Everest Pictorial Ride through and article

Thought this was nice:

http://miceage.com/kevinyee/ky012706a.htm

Gives much more a sense of the ride than just the vids.

If you haven't seen a vid here's the best one so far:

http://www.rollercoasterpro.com/onride_videos/

Edit: If this needs to be submitted to news, feel free to close (Geez, you think I would know the rules by now! :) ) *** Edited 1/28/2006 12:54:31 AM UTC by Peabody***

Great photo-essay, but followed by Kevin's typical "Animal Kingdom is TOO REAL" rant.

Sigh.

I'm a pretty big Disney fan, but some folks like him complain too much about Disney. At least he doesn't constantly fabricate things like Jim Hill.

Some interesting quotes from that "rant":

---

Unfortunately, the comparison refers to a fault in Everest: the train traverses the interior of a mountain and riders can view the scaffolding of the mountain in plain sight. It's more egregious on Desperado, but I was disappointed in Everest that so much of the inside of the mountain was visible during the supposed blackness of the backward helix. Can they not locate or invent a dense mesh which will keep light outside the mountain? Disney used to be above this.

---

I guess he hasn't ridden Space Mountain lately, which, despite great theming and effects, has always had the track structure visible from inside. Does that ruin the "experience" for him too?

---

Also like the Matterhorn, there just isn't that much theming. A few prayer cloths here, a climbing rope there, and you've got about all there is.

---

What about the mountain itself? The village that is so clearly represented in the pictorials? The extensive background, images, and statues throughout the two lines -- again, all captured in his photographs? Am I missing something here?

It's also not very flattering to reduce this massive expenditure to something that's not "exactly what Walt would have wanted" -- since when is he the authority on that matter? I'll be the first to admit I'm a hardcore Disneyphobe, but it seems to me that, despite calling it "that good [of] a ride" in the end, he's just specifically looking for things in which to be disappointed.

---

he's just specifically looking for things in which to be disappointed.

---

dingdingdingdingding. You've just identified Kevin's MO. He seemed to learn it from Lutz, who ironically has been all sunshine and smiles after the Old Regime at Disneyland got the boot a year or so ago.

Yeah...Lutz was always negative, and I'm glad he has changed. But, then things at Disneyland are really *that good* right now. Everyone is worshiping the new regime, and it's hard to imagine how they would have handled the last 2 years any better. I would have thought pleasing the hardcore DL fans would have been impossible, but man did they do it! The place was night and day compared to my very disappointing visit in 99.

Now back to your regularly scheduled Everest discussion...

Still amazed at how hard the Yeti animatronic got sold as the most advanced and all that, but you see it for less than 4 seconds as you zip under it.

Probably a sort of anticipointment on my part because I imagined something totally different in regards to how such a figure would be used.

Looks like a nice ride. Looks like a fun ride. Hell, it even looks like a solid ride. But now that I've seen the POV's that are popping up left and right, it's not enough to make me feel like I'm missing anything if I don't get there right away.

(maybe I should write for these Disney sites? ;) )

Hah! I think you've found your rant for this week's podcast.

Perhaps I will listen after all. ;)

(I'm trying to reserve judgement until I ride it next month. It's starting to look likely that it will be in continuous soft-open by then.)

*** Edited 1/28/2006 4:03:26 AM UTC by Brian Noble***

---

Lord Gonchar said:
Still amazed at how hard the Yeti animatronic got sold as the most advanced and all that, but you see it for less than 4 seconds as you zip under it.

Probably a sort of anticipointment on my part because I imagined something totally different in regards to how such a figure would be used.

Looks like a nice ride. Looks like a fun ride. Hell, it even looks like a solid ride. But now that I've seen the POV's that are popping up left and right, it's not enough to make me feel like I'm missing anything if I don't get there right away.

(maybe I should write for these Disney sites? ;) )

---

I guess you guys should add a Disney nut like me to the podcasts, eh? ;)

From what I still hear Gonch is that you do see the Yeti far away, approach it, then go under it, and that any more would ruin the experience.

The ride has more surprises than I thought, especially the layout. It look pretty incredible, but...

I don't know...It'll cost a whole days admission to DAK just to ride this great new coaster, and Three rides I've already done (a rapids, a darkride, and a safari-OH and I forgot the spinning mouse that Kennywood has done better). Everest helps to improve the park, but it is far from a complete theme park experience. They need a LOT more to justify a visit, imho.

I could say the same for the studios too. All of their park except for MK has like what, 5 or 6 rides?

Blasphemy, I know.

Don't forget Animal Kingdom also has Dinosaur, which I think is easily one of the 5 best rides at the whole resort. I think it's better than Indiana Jones in CA, but I know others will disagree. =)

Hey, I like Dinosaur better than Indy. I'll put both those rides in my top 10 favorite rides, coasters or not :)

Indy > Dinosaur.

But keep in mind that since the rides are identical it's all in the theming...

---

It'll cost a whole days admission to DAK just to ride this great new coaster

---

Except that the prime market for WDW isn't day visitors. It's families on a week's vacation and passholders who come out for 2-3 long weekends plus maybe one longer trip throughout the year. The locals (other than passholders) generally don't bother going unless they are passholders (and hence go all the time anyway) or they are showing Aunt Mary from Cheboygan a good time.

So, the vast majority of WDW guests are either buying multi-day tickets (usually with the ability to parkhop), or they have annual passes of some flavor. At that point, the marginal cost of an extra day isn't the ticket. It isn't even close.

Next month, we are staying seven nights, with six full days in WDW. Guess how much extra it costs me to take my family of four to, say, Epcot on the night we arrive for a few hours, and AK on the morning we depart for "one last ride" on Everest, upgrading my six park days to eight?

$32.91.

That's not per person. That's total. And it includes sales tax *and* two extra days' of theme park parking.

AK and DS don't have to be full-day parks. Their first job is to convert people who visit "Orlando" to people who visit "Disney".

Likewise, Everest isn't there to get people to come to AK for the day. It's there to give families a reason to come back to Florida this year rather than go to Colonial Williamsburg or the beach for their summer vacations.

That said, I'd argue that DS really is a full-day park; it has a very strong lineup of shows combined with a half-dozen decent-to-great attractions---compare it to Seaworld rather than MK and you get the idea. *** Edited 1/28/2006 9:38:25 PM UTC by Brian Noble***

There is a GREAT new EE video posted on TPR. Shows all the queues, off ride areas, and the onride video itself is better than any others I've seen so far.

http://www.themeparkreview.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=9

I think Theme Park Review links should be banned, like that other website, what was it? ;)

However, Everest looks like a fun coaster. Disney coasters are always better performers in person. However, one of the reasons I like the California Disney parks better is that everything is in one place. It's such a task to go park to park, and there is so much to cover. Dare I say, overwhelming?