But I don't think that all complaints about screen media can be dismissed as Disney fanboy bluster. Many theme park fans simply can't see 3D media as its creators designed. And many other fans are nauseated by the disconnect between the physical motion on a ride and the action they are watching on its screen, which too often does not sync perfectly. That's one of the reasons why I was so enthusiastic about virtual reality on roller coasters, because synching the VR action with the coaster track forces filmmakers to obey the laws of physics with the camera's POV in a way that they often don't on simulator, 4D, and even traditional theater films.
So while I think any campaign to purge screen media from theme parks is silly, I do agree that people have legit beef with certain formats of screen media and the way that they are employed within theme park attractions. In my Orange County Register column this week, I make a case for why I prefer 4K media over 3D films in theme park attractions. The high definition of 4K allows filmmakers to create more convincing and engaging visual environments, supporting more robust storytelling, while 3D too often is used as a gimmick to hurl junk at a screen. The 3D glasses often darken and narrow what riders see... if they can see the 3D come together properly at all.
I'm especially over 4D theaters, which too often ignore narrative to employ the full litany of 3D gimmicks, while assaulting the audience with wind, water and shaking elements that were surprising the first time we experienced them, but grew stale faster than a collection of Dad jokes.
That said, some people love 3D, otherwise parks wouldn't keep running those shows. And for kids who've never been in a 4D theater before, it's amazing. So I recognize that mine is just one person's opinion, and that others can differ.
What's your take on theme park screen media? What's the format you most like to see?
What's your favorite (or least favorite) theme park screen show or ride?
Read Robert's column:
Tweet
Robert, please stop carrying water for Universal. Disney fans (not the derisive "fanboys" term you pejoratively use) are not trying to discredit Universal in some kind of absurd conspiracy theory. How can Disney "fanboys" be giving a pass on Pandora's Flight of the Passage when we haven't even experienced or seen the ride yet? Many theme park fans on various boards have posted they believe Universal was heading in the right direction with the Harry Potter lands, but have moved backwards with all the screen based attractions. At the same time, Disney is moving away from screen based theater-style attractions such as Muppets and HISTA. If Universal keeps down this path then they'll find themselves in the same hole as SeaWorld behind the curve of what the public wants. You can evade reality and pretend the backlash is a conspiracy, or blame the audience for not being sufficiently obeisant to screen-based attractions, or, maybe, listen to the fans.
That being said, I agree with Tony Perkins above. While I enjoy many screen-based attractions, the most amazing experiences are the ones in which magic happens all around you, or somewhere in physical space.
3D can pull off some effects that are not possible in any other way. But (just to offer one example) have you seen the stunning Lumiere animatronic in Enchanted Tales with Belle? Compare that to a 3D image, even in high resolution 4K. It's no contest. There's no "how did they do that?" moment.
I adored 3D and 4D park attractions but like the rest of the world, I tired of 3D quickly. Though I still expect a higher quality of presentation at a theme park than I do from my local cinema.
Theme parks are starting to catch onto what cinemas figured out about 5-7 years ago, and I think new attractions will reflect the dramatic improvement in projection technology. Also, as older attractions are replaced and/or upgraded, we'll see those take giant leaps as well. The Spiderman and Star Wars upgrades should be all any park operator should look at when considering the state of their ageing screen-based attractions. Any attraction not being presented in 4K should be considered a relic, and audiences should reject them, forcing park operators to replace or upgrade these outdated attractions, regardless of how old they may be.
My beef with 4K or other attractions touted as "very high resolution" is that they usually aren't. Screen size matters, and a resolution that looks fantastic on your computer screen or even on a 75-inch TV starts to get fuzzy when screen size gets measured in 10-foot increments. This has been helped somewhat by the movie industry moving to digital projection and driving improvements in projector technology.
But the source material resolution matters too. Just because the projector can throw 20 thousand lines of resolution on the wall doesn't mean it's going to make a VHS tape watchable. If they cheap out on the production, a giant screen is going make it worse.
4K is an image resolution, thus there can be 3D and 4D projected in 4K.
Ultimately, my TL;DR here is this: Nail the basics before you level up.
Get the story right before anything else. Then make sure the audience can see the screen clearly, and don't bother with 3D if that will comprise the clear communication of the story and action. And then don't bother with the 4D until you've got the 3D right.
If 3D/4D doesn't add anything to the story - or worse, 3D/4D is detracting from it - ditch it.
This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
