Jump to content

Star Wars roller coaster coming to Disney theme parks?


Jay

Recommended Posts

Imagine getting into a roller coaster that looks like an X-Wing. Besides you, a coaster that looks like a Tie Fighter. Around you, everything looks like the Death Star trench and as the two cars begin to twist and turn on different tracks, your job is to destroy the other before they accomplish their mission. Sounds fun, right? Well, according to these conceptual drawing that were posted on the forums at WDWMagic (by way of Bleeding Cool) they seem to show a design for a Tie Fighter/X-Wing dogfight roller coaster that takes place on the Death Star.

star-wars-x-wing-coaster-260x160.jpg star-wars-tie-fighter-coaster-260x160.jpg

star-wars-coaster-map-260x160.jpg star-wars-coaster-side-view-260x160.jpg

star-wars-coaster-pov-260x160.jpg

There are a ton of details in each of these images. Notice that the X-Wing and Tie Fighter photos have seats in the top and that the cross section photo shows several rows, all with guns. Plus the POV photo shows “damage.” So, taking into consideration the notes on the map photo for the Millennium Falcon and Trench, it seems like it’s definitely some kind of battle ride where two cars are going in different directions. But honestly, we don’t know. We don’t even know if this is real, only that the person who posted them claims these blueprints were “submitted for patent.” If we find out more, of course, we’ll let you know. But your mind can begin racing.

http://www.slashfilm...-coasters-open/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I still think they need to create a 'Star Wars' land at Disney World. It would be the perfect competition to Universal's Harry Potter land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never been to Disneyland (not even the European version in France, which is closer to home). I wonder if I'm too old to have my virginal trip there at age 33?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do go a little bit mad if you keep up with all the rumors. The Imagineers come with so much amazing stuff that never goes anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're sooooooooooo not, Thor. It does help to go when you're young, but there are plenty of folks who experience it for the first time as adults and are blown away. There's something very special about the Disney parks - particularly the original Disneyland in Anaheim, California. If you get a chance to visit that one, I'd highly recommend it as a first exposure. There are many great things about the other resorts, too, including the Paris resort, but the original Disneyland is the only one that Walt Disney himself walked in. It's grown organically over the course of more than 50 years, and although Disney's attitudes have somewhat changed in recent decades, there's still something very, very special about that place. If all you want is an adrenaline rush, it won't be for you, but if you want to have an experience that is charming and beautiful and varied and emotional and optimistic and pure, I cannot recommend it highly enough.

I can't put it any better than Walt himself did at the opening of Disneyland in 1955:

To all who come to this happy place...welcome. Disneyland is your land. Here age relives fond memories of the past, and here youth may savor the challenge and promise of the future. Disneyland is dedicated to the ideals, the dreams, and the hard facts that have created America, with hope that it will be a source of joy and inspiration to all the world.

If that sounds like something worth experiencing...go for it. :D

As for this rumor, I hadn't heard anything about it till today. That'd be cool if it comes to fruition, but as The_Trout said, there are so many concepts at WDI that never actually get built.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been to Disneyland Paris twice now... the first time in 1991 (I was 10) and the second time in 2008 (at 27), and I've gotta say, it still works for me! It's the absolute "perfect world" atmosphere, and if you're still a kid inside (like I am... some may call it "immature" :D) you're gonna love it. I really would love to go to Anaheim, but hauling my ass across the Atlantic isn't really an option right now. I'll get to it though... although I'm really eager to visit the Harry Potter park as well, and that one is in Florida, just like Disney World.

How do Disneyland and Disney World compare?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disneyland and Walt Disney World are two very different beasts, each with its own pros and cons. The Disneyland Resort has two parks (Disneyland and California Adventure), and they're about 500 feet apart. Walt Disney World has four parks that sprawl over a huge resort with numerous hotels, water parks, and so forth. You could literally spend a week there and not get bored, especially when you consider that Universal is nearby. Disneyland is more of a 1- to 3-day sort of experience simply because of its smaller size.

So if scope and grandeur are what you prefer, WDW has a lot to offer. But it lacks a certain intangible charm that Disneyland has. That's almost universally agreed on. Disneyland was built by a father who risked quite a bit to build a sweetly nostalgic yet optimistically forward-looking experience that entire families could enjoy together, rather than just giving the kids some lame fairground rides and the parents a bench to sit on. Walt Disney World was built by a company that had recently lost its founder and that was looking to create a vast, marketable tourist resort. The goals and attitudes were rather different, and you can feel it in the DNA of these places, even if you can't exactly explain how the differences manifest themselves.

