Welcome to Theme Park Insider! Join the community or log in
Theme Park Insider
Facebook Twitter Google Plus Email Newsletter

Theme Park Apprentice 5: Chatter 2

The Discussion Continues

From Tim W
Posted July 3, 2013 at 1:19 PM
Continuation of the Chatter Thread


Comments in chronological order. Most recent at the bottom. Scroll down to respond.

From Mike Kinshella
Posted July 4, 2013 at 3:08 PM
Brand new chatter thread? Refreshing!! I thought I would post early this week as it's a holiday and this challenge is one I've been excited for for a while.

From Alan Hiscutt
Posted July 5, 2013 at 7:20 PM
I have posted my Restaurant. You have no idea how hard it was to NOT do Mos Eisley Cantina. I also had to dismiss Mel's Diner because of the previous history it had in Universal. I almost went with a Land Before time but decided against it, instead Ive opted to open up my Indiana Jones area with the Restaurant.

This was not my idea of a fun challenge. For the record, I have eaten about 3/4 of what is on the menu and I did use a little help from google to get the flavour combinations for descriptions.

From Mike Kinshella
Posted July 5, 2013 at 8:33 PM
I love your recreation of the iconic dinner scene in Temple of Doom. As a kid I absolutely loved that sequence and would have completely spazzed out at the chance to eat "chilled monkey brains"! I hope you plan on serving them in little fake monkey heads though.
I personally love these kind of challenges. Rides and attractions are obviously fun to dream up but it's the details like food and retail that can really make the difference, bumping a good park up into great territory.

From Alan Hiscutt
Posted July 6, 2013 at 12:20 AM
Thanks Mike, appreciate it, I say not fun because A) I get far too involved in researching food and I hate cooking! B)I never feel like I measure up to the image I had at the start and C) I had too many choices this round, Star Wars, American Graffiti, Indiana Jones, it was not an easy choice!

From AJ Hummel
Posted July 6, 2013 at 10:08 PM
This week's challenge was not fun because I only had about three hours spread between yesterday and today to write it. It doesn't help that I'm not really a restaurant person, especially when combined with theme parks (I almost always pick a quick service stand when visiting and the fanciest theme park restaurant I've visited is Knott's Johnny Rockets). Hopefully my somewhat "light" entry is satisfactory to avoid elimination, as I've got a spectacular one planned for next week.

From Bryce McGibeny
Posted July 7, 2013 at 7:01 AM
Oh dang, I don't know why I put appetizers after entrees. A small issue, I'm sure, but I fixed the arrangement anyways.

From James Koehl
Posted July 7, 2013 at 7:24 AM
Bryce, so now I had to go and change my critique so that I didn't look like I hadn't read your proposal! Just kidding (although I did go back and change it). Not really a problem, but this is to everyone- be careful about changing your proposals after they are posted. Fixing things like misspelled words or grammar you just noticed is not really a problem, but any sort of major fix (which I really don't consider Bryce's major) is not a good idea, especially if it is something specified in a critique.

Once you post you proposal, reread it, fix anything you see that you missed, reread it again, fix it again if needed, but sometime you have to just decide that it's done, hands off, and see what happens. If you are not sure what to do, especially if a critique has already been posted, contact the judge and get a ruling about what can be done. We're really nice guys, mostly, except for Tim when anyone disagrees with him. And Andy, when he doesn't get his way. And James, when....hey, wait a minute!

From Alan Hiscutt
Posted July 7, 2013 at 8:48 AM
Top spot whooooo! I think the highest I ever got before was third so even though this is just one week, I am very happy! Even more so when you consider this was not my strongest category! Thanks judges for your critiques and on a side note the prices in the restaurant are in line with other Indian restaurants I have visited. And yes, I love Indian food. I could have created a menu with hundreds of dishes but glad I didnt!

From Alan Hiscutt
Posted July 7, 2013 at 8:57 AM
Just wondered, We are getting down to the business end of this competition now, The top 7 will e left in after this weekend, got me to thinking, who would you be put your money on as the winner so far?
Obviously you cant nominate yourself, but Id go with Mike. His Park is really taking shape and would be on my vacation 'Must do' list.

