride that was neglected and allowed to fail. They had two theaters, but at the end they only ran one, thus doubling the wait time. They did do a vacation show and a Christmas Show, but they could have done a lot more with different shows, perhaps even offer two different shows at the same time.

For me, CBJ will always be in Bear Country, the land that took its name from this show. Putting CBJ in DCA would be like serving filet mignon at the Village Haus, the surroundings are nearly as nice in DCA. You've got a hotel and cheap rides everywhere, seeing CBJ there would be so depressing.

---------- Post added 08-07-2012 at 07:54 AM ----------

... If Tony says it can't be done, I believe that it won't happen. Could it be possible? Maybe, but I'm sure the hundreds of millions of dollars it would take would not be worth it. They already spent hundreds of millions to bring back the subs... And every bags on how awful it is compared to the original. If a company is going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars, they want a substantial increase to make up for it. Keep moving forward applies very nicely to this situation. People mover still exists in WDW and not having it here is not the end of the world.

1. The Subs refurb did not cost hundreds of millions, but about $70 million.

2. I think a lot of hardcore APers here don't really care for the Finding Nemo film, and they were already anti-Buzz Lightyear and Anti-Pixar before the Nemo Subs were put in. I know both rides quite well, and the older subs ride had a lot of aging "animatronics", such as gigantic clam shells with pearls that opened and closed only because air bubbles were being pumped into the shell (still there as an homage, but look very dated), and a very fake looking sea dragon.

It was a hodge-podge of stuff you'd might find in underseas sci-fi and stories. Supposedly about the wonders of a nuclear sub and exploration turned into a voyage where you'd have mermaids and a wacked out looking sea serpent.

Nemo seems more vibrant and alive as there is a clear story instead of a bumbling adventure. You've got characters you know, and some much better effects (when they are working properly), than the old subs ever had.

The subs are sort of part of Fantasyland now, fitting as the subs in MK in WDW were in Fantasyland before they were removed.

[Bronco21]

1. The Subs refurb did not cost hundreds of millions, but about $70 million.

2. I think a lot of hardcore APers here don't really care for the Finding Nemo film, and they were already anti-Buzz Lightyear and Anti-Pixar before the Nemo Subs were put in. I know both rides quite well, and the older subs ride had a lot of aging "animatronics", such as gigantic clam shells with pearls that opened and closed only because air bubbles were being pumped into the shell (still there as an homage, but look very dated), and a very fake looking sea dragon.

It was a hodge-podge of stuff you'd might find in underseas sci-fi and stories. Supposedly about the wonders of a nuclear sub and exploration turned into a voyage where you'd have mermaids and a wacked out looking sea serpent.

Nemo seems more vibrant and alive as there is a clear story instead of a bumbling adventure. You've got characters you know, and some much better effects (when they are working properly), than the old subs ever had.

The subs are sort of part of Fantasyland now, fitting as the subs in MK in WDW were in Fantasyland before they were removed.

My point is that Disney spent a substantial amount of money to bring back an old attraction (that required less work and less ADA and OSHA compliance changes) and it is not the home run e-ticket experience they were shooting for. You really think Disney would drop even more money to bring back a ride that they know would not be a huge e-ticket draw from the get go? If it doesn't make sense financially they aren't going to do it even if it might somehow be possible.

Some aspects of the subs I agree with you on, the sea serpent was silly (but the 3 times I rode it I was under 5 so I liked it), the animatronics were lame (I remember the mermaids were stupid looking), and the story was all over the place (but so is the story on most of the classic Disneyland rides). However, Nemo is about reliving the movie (but not in an especially interesting or entertaining way), whereas the original was about experiencing an underwater voyage filled with suprises, adventures, ect. The original had a completely different feel to it. It was not about watching a movie. It was about going on a real journey of discovery.

[explodingboy]

Above anything, the constant "Bring back the Peoplemover" argument makes me not want it more than back more than anything.

[Krack]

Above anything, the constant "Bring back the Peoplemover" argument makes me not want it more than back more than anything.

There's no virtue in being a contrarian solely for the sake of being a contrarian.

[explodingboy]

There's no virtue in being a contrarian solely for the sake of being a contrarian.

Not being a contrarian for the sake of being one, trust me. We need something new. Something fresh. I don't think the Peoplemover is the answer.