Another thing worth mentioning is that if you just compare Disneyland Park to its Florida counterpart, the Magic Kingdom, few fans will tell you the Magic Kingdom is better. Disneyland has a very impressive roster of attractions, including some that can't be found in Florida at all (e.g. the Indiana Jones Adventure, the Matterhorn, Mr. Toad) and some that are WAY better than their Florida counterparts (e.g. Pirates of the Caribbean, Space Mountain). Granted, not EVERYTHING is better, but Disneyland is just so jam-packed with that charm that many people find it irresistible.

Anyway, you can probably tell which resort I prefer, but my opinions on the Florida resort are based largely on years and years of researching the place online, since I don't have many of my own memories of it. So take it all with a grain of salt. But a lot of people agree that Disneyland offers small-scale charm and intimate sincerity, while Disney World offers large-scale grandiosity and a true resort atmosphere. Different people will have different priorities and preferences.

Oh, and the weather is better in Anaheim. ;)

(As for comparisons to Disneyland Paris...I haven't been there, but based on what I know, I'd say it's a little closer to WDW in overall feel, but it really is its own thing. The American parks are much more...American. :P)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't argue with the weather - I'd much rather live in California than Florida - but I didn't find any of the "charm" you mention the one time I went to Disney Land (I've been to World twice).

I just found 'Land to be smaller, dirtier, and older than 'World.... felt like a smaller, run-down version of 'World to me when I was there (I was 17, and had already been to 'World twice).

Of course, I'm sure my opinions of both parks would change were I to go back as an adult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17...[does math]...oh, you visited during the dark ages, no wonder! Yeah, things have totally turned around since then. The 90s and early 2000s were a sad time for Disney management on the west coast. Fortunately, things turned around in 2004 or so, when they started preparing for Disneyland's 50th anniversary in 2005. Totally cleaned the place up. By all accounts, Disney World is the one that's now in significantly worse condition on the whole.

One thing to note about the Anaheim resort is that Disneyland's sister park, Disney California Adventure, opened in 2001 as a bit of a stinker, but they've been investing $1.1 billion in fixing it over the last few years, so things have been getting a lot better. :D I don't think there's ever been a theme park that remained open with such ubiquitous (and well-themed!) construction walls. That'll be finishing up next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disneyland and CA Adventures are awesome. Haven't been to any other Disney theme parks, but some of the fondest memories of my childhood came from Disneyland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17...[does math]...oh, you visited during the dark ages, no wonder! Yeah, things have totally turned around since then. The 90s and early 2000s were a sad time for Disney management on the west coast. Fortunately, things turned around in 2004 or so, when they started preparing for Disneyland's 50th anniversary in 2005. Totally cleaned the place up. By all accounts, Disney World is the one that's now in significantly worse condition on the whole.

One thing to note about the Anaheim resort is that Disneyland's sister park, Disney California Adventure, opened in 2001 as a bit of a stinker, but they've been investing $1.1 billion in fixing it over the last few years, so things have been getting a lot better. :D I don't think there's ever been a theme park that remained open with such ubiquitous (and well-themed!) construction walls. That'll be finishing up next year.

Ah, interesting!

Yea I went to Disney World in the early/mid 90s (maybe the late 80s my first time?), and then Disney Land in the summer of 1997 - the summer between high school and college for me. Since then I haven't been back inside either park proper, but I have been down in the Orlando area twice (2001 and 2005) and been to Pleasure Island both times.

I am interested in going to both parks again, especially since my GF has never been to either

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd reply to this thread, but Data said everything I was gonna say, including the love for DL vs. WDW. DL is just oozing with charm, and it's small size gives it a more intimate feel. Of course, I'm biased since I grew up in Phoenix and went to DL every summer for twenty straight years. That said, WDW is certainly awesome, and it's isolation from "the real world" is a serious asset.

Anyway, yeah, it's never too late to visit a Disney park for the first time, and if you're near Paris, go for it! DL Paris is supposed to be absolutely beautiful (though the Studios park next store is supposed to be pretty weak).

Sidenote: I'm still sad that our own Datameister lost the time for his Virtual Magic project, a complete rendering of Disneyland in 3D. It was looking pretty amazing, though none of the renders are on Flickr anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, if you get a chance, I'd definitely visit either or both again, Jay. My vote goes for Disneyland (surprise!), simply because it's regained the luster it lost during the 90s, and you might have a very different experience this time. Not to mention that there's a whole 'nother park that was just a parking lot back then! California Adventure may not be the most amazing park ever, but it certainly doesn't feel old, not even in the gracefully mature sort of way that Disneyland does. It just feels new, especially with all the stuff that's been built in the last two years or so. And although I can't fathom why, there are certain people who prefer it over Disneyland, so who knows!

