Kevin C

Published: July 19, 2014 at 1:16 PM

Why would it take a couple of years to add a new theater to an existing attraction?

I've been on the ride. It's a warehouse-style room with a big screen and a ride vehicle that moves a bit.

What on earth is so time-consuming that it will take a couple of years to expand?

Jaiden Cohen

Published: July 19, 2014 at 2:28 PM

That's not a pic of the soarin building. That is the millennium showplace convention center.
108.86.248.184

Published: July 19, 2014 at 2:39 PM

Glad to see Disney might make new films for 'Soarin', it should be something continuous with 5-6 options from around the world. That would be appropiate since visitors come from around the world. And like Star Wars you never know which trip you will take.
steve lee

Published: July 19, 2014 at 2:46 PM

Funny, I would think the best way to reduce wait times on Soarin' would be to give crowds a reason to visit the Imagination pavilion or Universe of Energy or the shuttered Wonders of Life pavilion.

I guess it's easier to just keep adding to one of the few decent attractions in Future World and just keep ignoring the outdated stuff that no one visits. It makes it easier for me, since it means there's no reason to get to Epcot before World Showcase opens.

173.65.226.200

Published: July 19, 2014 at 5:08 PM

The new Soarin' needs to be in 15/70 IMAX, as it is the highest quality projection system in the world. Digital cinema can't even come close.
Rob McCullough

Published: July 19, 2014 at 5:15 PM

Sorry - but that IS a photo of Soarin' behind Canada. The tent you are talking about is a bit further to the left of Canada and not nearly that tall.
166.137.119.48

Published: July 19, 2014 at 5:39 PM

The only way to ride Soarin is after a tipsy trip through the Wotld Showcase. If Universal was building the theater it would be done in time for this year's Food and Wine Festival.
209.44.133.160

Published: July 19, 2014 at 6:17 PM

3rd screen for Soarin'. Finally. I agree with the folks who posted above. Why should it take Disney 2 years to add another screen? And how can Disney go a decade with zero major upgrades to Epcot?
72.189.141.1

Published: July 19, 2014 at 6:32 PM

There were plans to have a third (and possibly even a fourth) theater for opening day, but time and budget made it get dropped. Thinking only two theaters was enough has been plaguing it since day one. Target numbers were based on California's Guests, which are annual pass holders, so wait times there are typically much shorter (low demand) whereas here in Florida it's mostly first time visitors or those on vacation with limited time so there is always a huge demand.
James Trexen

Published: July 19, 2014 at 7:10 PM

I have my doubts about the Soarin theater, especially when you look at that photo. With a shape like that, a major change would have to be made to the whole infrastructure to the building.
216.53.168.57

Published: July 19, 2014 at 9:01 PM

That is a very wide, but not very deep building as you're seeing it in this photo. If you look overhead, there is plenty of room behind to add one or two more screens
N B

Published: July 19, 2014 at 9:51 PM

I'll have to disagree about digital projection... 8K will look better than standard film blown up that big... especially if is filmed in 8K to begin with. Digital projection can also be stitched together on a large screen much easier as the projectors are tiny compared to IMAX and no not need to be rewound.

All film suffers from motion judder eventually. Those holes in the film that the gears use to feed it through the aperture get worn out and enlarged over time and it the picture can shift a few inches on a screen that large.

Four 8K projectors can be stitched to produce 16K resolution very easily.

Sylvain Comeau

Published: July 20, 2014 at 9:22 AM

The CMs deserve a much bigger raise. They're the ones who put up with the crowds which put billions in Disney's coffers.

The new version of Soarin' has been rumored for years and years, and is supposed to be called Soarin' Around the World. I certainly hope that the head office will force WDW to adopt the new version, since we've all seen the old one a zillion times.

94.203.206.10

Published: July 20, 2014 at 10:17 AM

I am thrilled to hear the CM are getting raises. It is a shame that Disney has such a fantastic reputation as a company, but anyone I have ever worked at Disney left due to wages. Hopefully, they can retain more frontline talent with this new agreement.
98.85.98.163

Published: July 20, 2014 at 1:20 PM

Man I can't wait another Soarin building,Soarin over Avatar and a possible Toy Story Midway Mania building expansion.

It's nice that Disney doesn't depend on screen based attractions like Universal ...

97.100.108.108

Published: July 20, 2014 at 3:09 PM

It's really simple as to why it will take Disney so much longer to expand the Soarin' building to add another theater... They want to do it RIGHT. Sure, Universal could put it in in about six months, if the attraction used "off the shelf" mechanicals like 99% of Universal's rides. But Soarin' uses a unique lifting mechanism which will have to be built from scratch. And if Universal somehow managed to pull off such an amazing feat it wouldn't be properly themed and would probably break down every other showing.
Tim Hillman

Published: July 21, 2014 at 6:00 AM

^^^^^Fanboy Alert! Fanboy Alert!^^^

That's right, Anon, let's give Disney a pass for moving at a glacial pace because they do it "RIGHT" and Universal puts in '"off the shelf" mechanicals' in "like 99% of Universal's rides."

Put down the Kool-Aid and face the facts. Both parks give us great attractions of all kinds. One company moves slowly, and the other is doing amazing things and being very responsive to their customers. Just because you can't handle reality doesn't mean that the rest of us have agree with your silliness!

70.114.218.19

Published: July 21, 2014 at 10:13 AM

The excessively long lines on Soarin' are the result of a lack of attractions at EPCOT. I would rather see Disney invest money in adding new attractions rather than expand capacity on an existing one.
Kevin C

Published: July 21, 2014 at 11:01 AM

Tim,

Both the anonymous comments above you looked like snark to me

Tim Hillman

Published: July 21, 2014 at 11:37 AM

The first one is definitely snark. I'm not so sure about the second one. That's the trouble with anonymous comments. Sometimes it is hard to tell if they are being sincerely fanboy or just being snarky.