Fast & Furious: Supercharged - General Discussion

[Milla4Prez66]

I'm more confused than ever.

And not making a fast and furious ride fast and furious... I don't know. You're missing a big opportunity. High speed thrill ride sounds like the perfect system. I guess now it's not a ride but an attraction... Like a stunt show? Right now its a car show/simulator and that sounds.... Not very interesting.

I think he may be suggesting that there will be show scenes and more to the attraction than just walking around looking at cars then going on a 45 second simulator.

 

[Stitch_101]

Eh, the Disaster overlay has been there 7 years. The ride portion has been open for 25 years now.

Plus, although the screen attractions could be changed out more often than not, looking at Uni's track record, they're not.

Hello Hanna Barbera... I'm sorry, I mean Jimmy Newtron. Darn it, I mean Minion Mayhem!

And aside from Terminator (which IMO still holds up as one of the better 3D shows anywhere), Shrek is the next oldest screen based attraction. It's going on 12 years old at this point, and though I think it's about to start pushing the over staying it's welcome point in my eyes, I don't fault Universal for not yet replacing it. It is still a popular IP among kids, if one that is slowly losing its relevancy.

 

[Clive]

Well that space has been wasted for the past however many years Disaster has been there, so what's the difference now?

I'm going to suggest to you that Disaster is actually a great, well-done attraction and hasn't been "wasted" in that space at all.

Replacing it with this possibly mediocre attraction just isn't very exciting. Especially when you go from an almost all-practical ride to another 3D simulator for a property that begs for a real, actual thrill.

 

[Nick]

I'm going to suggest to you that Disaster is actually a great, well-done attraction and hasn't been "wasted" in that space at all.

100% Agreed

Replacing it with this possibly mediocre attraction just isn't very exciting. Especially when you go from an almost all-practical ride to another 3D simulator for a property that begs for a real, actual thrill.

Yep. And I don't see how it's defensible to pretty much say "The attractions are gonna be mediocre, but just think of it as an appetizer!".

Just because it's an appetizer doesn't mean I want it to taste like crap...

 

[ChrisFL]

100% Agreed


Yep. And I don't see how it's defensible to pretty much say "The attractions are gonna be mediocre, but just think of it as an appetizer!".

Just because it's an appetizer doesn't mean I want it to taste like crap...

yes, but if we compare it to Disney terms....not everything can be an "E-Ticket", especially when they're investing so much in so many areas. I don't just mean investing money, but also time and resources (construction crews)

 

[Quint]

@Teebin, any information regarding minimum height requirement?

 

[Ryan]

Sad that Universal doesn't want to make a Fast and Furious attraction that actually goes fast.

 

[NJBrandon]

I'm going to suggest to you that Disaster is actually a great, well-done attraction and hasn't been "wasted" in that space at all.

Sure you can do that. Doesn't mean you'd be right though.

It's 2015. Nobody is impressed by water coming into a subway.

 

[martymcflyy85]

I'm impressed by water coming into a subway.

 

[Jwhee]

Sure you can do that. Doesn't mean you'd be right though.

It's 2015. Nobody is impressed by water coming into a subway.

A lot more people are impressed by water flooding a subway and a tractor trailer exploding in their face compared to watching a screen and feeling their butts bounce.

 

[NJBrandon]

A lot more people are impressed by water flooding a subway and a tractor trailer exploding in their face compared to watching a screen and feeling their butts bounce.

Really? Then why is the E-Ticket for Avatar a screen simulator? Why is the E-Ticket for Star Wars going to be a screen-based ride?

Screens are the future and you can kick and scream all you want, but it's happening.

/End of OMG SCREENZ discussion

 

[OrlandoGuy]

Sure you can do that. Doesn't mean you'd be right though.

It's 2015. Nobody is impressed by water coming into a subway.

Lol, I'm even less impressed with watching another 3-D movie.