[Krack]

Not being a contrarian for the sake of being one, trust me. We need something new. Something fresh. I don't think the Peoplemover is the answer.

All I did was read your post. You said the fact that other people constantly say they want the Peoplemover back was the main reason you didn't want it back. That's being a contrarian.

"Because other people really want something, that's the primary reason I don't want it." = contrarian

[bkroz]

^^ I can agree with that in part. Tomorrowland, as we know, needs to be completely re-imagined. Like, totally. Be it in WDW's white-and-chrome intergalactic space port (Buzz Lightyear, a wall*e dark ride, Cosmic Ray's Starlight Cafe), as a vibrant comic-book Sci-Fi City (which would be advisable since Star Tours will continue to be the staple of the land, perhaps adding in Marvel heroes, Alien Encounter, and a wall*e dark ride) or even as a full, true, organic overlay of Discoveryland (Journey to the Center of the Earth, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea - even in Tokyo's dark ride form - gardens, fountains, copper and seafoam towers, etc).

I think the idea is that hopefully, in any one of those scenarios, something would occur on the Peoplemover track. Not as a signature, staple attraction, but as a necessary compliment to the area's aesthetic and capacity.

One needs only travel to Hong Kong (or even Paris) to see how very odd Tomorrowland looks when it's a "one story" (story as in, floors in a building) kind of place. Even though nothing's happening on the Peoplemover tracks, they add very important depth and immersion to the area. Ideally, there would be activity overhead with multi-tiered pathways, monorails sailing by, Peoplemover whizzing into buildings, activity on upper levels, elevated pathways... The Peoplemover, in that way, is not unlike the Columbia or the Explorer Canoes - as much place-making as attraction. It adds vibrancy and dimension as much as throughput and enjoyment.

In other words, the Peoplemover is not the answer, but it's an important element of Tomorrowland that's missing. The idea being that the land clearly needs a full, new overlay of some sort, and that the Peoplemover ought to be factored into whatever that is.

[explodingboy]

All I did was read your post. You said the fact that other people constantly say they want the Peoplemover back was the main reason you didn't want it back. That's being a contrarian.

"Because other people really want something, that's the primary reason I don't want it." = contrarian

If you read my other posts on this subject, you would understand my point and stance, and you would know that I wasn't being a contrarian just for the sake of it. Just a little tired of the "bring it back" talk. It makes me want it back even less, because it's a tired topic. We need to push forward, being that it is Tomorrowland.

[chesirecat]

Some aspects of the subs I agree with you on, the sea serpent was silly (but the 3 times I rode it I was under 5 so I liked it), the animatronics were lame (I remember the mermaids were stupid looking), and the story was all over the place (but so is the story on most of the classic Disneyland rides). However, Nemo is about reliving the movie (but not in an especially interesting or entertaining way), whereas the original was about experiencing an underwater voyage filled with suprises, adventures, ect. The original had a completely different feel to it. It was not about watching a movie. It was about going on a real journey of discovery.

Everybody has a different opinion on the subs. I'm sure that 5 year old kids today love Nemo as much as five year old kids yesterday loved the old subs. I liked the old subs, you could plant your face in the porthole and imagine what it would be like under the ocean . . . but this did take imagination. You also need imagination to enjoy the new Nemo Subs, something adults have lost and blame it on the old subs not being there. As an adult, the old Subs ride wasn't that great as you knew instantly how it was done.

Little 5 year old kids are fascinated by the Nemo subs as the projection technology is pretty well done, as if Nemo is swimming around.

As an adult, I don't have a burning desire to see the Old Subs over Nemo as both rides are obviously "fake". I think Nemo is better as the project tech allows characters to appear to be moving quickly under water, not so with the old sub ride. I think that most non-APers adults like Nemo as it entertains, and their kids love it.

---------- Post added 08-07-2012 at 05:00 PM ----------

One needs only travel to Hong Kong (or even Paris) to see how very odd Tomorrowland looks when it's a "one story" (story as in, floors in a building) kind of place. Even though nothing's happening on the Peoplemover tracks, they add very important depth and immersion to the area. Ideally, there would be activity overhead with multi-tiered pathways, monorails sailing by, Peoplemover whizzing into buildings, activity on upper levels, elevated pathways... The Peoplemover, in that way, is not unlike the Columbia or the Explorer Canoes - as much place-making as attraction. It adds vibrancy and dimension as much as throughput and enjoyment.

I agree.