From AJ Hummel
Posted July 9, 2013 at 1:21 PM
It looks like I'm done for this year. While I don't think I'm the worst competitor left, I do think my challenge 5 submission was the weakest and overall I haven't been up to par compared with last year. Hopefully I'll do better next time.

As for the finalists, there are a lot of strong competitors this year and it is hard to pick, but based on the first half of the competition I'm going to say Joseph and Mike should both make it to the finals. Joseph has done exceptionally well this year, and last year I thought he was eliminated too early, so it should be interesting to see what is to come. Mike has also done a spectacular job this year as well, and has scored near the top of every challenge except the one he submitted late. As for the third spot in the finals, I'd guess that will be taken by either Alan (who has improved with each round) or Christopher (who has consistently had good submissions, but no first place wins). Jay seems to have taken a nosedive in the past couple challenges and both Bryce and Chad are underperforming compared to last year (funny how all three TPA 4 finalists seem to have difficulty this year), so I think it would be tough for any of them to get into the finals, though not impossible as even someone who's doing spectacularly could have one poor proposal and be eliminated and just having a string of solid proposals could be enough to keep you in the game.

Good luck to all the remaining contestants. I'll keep up with everyone's submissions and, depending on time, might have to submit a final park as an unofficial entry.

From Christopher Sturniolo
Posted July 9, 2013 at 2:16 PM
Just wondering, am I the only first timer in the competition?

From Bryce McGibeny
Posted July 9, 2013 at 3:43 PM
I have a question about this week's challenge... You said "no thrilling dark rides", but can the ride be indoors and be full of special effects? It wouldn't be moving along a track and telling a story, but it would be in the dark and it would have special effects.

From Christopher Sturniolo
Posted July 9, 2013 at 5:36 PM
By thrilling dark ride, I think Tim means something along the lines of Indiana Jones, Spider-Man or Harry Potter. I think he wants something along the lines of a simulator (fixed like Star Tours) or an indoor flat ride (Tower of Terror).

From Tim W
Posted July 9, 2013 at 6:36 PM
While I did not write the synopsis for this week's challenge, I would consider a thrilling dark ride to be something closer to Indiana Jones Adventure, or even Mr. Toad's Wild Ride. It's really more at your own discretion this week, but cannot be just simply another dark ride. It must have a major component to it that makes it thrilling (speed, drops, spinning, etc.)

From Tim W
Posted July 9, 2013 at 6:36 PM
While I did not write the synopsis for this week's challenge, I would consider a thrilling dark ride to be something closer to Indiana Jones Adventure, or even Mr. Toad's Wild Ride. It's really more at your own discretion this week, but cannot be just simply another dark ride. It must have a major component to it that makes it thrilling (speed, drops, spinning, etc.)

Chris, you and Mike are the only new contestants remaining so far.

From James Koehl
Posted July 9, 2013 at 9:41 PM
I did the write-up for this week's challenge, and Tim and Christopher explained it pretty well. I doubt that we are going to be too anal about what qualifies as a dark ride instead of a thrill ride. I would consider Spiderman/Harry Potter/Mummy as dark rides; Mission:Space/TOT/Maxair (at Cedar Point) as thrill rides. Sorry if that doesn't help much.

From James Koehl
Posted July 9, 2013 at 9:43 PM
Bryce, based on your description, your idea sounds fine- rather intriguing actually.

From Bryce McGibeny
Posted July 10, 2013 at 6:52 AM
No, you explained it well!

Thank you!

From Bryce McGibeny
Posted July 13, 2013 at 6:26 AM
I can't post pictures this week. That would require a computer to resize them, and my Internet has been out for a week (help). I had to go to a Starbucks to post my ride and this message, haha.

From Chad H
Posted July 13, 2013 at 6:19 PM
Phew, thought we were all doing droptowers for a minute there....