EDIT: Thanks for the shout-out about that project, The_Trout. :) That was definitely fun while it lasted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand this: Why is there a park called California Adventure... IN California?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand this: Why is there a park called California Adventure... IN California?

Because the people in charge between 1996 and 2002 or so weren't the sharpest tools in the shed. Luckily, many of the mistakes are now being fixed, though the name won't be changing. Terrible as it is, DCA has too much brand identification now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hahahaha...that's the same thing a lot of fans have wondered, Jay. Well, originally, the park was supposed to celebrate the cultures and locales and history and innovation of the state, but unfortunately, it wasn't executed very well, so it came across more as a bunch of hokey replicas of famous landmarks with a few lame rides. Fortunately, a lot of that stuff is gone now, although it's come at the expense of thematic unity. Now, the park is a lot less about California...it's more just a variety of experiences, some of which celebrate California and some of which are just random Disney-related stuff. It disappoints me a little on a conceptual level, but the park is (and will be) so much more enjoyable than it used to be, so I'm not too worked up about. Especially because they kept the California-focused elements that actually worked (e.g. Soarin' Over California and the area around Grizzly River Run), and adding a few more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I concur with Data on all accounts. I have visited Disneyland many, many times, and WDW at least a half dozen times. My favorite parts of 'World are:

1) Expedition to Everest - one of the most inventive attractions on the planet (located in Animal Kingdom - it's the only ride worth the admission there).

2) Tower of Terror - the original that is much more elaborate than its California Adventure counterpart.

3) Sheer size - you never run out of things to do, no matter how long your there. Also, because there's more elbow room, you're less likely to feel the pressure of the throngs of people crowded around you like you do on a summer's day at Disneyland.

On the other hand, I have never been to WDW without at least one epic rainstorm. When these occur, you might as well put on your swimming trunks and grab a canoe, because water doesn't go anywhere in Florida - it just gathers.

Disneyland, as Data said, has a certain charm, knowing that it was built by the genius himself. Other pros for Disneyland include:

1) It generally has better attractions because there is less room, so the less interesting ones are demolished.

2) Size - you don't have to take a shuttle bus to the tram to the ferry to the monorail because you can walk anywhere in either park in minutes.

3) Indiana Jones - the music alone is worth the real estate.

4) Pirates of the Caribbean - the dips are pretty thrilling, as opposed to WDW where the water table is too high to allow any noteworthy descent.

Soarin' over California would have been on the list a few years ago, but now WDW has one, which doesn't make any sense - but whatever. It's an awesome ride. I'm one of the few that has actually loved California Adventure since it opened - it has some of my favorite rides (Tower of Terror, Soarin', Screamin', Grizzly River Run.)

I should probably join the Disney board that Data is on because I am a fanatic. But as long as we're allowed to talk Disney from time to time on this board, I'll be content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love Disney World. We try to go every year and it's always a fun time. We go in January and I either run the marathon or the half marathon, more recently it has been the half. I just have not been training like I used to. The more we go the less we care about the rides. We go to different restaurants and see different shows. Truly there is something for everyone. We are planning to go again next year, my funds are a little low now but I got plenty of time and still have the urge to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand this: Why is there a park called California Adventure... IN California?

Because the people in charge between 1996 and 2002 or so weren't the sharpest tools in the shed. Luckily, many of the mistakes are now being fixed, though the name won't be changing. Terrible as it is, DCA has too much brand identification now.

The name makes perfect sense. The theme park is a tribute to California - almost all of the rides are based on CA, and atmosphere/lines/themes of the park is all California related. I don't understand the problem with naming it CA Adventures...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just meant why create a tribute to California IN California. You've already flown out to California - you can explore California yourself. Would make more sense for the Florida theme park to have a California theme park, to make you want to go there next

EDIT: Unless, of course, the implication is "this theme park is the best place for adventure in California" and not "Explore what California is like" - which makes sense, I just hadn't thought of it that way before

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since I've never been to the US at all (I'm from Germany) picking one of the two parks isn't really the main factor anyway. I guess the major aspect for me would be to see some of the usual places, like either NY on the east coast or LA and SF on the west coast, with the latter one possibly including a trip do Disneyland. If after that another occasion arised, I might pick Florida for a theme park vacation (with Disney World and the Harry Potter park getting priority).

