I can tell you that Universal has every bit the talent and design consideration that Disney has, the budget and the timetables are the ONLY difference. It's NOT about "sophistication". As that would imply that the only thing that leads to sophistication is the level of budget. If you think down that route, you're doing a disservice to all of the creative people who make amazing and incredible things with nothing but good ideas and shoestring budgets.
Disney has the luxury of a culture that usually recognizes the advantages of taking a holistic approach to show design that remains unmatched. If you compare the infrastructure of Universal’s Islands of Adventure and Disney California Adventure, they’re in different categories altogether.
I never stated that money equates quality, but I did say Disney usually recognizes the value in using top tier equipment for their shows.
Those people make real magic and THOSE people are the ones who deserve our recognition. Not the other way around. Anything can appear impressive with a ton of money thrown at it, but good ideas stand on their own regardless of equipment or money.
Again, I’m not getting into a debate regarding creative superiority. That is subjective and you and I will likely not see eye to eye on this.
Let's not oversimplify what you are saying. Your original argument was that Disney is better because they use top-shelf equipment and spend money to hide it all from guests.
No, my overall argument was that Disney does a lot of work in areas that are often ignored by fans. Anyone can buy equipment, but it takes institutional knowledge to utilize this equipment in a consistent manner across all their properties. I never said Universal used subpar equipment in all their designs, but they are inconsistent.
Yes, on that last point you are right. Disney spends an extraordinary amount on hiding projectors, speakers, and equipment. Sometimes this could be tens of millions to do so. We all know that this incrementally makes the park overall look better. But let's not confuse things here.. the quality of attraction itself is not impacted at all.. especially if it's a show.
Again, I am not going to debate which show you think is subjectively better. I am making an argument on technical merits alone.
By doing that, budgets have to be smaller as the risk is much higher. So it is then up to creative to make the best of a smaller budget. And in many cases, David can indeed defeat Goliath when you creatively use the budget for things that make the core experience better.
Sure, you can take a look at Jurassic Park: The Ride as a good example of this, but this was never the main crux of my argument.
Each one of those lights, if I remember correctly, are all the same exact units used in BOTH World of Color and Fantasmic.
At the moment, World of Color doesn’t use any of those fixtures, but they may after their refurbishment concludes. Fantasmic uses the BMFL. Both are top tier manufacturers, so I understand your overall point. The specific models are ultimately irrelevant in this discussion.
From a quality of equipment standpoint, they are using the latest and best stuff. So why not give them credit for that? Instead we're going to attack them because you can see it more than at Disney parks?
Because the show hasn’t opened? You’re presenting a hypothetical that I never alluded to.
Cinematic used Vari-Lite and Syncrolite fixtures along with Meyer Sound audio - all top tier equipment. But the entire show was poor and maintenance was never kept up.
I'll go on to say that every part of this show has been done right, by teams of people who are dedicated and who care about making it good. I know many of the Thinkwell folk as well and used to work with many of them when I lived in CA - some of them former Imagineers and Universal people. Many of them are superfans and nerds like us. The Universal Entertainment people working on this are top notch as well. You're to get a good show here. This team is the very best.
When have I ever claimed the teams weren’t dedicated? Did you know the last two iterations of Universal Studios Florida’s nighttime show were also designed by Thinkwell? I’ve followed both very, very closely, and if we want to get into subjective waters, I didn’t think both were very good. Thinkwell is a fine company, but Universal is ultimately responsible for the output.
Disney uses design firms too, but much of their work is in house. This - again - goes back to my point about institutional power that has been built with decades of experience.
So yes, poles may be visible, projectors may not have windows, equipment may be seen. But at MOST you can knock them on their aesthetic considerations. To call this "less sophisticated" is just not true and slanderous to the many hard-working people who are dedicated to making this show new and good.
If a company invests in a complex park-wide audio system that foresaw parades and spectaculars 10-15 years into the future, then yes, it is a more advanced product. There’s a reason why when you watched Cinematic from outside of Diagon Alley you still heard the land’s background audio playing.
I appreciate the good dialogue about this.