From Alan Hiscutt
Posted July 13, 2013 at 6:39 PM
had crossed my mind to do one glad i changed my mind!

From Joseph Catlett
Posted July 14, 2013 at 8:29 AM
Everyone, I am so sorry. My wife and I had a last minute move that we did not anticipate and thus having time to move to our new home and writing...well something had to give. On the happy side, we have a beautiful new town house in the Orange County suburb of Yorba Linda, CA. On the downside I'm forced to drop out of the competition as I just didn't have time to complete my POLTERGEIST themed entry on time. I wish all the other writers out there the best of luck. I wish I could continue but I was not able to make the deadline. Again, I am very sorry for having to drop out but sometimes life gets in the way.

From Mike Kinshella
Posted July 15, 2013 at 3:37 PM
First of all, my apologies for the late entry this week. Thank you Tim (and the rest of the judges) for accepting my late proposal! Also, thanks to all of you who had kind things to say about my proposals in the competition thus far. As a first timer here at TPA I am having a blast sharing my wild ideas with you and reading all of yours!
Now, James has mentioned that the logistics of my thrill ride (Sky Rippers) are theoretically a little confusing. Although I did envision a rough idea of how the ride would operate I didn't include much of this in the proposal in order to not bog it down with technical stuff but after reading James' critique and rereading my entry I realize that I probably should have elaborated on this more.
I know that this does not count as part of my actual proposal but in case anyone is interested, the ride would break down something like this:





The taxi sequence through the jungle leading to the runway (take-off sequence) would be of slightly different lengths depending on which of the four main domes your ride vehicle is going to use. The shows would be staggered so that the show starts in dome 1 slightly before dome 2 which starts slightly before dome 3, etc. This small lag in time is just enough so that the main show in dome 1 ends and the plane inside then enters the inverted dome (for the brief upside down sequence before the ride's end), then as that plane enters the crash landing scene the plane in dome 2 enters the inverted dome AND a new plane enters dome 1, beginning the ride experience. The whole thing would be run on a computer system that would ensure that the timing goes smoothly and assures as many guests as possible get put through the attraction.


Obviously four giant domes and a ride system of this nature would cost an arm and a leg but hey, there are no budget restraints on TPA contestants right? :)


Also, even utilizing this system (and assuming that everything always runs smoothly with no breakdowns) Sky Rippers would not be a particularly high capacity attraction. It is, after all, not unheard of for parks to create popular "E ticket" type attractions that have relatively weak capacity. Is it perfect? No. But sometimes an attraction is worth a very very (very) long wait.

From James Koehl
Posted July 15, 2013 at 3:45 PM
Mike, now it makes complete sense. You did yourself a disservice by not including it in your proposal. Your diagram of the ride cleared up all my questions about it. Remember that you are presenting your proposal to impress the voters and judges- give us the information and let us decide if we're going to read it (or need it) or not.

From Bryce McGibeny
Posted July 16, 2013 at 1:03 PM
Is a full dialogue needed? I know it would be nice, but I don't feel like I have enough time to type up a complete dialogue for a musical that's almost an hour long.

From Tim W
Posted July 16, 2013 at 8:05 PM
Full dialogue is not necessary, but show some of the dialogue that would happen throughout the show.

From Christopher Sturniolo
Posted July 17, 2013 at 6:50 AM
My show is mostly going to be improvised through audience participation. Is it OK if I explain the dialogue instead of writing it verbatim?

From James Koehl
Posted July 17, 2013 at 9:24 AM
Christopher, you don't need to write out all the dialogue, or actually any of it if that's what you feel will give the best presentation of your show to the judges and voters. I wouldn't mind seeing a little bit of dialogue, if just to show us that you can indeed write dialogue that sounds like spoken dialogue, but that's just me. I'm a theatre guy, just got off directing "Man of La Mancha" a few months ago, but if you describe the action well enough without it I can certainly deal with that.

From Alan Hiscutt
Posted July 17, 2013 at 9:35 AM
So many choices his round! What to do.....