Stop defending this ride. I know you can't judge before opening but looking at the facts, we're getting ANOTHER 3-D simulator (in this case, a ride where you literally just sit in front of a screen); in the process we're losing a practical effect ride (one that was cool in its prime and could have been saved with some money, effort, maintenance and care) as well ss throwing away a cool property that would have been bonkers as a "real" ride. Its just a lazy move. It's Universal's Frozen. Let's not sit back and pretend it's more than that.

 

[OrlandoGuy]

Really? Then why is the E-Ticket for Avatar a screen simulator? Why is the E-Ticket for Star Wars going to be a screen-based ride?

Screens are the future and you can kick and scream all you want, but it's happening.

/End of OMG SCREENZ discussion

I dont care about screen rides. But Universal is giving us nothing else. At Animal Kingdom, Avatar will be one of only 2 3-D attractions. FnF will be the 6th after Fallon (unless I'm missing some).
EDIT: And for the record, I would feel equally annoyed if Avatar was going to be another animal exhibit or safari-type ride, when Animal Kingdom is already full of those.

 

[Quint]

watching a screen and feeling their butts bounce.

If I had a nickel...

 

[NJBrandon]

A lot more people are impressed by water flooding a subway and a tractor trailer exploding in their face compared to watching a screen and feeling their butts bounce.

Then why weren't you chaining yourself to the Backlot Tour before that closed? That had WATER and FIRE. WOW!

 

[s8film40]

I think the issue of screens has more to do with implementation than just simply wether there are screens or not. Something like Transformers is a great ride wich blends the screens into an overall great ride experience. If you ride a tram and it stops and you watch a movie this is really more a show than a ride. Something like StarTours and Simpsons type rides were new technology back in the 80's and 90's. This technology has no business being implemented into a high end or even a regional theme park at this point in time.

 

[Viator]

Then why weren't you chaining yourself to the Backlot Tour before that closed? That had WATER and FIRE. WOW!

Even better, a Tractor trailer also on fire too; its a Christmas miracle!

I'll just say this; No matter what, Screens are here to stay. Hell; you can technically call all the recent WDW attractions screen based (Seven Dwarf, Voyage of the Little Mermaid, Enchanted Tales, the upcoming Frozen attraction...it will, StarTours 2.0, E.t.c..)

 

[Jwhee]

Then why weren't you chaining yourself to the Backlot Tour before that closed? That had WATER and FIRE. WOW!

Backlot tour? LOL.

There's a difference between a crappy 25 minute ride with one mediocre explosion scene, and a full blown Jaws style ride or any good ride with practical and physical sets and effects. Ever been on the Studio Tour at USH? I can assure you that my whole tram car was more impressed with the Jaws & Earthquake portions than they were with seeing Fast & Furious. Sure the whole "screens are the future" argument is valid, but then when you look at a park like USF, which will have 8 screen based attractions and 3 physical, when does it get old? Your Star Wars argument is valid, but you have to remember that DHS will still have more physical attractions than it will screen based when Star Wars opens. My argument isn't that screens are bad, but at a park like USF one would be much more impressed with seeing some physical explosions rather than going on 8 screen based rides in a row, it gets old.

 

[captainmoch]

This^. It's not that screens are bad themselves, it's that by the time Furious and Fallon come, it will practically be the entire park. So wasting an IP that has perfect potential for a full-on thrill ride on another simulator, in a very large plot, is kinda disappointing.

 

[Milla4Prez66]

I hated Disaster so it being replaced by anything is a plus for me. Unless you were picked to participate, I had a hard time enjoying most of the attraction and while the Earthquake scene at the end is iconic, it is 25 years old and the effects were hit or miss regarding to whether or not they worked on any given day. I think the average theme park guest is going to appreciate F&F way more than Disaster. Plus with such little actual information to go on with this upcoming ride, I don't see how anyone call this a downgrade so early, especially with the attraction it was replacing was one of the least popular in the park. Instead of being a bunch of Chicken Littles, how about we just wait and see what happens? With the amount of land they are using for this, there is no way this is a simple clone. This is a huge franchise for Universal and it will draw people, I'm sure they've got something up their sleeves.