[2023] The Curse at Alton Manor

[Zeock]

I think Jumanji looks really good myself! The screens look decent, and there appear to be some decent animatronics in there too!

Although with that being said, I generally have a higher tolerance for screens on dark rides than most in this thread. I don’t really have an issue with screens in most cases, and when done well, I thoroughly believe that they can enhance an attraction rather than detract from it.

In Jumanji: The Adventure, I feel like the screens aren't necessary and that physical props would work better.
Like you, I am not totally against screens, but they have to be used in a way that physical props would not be able to do as well.

 

[rob666]

I have a different opinion on screens based on the ride I’m experiencing/the ride I’m expecting to experience.

I’ll use Gangsta Granny as an example. I was expecting lots of screens in there and actually think they are suitable and work well enough for the ride that it is.

However, with this re theme, screens are not something I’d want to see. I wouldn’t be expecting loads, and I’m not they’d fit the experience very well. Screen overuse may make this a damp squib, whereas with Gangsta Granny they’re fine. I’m not expecting screens in this ride, I’ll be surprised if even 1 makes it into here.

Do you count a Pepper's Ghost as a screen, out of interest?

 

[Zeock]

Do you count a Pepper's Ghost as a screen, out of interest?

I'm not the original poster, but I do not consider a Pepper's Ghost effect as a screen, although there is an argument to be made for it.

 

[rob666]

Because it uses a big glass screen!

 

[Danscott22]

Do you count a Pepper's Ghost as a screen, out of interest?

Not personally, but I see how to argument can be made

EDIT: edit made to earlier post

 

[Matt N]

Do you count a Pepper's Ghost as a screen, out of interest?

I guess a Pepper’s Ghost illusion could be considered a screen, but I’d consider that to be more of a projection mapping effect myself. Although it could certainly be considered a media-based illusion, and I’d argue that it is an example of screens and media being very effective!

When people talk about screens, I think they’re talking more about video screens.

Another thing I’d say about screens is that I think a very important element for a screen-based ride to succeed is a good ride system. A lot of the screen-based rides you see today have very dynamic ride systems that are designed with screens in mind. The Oceaneering ride system used on Jumanji has a full motion base and works very well with screens, and to a lesser extent, Gangsta Granny uses quite a dynamic ride system that suits screen use.

Duel’s ride system is not overly dynamic in that regard (the vehicles can’t spin or anything), so I’d argue that it suits screens less.

 

[Craig]

Do you count a Pepper's Ghost as a screen, out of interest?

As an aside this is where I think Mark Fisher was going with his "Victorian effects" comment in that interview the other week. First appearing in the 1800s, but the evolution of the effect has seen it being utilised using projectors and TV screens in more modern times.

Back to the physical vs screen argument though. Screens are fine when they're used to complement the physical theming, or where they're used to produce effects like Pepper's ghost. Everything looks a little flat when they're the sole way of telling the story, or where they're obviously just bog standard projection screens/TVs. But if used together with those physical scenes and props then they can do a really good job of enhancing a scene.

 

[Themeparksandy1981]

The big problem now is like when the 1st and 2nd time I went on HH it made me jump but after that it’s boring as you know where all the effects are.
It’s a shame they can’t have different props/effects going off in each room randomly so 1 ride isn’t the same every time.
That’s where Projector mapping can come in as it can change the look of a room in the pre show. Maybe make it look like we walked into Emily’s house which now takes up the whole room.

 

[Matt N]

I have to say that I think Universal are the people who do screen-based rides best, from my experience.

One of the strongest uses of screens by a ride, from my experience, is The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man at Islands of Adventure. That ride uses screens pretty heavily, but it blends them very, very nicely with plenty of physical theming.

Screens are used to great effect within the ride. Effects like the simulated freefall are incredibly convincing, and would be nigh on impossible to produce with physical theming. There are also some other really nice instances where the stuff happening on the screen blends with physical theming, such as when one of the villains throws a fireball on the screen and it perfectly syncs with a real flamethrower going off within the scene.

Here’s a POV, for those of you that have never ridden:

(Some of the footage on the screens looks a bit dodgy through a camera because it’s in 3D; you’re wearing 3D glasses on the ride itself)

Many other Universal rides do this similarly well, in my view. Things like TransFormers and Gringotts are also very good at using screens effectively and merging them well with physical theming.

 

[RIPCorky]

I have to say that I think Universal are the people who do screen-based rides best, from my experience.

