Fantasyland Expansion - Part 2

[Miketheboss]

lol. Indeed. They're going to need a healthy sprinkling of pixie dust to get the attraction looking as magical as that.

I think they sprinkled it.

 

[MrRoamer]

Looking incredibly good

 

[ThemeParks4Life]

Looks excellent!

 

[Cole]

Hate to be the de by downer but those AA's look weird. It's the same thing with cars land and luminaire. Like I understand why that's the way it is but I stands out like a sore thumb and just looks a little off. Movement is phenomenal, faces....not so much

 

[rhino4evr]

I disagree. I think the projected facts give them an animated quality that is simply missing on other animatronics. Considering these are supposed to be animated characters I think it works really really well

 

[Cole]

I disagree. I think the projected facts give them an animated quality that is simply missing on other animatronics. Considering these are supposed to be animated characters I think it works really really well

I guess but then again animatronics are by the name animated characters, how hard is it to make a pair of eyes blink and add a moving mouth? It's like the buzz AA in space ranger spin. Like WOW did that get dated, I feel like this will be the same case in 10 years

 

[GAcoaster]

I agree, the projected faces look odd, especially when paired with the fiberglass hands and the beards and things. It's like it should all be "real" or all animated. The good animatronics (like Pirates) are superior.

 

[Skipper Justin]

Lumiere looks pretty amazing. Just saying.

 

[Cole]

Lumiere looks pretty amazing. Just saying.

Movement is incredible for such a small figure face is...off

 

[Disneyhead]

It's kind of a cool effort, but I think I would have preferred a soft latex face.

 

[martymcflyy85]

Those AA are freaking awesome, and I wish Universal would put more stuff like that in their rides, instead of relying mostly on 3-D screens.

 

[Miketheboss]

Hate to be the de by downer but those AA's look weird. It's the same thing with cars land and luminaire. Like I understand why that's the way it is but I stands out like a sore thumb and just looks a little off. Movement is phenomenal, faces....not so much

It stands out like a sore thumb because they are the only thing being filmed. I feel like once they are in the "mine" surrounded by thousands of sparkling gems, they will look better.

 

[Jymmymack]

Just a minor note, not all of the cars in RSR are projected faces. In fact, most of them aren't projected. They only did it for cars that didn't have grilles (like Lightning) since it would be incredibly difficult to make the entire hood a latex face.

The dwarf AA's are nice and look great.

 

[Cole]

It stands out like a sore thumb because they are the only thing being filmed. I feel like once they are in the "mine" surrounded by thousands of sparkling gems, they will look better.

You know that's what I'm curious about because you are probably right, with all the cgi sparkling it might look right at home. Just gotta wait and see I guess but so far I don't know. I've watched that video like 5 times now

 

[badlactose]

I think the projected faces look nifty. I agree that within show lighting, with all sorts of elements lit up, the fact that their faces are 'glowing' won't be so apparent.

That said, I don't think the faces work as well as the projected face on Lumiere for several reasons.

1) Lumiere is a candle, so a glowing face suits the character.
2) He is quite small, so the lack of 'depth' on the facial features is very hard to detect.

Similarly, for the cars in Radiator Springs Racers, the only projected elements are the eyes, which should be essentially flat (since it is the windshield), so the lack of depth is not jarring.

 

[Cole]

I think the projected faces look nifty. I agree that within show lighting, with all sorts of elements lit up, the fact that their faces are 'glowing' won't be so apparent.

That said, I don't think the faces work as well as the projected face on Lumiere for several reasons.

1) Lumiere is a candle, so a glowing face suits the character.
2) He is quite small, so the lack of 'depth' on the facial features is very hard to detect.

Similarly, for the cars in Radiator Springs Racers, the only projected elements are the eyes, which should be essentially flat (since it is the windshield), so the lack of depth is not jarring.

They just look strange to me, as I said before buzz looks incredibly dated and that came out around 10 years ago. Who's to say we will look at luminaire, cars and the dwarfs in 10 years and say ouch that's so obvious. I'm saying I know why Disney is going this route but it might backfire on them in 10 years when they forget to replace a bulb and now all those animatronic faces are lit up like a Christmas tree AKA buzz? They might look better in show lighting but any guest can tell the difference between real and CGI

 

[Hockeyman55]

So how long until we get disco dwarfs?

 

[Cole]

So how long until we get disco dwarfs?

Or blank faced dwarfs, hopefully they have a strobe light on hold

 

[Miketheboss]

I think the projected faces look nifty. I agree that within show lighting, with all sorts of elements lit up, the fact that their faces are 'glowing' won't be so apparent.

That said, I don't think the faces work as well as the projected face on Lumiere for several reasons.

1) Lumiere is a candle, so a glowing face suits the character.
2) He is quite small, so the lack of 'depth' on the facial features is very hard to detect.

Similarly, for the cars in Radiator Springs Racers, the only projected elements are the eyes, which should be essentially flat (since it is the windshield), so the lack of depth is not jarring.

The dwarfs faces aren't flat.

 

[shiekra38]

Simple movements and projection...groundbreaking