The People Mover track was for decades an important aesthetic element of Tomorrowland. The People Mover in WDW is one of my favorite rides, and it gives the land great visual appeal, a sense of bustling activity that is part of a lot of people's vision of the future.

Future World in Epcot also uses the monorail quite effectively to add to the visual space and to tell the story of a utopian tomorrow.

Even if they had to add rails to the People Mover track, they could make them transparent with LED lights inside of them, and the People Mover would once again add to the visual storytelling.

The fix for People Mover would be two times Nemo, yet would be worth it as the ride was fast loading, IMHO. They won't do it, IMHO, because it would require a lot of Tomorrowland to be torn up, perhaps temporarily shuttering Star Tours and/or Buzz, or even Space Mountain, if they have to replace track. Expensive, but any construction project like this is doable.

They also can't take down the People Mover track as it adds much needed futuristic theming to Tomorrowland.

Of course, they very well might add a faster ride, but not as fast as the rocket rods, but removing the outside portions of the People Mover track and just using a track which zooms around the outside of the buildings, thus fixing a lot of the OSHA problems, while repurposing the old People Mover platform.

[Krack]

The Peoplemover adds kinetic energy. Clearly the land that should have the most kinetic energy going on is Tommorowland - it used to - now it barely has any. The dual mistakes of (1) changing the PeopleMover (which resulted in removal of the PeopleMover/RocketRods) and (2) moving the AstroOrbitor to the hub took an area that for decades appeared to be bustling with activity and made it look like nothing is going on. The heart of Tomorrowland is now lifeless. It's the #1 issue that needs to be addressed in any re-do of Tomorrowland - the most important thing the land lacks is exactly the thing the PeopleMover brings.

EDIT: And while we're on the topic, move the AstroOrbitor back too.

[Poisonedapples]

i am tired of the subs. i maybe the only one that feels this way. i want the people-mover back tho.To me the subs are so...boring and humdrum .

---------- Post added 08-07-2012 at 10:19 AM ----------

T
EDIT: And while we're on the topic, move the AstroOrbitor back too.

It was never taken out.sadly it's still there. smack in front of Tomorrowland

[chesirecat]

The Peoplemover adds kinetic energy. Clearly the land that should have the most kinetic energy going on is Tommorowland - it used to - now it barely has any. The dual mistakes of (1) changing the PeopleMover (which resulted in removal of the PeopleMover/RocketRods) and (2) moving the AstroOrbitor to the hub took an area that for decades appeared to be bustling with activity and made it look like nothing is going on. The heart of Tomorrowland is now lifeless. It's the #1 issue that needs to be addressed in any re-do of Tomorrowland - the most important thing the land lacks is exactly the thing the PeopleMover brings.

EDIT: And while we're on the topic, move the AstroOrbitor back too.

I agree.

Something will eventually have to be done with the former People Mover/former Astro Jets tower, it is massively large, and used for nothing. The "hub" of activity for Tomorrowland is now near the Entrance where they put the Rocket Jets, and it is a pain walking around here as it is always crowded.

They could put in the Star Wars speeders ride, use the old People Mover/Astro Jet tower and build a track that is not inclined, hence they could use linear induction, like in the Magic Kingdom, and a track which doesn't loop inside of the buildings, but rather makes a large in front of Tomorrowland, one around Space Mountain, and one perhaps through whatever they build in Innoventions. There were plans to do something like this as starting over and building a new track would be cheaper. The old track inside the buildings could be boarded up.

[explodingboy]

EDIT: And while we're on the topic, move the AstroOrbitor back too.

This.

[bigwavedave]

One day, a castle like that will become representational of totalitarianism, monarchy, and dictatorship (if it isn't already) and Disney will have to tear it down to avoid the negative association. They will replace it with a more democratic symbol (a Roman Basilica or something). So have patience, my friend.

Ok! I think the Marxist web pages is a few web sites over

---------- Post added 08-07-2012 at 12:14 PM ----------

Just for reference, here is the area that the submarine track covers...the yellow circle is where the maintenance bay is:

Attachment 22901

I won't get into speculation about what may or may not be done with the area, but I thought the map may be helpful to some.

Wow I had no idea it took up that much room. I do like how they made use of the space just the same. One thing about the boat area, why not just bring the boats back. From what I remeber they didn't seem that expensive to operate. It was just a boat going along the lake on a little hidden track