From Alan Hiscutt
Posted July 30, 2013 at 3:44 AM
Wanted to say a massive thanks to everyone who kept me in last week and who voted this week. Top 5 was beyond my expectations and I enjoyed every minute of this years competition.

I hope to be back next year!

I wish the remaining 4 all the best and a sincere thanks to all 3 judges, their critiques and suggestions have been an invaluable source of help and inspiration.

A special thanks to Tim who once again has put a lot of time into this years competition.

From Andy Milito
Posted July 30, 2013 at 10:00 AM
Let me just say, Alan, that you did really well without overindulging on Star Wars or Indiana Jones. I really appreciated your usage of lesser known Lucasfilm properties, like Labyrinth and similar movies.

Good job to you Alan!

From Tyler Harris
Posted August 4, 2013 at 3:43 PM
Hey Tim, sorry if I asked you this before, but can I do WPA 2 like a month or 2 after the finale? I had always wanted to do that since I started looking at the blog last year.
Plus, I figure it would be fun for me and the other contestants and judges.
Go Chad!

From James Koehl
Posted August 4, 2013 at 4:23 PM
Tyler, Tim already answered this. Here is his answer from June,22.

From Tim W
Posted June 22, 2013 at 4:13 AM
Tyler, I apologize I was not able to respond to the earlier thread created on Water Park Apprentice 2.
I regret to inform you that the simple answer to your question of moderating a competition of Water Park Apprentice 2 is no. I can not relinquish my creative rights to the Theme Park Apprentice or the Water Park Apprentice series. Moderating both of these competitions has been an extremely large responsibility filled with development, challenge writing, score tabulation, judging, and the occasional headache. However, I feel an obligation to maintain and uphold the dignity and status of these competitions for as long as they shall last. While the contests may be sparse in frequency, I believe the lapse between each of the competitions allows contestants to enhance their creative juices and improve their performance. While I cannot restrict the creation of a similar theme park design competition, I will neither participate nor provide endorsement. I would highly recommend developing a competition with stark differences to avoid plagiarizing Theme Park Apprentice.

I also responded to you as follows:

From James Koehl
Posted June 22, 2013 at 11:57 AM
Tyler, I am not sure how long you have been following the Theme Park Apprentice series, but as one who has been actively involved as a reader, competitor and now judge, I want to be sure you understand that this little on-line contest has had an important influence on many lives. Friendships have been formed, careers have been influenced and creative talents have been discovered, all because Tim came up with an idea that found a home here in TPI. I have known Tim through TPA for years, and the pride he takes in his creation cannot be put into words. This is his baby, his contribution to TPI, and if he seems to be possessive of it and defensive of it, that is because he has earned that right. I also know that the last thing he wants is to exclude anyone from participating, because he knows how much it has influenced so many people on many levels. But that participation must be in the framework of the competition series, and that is with Tim as the “Donald Trump”, the master of the competition.
Theme Park Apprentice, at its core, tries to inspire creativity. If you want to show that you have that creative spark and talent, there are two ways to do so: 1) show TPI by creating something original, something unique, something that you can be proud of because you thought of it first. We don’t need another Theme Park Apprentice competition clone. TPA is always going to be refined, tuned, perhaps made more challenging in future competitions, but always improving, and 2) compete as a competitor. Show TPI that you have that creative spark and talent by competing in the next competition, whatever and whenever it may be. Show that you have the maturity, the understanding of fair-play and most importantly, the ability to create well-conceived, well-written and original ideas.
Tyler, you have an enthusiasm that can take you far, and I suspect that there is a deep pool of untapped potential that you are just now discovering. Keep that enthusiasm under control, develop those potential talents and I am sure you can create something for Theme Park Insider as influential as Theme Park Apprentice is, something unique, something you can be proud to call your own.

If you don't understand any of this, please contact either of us and we will try to explain it further.

From Tyler Harris
Posted August 4, 2013 at 4:46 PM
Sure.. But I might need a little help with making it oringanal.
Thanks James.

This discussion has been archived, and is not accepting additional responses.