Regarding Disneyland Paris, of course I have no comparison to the US parks (or the Tokyo one, for that matter), but I felt that the "Walt Disney Studios" park was definitely the less appealing one... which doesn't mean it wasn't appealing, as it had some nice attractions as well. It's just that the regular park felt much more "Disney", since it was designed in that well known classic style (ranging from the 20's to the 50's, I guess). Space Mountain and Pirates of the Caribbean were probably my favorite ones, and there was also an "Indiana Jones" ride, which, unfortunately, was closed for maintenance. But from the looks of it, it was just a rollercoaster... wasn't there a live action show in one of the US parks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mountain and Pirates of the Caribbean were probably my favorite ones, and there was also an "Indiana Jones" ride, which, unfortunately, was closed for maintenance. But from the looks of it, it was just a rollercoaster... wasn't there a live action show in one of the US parks?

There was a stunt show at the Florida park. It was a good one as far as stunt shows go, but no comparison to the ride in CA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[EDIT: Beaten to the punch, but oh well. :P] There's a live action Indy show at Walt Disney World, but what I was talking about is the Indiana Jones Adventure, which only exists at Disneyland (and at Tokyo DisneySea, in a somewhat modified form). It's not a roller coaster - it's a totally immersive indoor thrill ride themed as an escape from an Indian temple in which an ancient evil god is trying to kill you, pretty much. :P It contains scenes inspired by a lot of the films' most excellent gags and thrills and gross-outs. Truly a top-notch blend of theme and thrill, and nothing like the one at Disneyland Paris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea, I've never been to that one, but would love to check it out. Why in the world wouldn't they put that one in Disney World too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the theme parks I've been to just blend together in my memory. I recall specific rides/attractions and can't really tell you which park they were from.

I vividly recall the Jurassic Park ride at Universal. I don't particularly like rollercoasters, and I misread the pamphlet on the ride as an 8 foot drop at the end, when it was actually an 80 foot drop. Lo and behold, there was actually an 8 foot drop at the end giving me a false sense of secutiy, then you go into a dark tunnel and there's the 80 foot drop! :lol:

Also vividly remember Pirates Of The Caribbean. The second the boat started going into a dark tunnel I just gripped onto my seat as hard as I could!

Damn those tunnels!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, they did and they didn't, Jay. Walt Disney World has Dinosaur (AKA Countdown to Extinction), which uses the exact same type of revolutionary ride vehicles on the exact same track layout, but the scenes and music and story and everything are totally different. I haven't been on that, but I hear it's inferior, and as much as I love dinosaurs, I think I'd probably agree. Indy is a truly phenomenal attraction.

EDIT: Haha, not a fan of drops, Koray? You're certainly not the only one out there, though I personally love a decent drop, as long as it's not too ridiculously long, and as long as it doesn't decelerate too you painfully at the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only remember the POTC ride in Florida and thought it was really tame and silly. Had no idea the California version was so different

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there's a good chance you'd also find the original to be tame and silly, then...it's basically the same as the Florida version, except it has a whole bunch of additional scenes at the beginning that lend it a darker quality. The exterior and the queue are also very different, because the attraction is located in New Orleans Square, and the queue is masterfully themed to be a Louisiana bayou at night, with a little landing where the boats depart from. As an added bonus, you can actually dine inside that first scene of the attraction, at an expensive but amazingly evocative restaurant called the Blue Bayou.

As with all these things, personal taste plays a huge role. You say tame and silly, I say timeless, world-class gold standard in dark ride design and implementation. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, like I said I need to experience all these things again as an adult to form a true opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just meant why create a tribute to California IN California. You've already flown out to California - you can explore California yourself. Would make more sense for the Florida theme park to have a California theme park, to make you want to go there next

EDIT: Unless, of course, the implication is "this theme park is the best place for adventure in California" and not "Explore what California is like" - which makes sense, I just hadn't thought of it that way before

It's not meant to provide the same adventures that can be found elsewhere in CA or to provide the "best place for adventure in CA." It's meant to complement the already exciting state of CA with the nostalgia and magic that is unique to the Disney theme parks, and synthesize an entirely new experience for the visitor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah all the sets were fantastic and extraordinarily detailed. But it's pretty much a slow boat ride and then a huge drop, just like Jurassic Park.

Well, not quite. At least at Disneyland, it's a slow boat ride with two short drops near the beginning and a long lift hill at the end but no drop. In Florida (and Paris?), there are no drops at all, I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, you're right, there is one drop in the Florida version. Shouldn't be too huge, though. Nothing like the Jurassic Park drop. As for the 15-second figure...that would feel like an eternity! Even big ones like on Jurassic Park or Splash Mountain only three seconds or so. They just feel longer because it's such an intense rush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, and I agree that WDW > DL, but I would gladly do DL, probably skipping DCA.

WDW has the re-designed Magic Kingdom, which was Walt's dream on steroids. You have to cross a damned lagoon to get to the gates, a marvel underground labyrinth keeps all backstage operations completely out of guest sight, Liberty Street realized even better than originally conceived, bigger, better Splash Mountain and Haunted Mansion, the Peoplemover, Matterhorn-style Space Mountain with dual tracks, no Tarzan in the treehouse, Country Bear Jamboree. It's admittedly flawed and they've added a lot of dumb attractions over the years. Disneyland has more shit and it's smaller. That's cool and everything and I love the place, but there's something about Magic Kingdom that drives me slightly wilder. It just feels like Disney's dream realized. Like the guy would have shit his pants if he'd seen it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WDW has the re-designed Magic Kingdom, which was Walt's dream on steroids.

Steroids are for getting as big and beefy as possible, often causing various unattractive and even dangerous side effects in the process, as well as leading to aggressive mood swings and an all-around less pleasant personality. So your analogy is spot-on! ;)

You have to cross a damned lagoon to get to the gates...

That'll make your trip easier!

...a marvel underground labyrinth keeps all backstage operations completely out of guest sight...

Admittedly nice, though Disneyland manages just fine.

...Liberty Street realized even better than originally conceived...

Yet no New Orleans Square...

...Matterhorn-style Space Mountain with dual tracks...

As opposed to a Matterhorn AND a Space Mountain with amazing music and a single longer track that isn't painful...

...no Tarzan in the treehouse, Country Bear Jamboree.

You got me there. :(

Like the guy would have shit his pants if he'd seen it.

I think the most striking part of his reaction would be his rage at seeing they built a theme park instead of the real EPCOT - the Experimental Prototype Community Of Tomorrow.

Anyway, despite my tongue-in-cheek belittling of WDW, I actually really want to take a trip there to experience it as an adult. As soon as I can get the time off from work, find the right group of people to go with, and afford the travel expenses, I'll do it, and I'll have a blast. But I do think there's something incredibly special about Disneyland that Walt Disney World sacrifices in the process of taking the aforementioned steroids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like every American kid (at least from a family with steady income) at some point gets to visit these Disney parks? Part of the general upbringing etc.?

I've been to a few theme parks, carnivals, zoos and interactive museums over the years (mostly in Norway and Europe), but nothing quite as big as Disneyland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, there are plenty of Americans who've never been - especially in the Midwest, I'd imagine, since they're neither on the west coast with Disneyland nor on the east coast with Walt Disney World. And even in California and Florida, you do meet people who've either never been or haven't been in a long, long time. But yeah, the parks are pretty well-known overall, and quite busy. (Despite the poor economy, attendance has actually risen at Disneyland in the last few years...) Disneyland tends to attract a more local demographic - lots of annual passholders - whereas Disney World is more tourist-oriented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're really going to criticize WDW and WDI because they didn't build a futuristic city? Was that even really feasible? I think I'd rather go to the EPCOT they came up with than Disneyland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're really going to criticize WDW and WDI because they didn't build a futuristic city? Was that even really feasible? I think I'd rather go to the EPCOT they came up with than Disneyland.

For the alcohol or for the rides?

One other thing I forgot to mention is that Big Thunder is a much more thrilling attraction at WDW - the Disneyland one is still fun - one of my favorites - but there's not enough room for all the drops it wants to have, so some of them end up being lackluster.

And to the point of this thread, I really like the concept for the Star Wars ride. It actually looks pretty feasible. The track layout is simple but it would support the narrative quite nicely, both aspects being key to Disney attractions. I'm skeptical that it's authentic, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're really going to criticize WDW and WDI because they didn't build a futuristic city? Was that even really feasible? I think I'd rather go to the EPCOT they came up with than Disneyland.

I'm really thinking Walt would have criticized it. He seemed to be pretty preoccupied with the EPCOT he envisioned, and they basically scrapped the whole idea after his death. I dunno if it would have worked, but he seemed to think it would. As for the last sentence...nah, not gonna go there. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like every American kid (at least from a family with steady income) at some point gets to visit these Disney parks? Part of the general upbringing etc.?

I've never been to a Disney theme park, and quite frankly, never want to, even though I could afford it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all likelihood, you've made up your mind and won't be persuaded otherwise, but to satisfy my own curiosity, would you mind explaining why you don't want to go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.