One of the strongest uses of screens by a ride, from my experience, is The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man at Islands of Adventure. That ride uses screens pretty heavily, but it blends them very, very nicely with plenty of physical theming.

Screens are used to great effect within the ride. Effects like the simulated freefall are incredibly convincing, and would be nigh on impossible to produce with physical theming. There are also some other really nice instances where the stuff happening on the screen blends with physical theming, such as when one of the villains throws a fireball on the screen and it perfectly syncs with a real flamethrower going off within the scene.

Here’s a POV, for those of you that have never ridden:

(Some of the footage on the screens looks a bit dodgy through a camera because it’s in 3D; you’re wearing 3D glasses on the ride itself)

Many other Universal rides do this similarly well, in my view. Things like TransFormers and Gringotts are also very good at using screens effectively and merging them well with physical theming.

Sorry I get what you're saying but it still looks like you're sat watching a movie or a computer game. There's no depth to anything, it's all flat and glowing like a TV screen.

This ride really needs to stick to it's roots so it remains different to all these other clones

 

[MaxPower]

It’s a shame they can’t have different props/effects going off in each room randomly so 1 ride isn’t the same every time.

If they integrated screens with physical props and scenery they could easily have different animations of ghosts and monsters for each ride cycle.

If they changed the lighting and sound effects along with this it would make it more re-ridable.

I suppose much depends on whether they want it to tell a cohesive story or not.

 

[Craig]

I'd prefer they spend money and effort on creating one ideal run for guests, rather than start faffing trying to get different experiences each time. After all, the vast majority of guests will be going on this once maybe twice a year. If something is immersive enough, there'll be enough new things for guests to spot on subsequent run throughs for some time.

 

[MaxPower]

You're probably right @Craig, as it is Merlin we're talking about.

 

[Zeock]

The big problem now is like when I 1st and 2nd time I went on HH it made me jump but after that it’s boring as you know where all the effects are.
It’s a shame they can’t have different props/effects going off in each room randomly so 1 ride isn’t the same every time.

If Towers decide to go all out on the scares, I think that they should have different effects going off randomly, but if they want to follow a cohesive narrative, then they shouldn't, unless they want to make up multiple narratives.

 

[Matt N]

I think what @Themeparksandy1981 raises is perhaps an inherent flaw of rides that focus strongly on jumpscares, and that is that they lack rerideability by virtue of the fact that you know where the jumpscares are and don’t have the element of surprise on subsequent rerides.

Duel/The Haunted House focused pretty heavily upon jumpscares with little in the way of backstory and finer storytelling details, and I’d argue that that did limit its rerideability. For me, I found that Duel’s jumpscares had far more of an effect on my first ride than they did on subsequent rides. With this in mind, the ride did lose its touch somewhat when I rerode it.

With this in mind, I am glad to hear that the 2023 iteration of the ride will be fleshing out the narrative a little bit more and going for more of a backstory-driven approach. This should hopefully make it a bit more rerideable and less reliant on superficial mechanisms like jumpscares. By all means, I’m sure there will be some jumpscares in there, but the “clever backstory” should hopefully mean that the ride doesn’t live and die with its jumpscares like Duel/The Haunted House arguably did.

 

[DistortAMG]

I would expect an announcement on this very soon, the marketing machine will start whirring up into action now the Christmas hype is over. Assuming they want it open for the start of the season, which I am sure is their aim. If they meet that target or not, that is a different matter.

 

[Zeock]

I think what @Themeparksandy1981 raises is perhaps an inherent flaw of rides that focus strongly on jumpscares, and that is that they lack rerideability by virtue of the fact that you know where the jumpscares are and don’t have the element of surprise on subsequent rerides.

Duel/The Haunted House focused pretty heavily upon jumpscares with little in the way of backstory and finer storytelling details, and I’d argue that that did limit its rerideability. For me, I found that Duel’s jumpscares had far more of an effect on my first ride than they did on subsequent rides. With this in mind, the ride did lose its touch somewhat when I rerode it.

With this in mind, I am glad to hear that the 2023 iteration of the ride will be fleshing out the narrative a little bit more and going for more of a backstory-driven approach. This should hopefully make it a bit more rerideable and less reliant on superficial mechanisms like jumpscares. By all means, I’m sure there will be some jumpscares in there, but the “clever backstory” should hopefully mean that the ride doesn’t live and die with its jumpscares like Duel/The Haunted House arguably did.

This seems promising, although I found Duel reridable despite the jumpscares lacking. It would be nice to have more detailed scenes which try to truly immerse you, although I wouldn't want the jumpscares to be removed altogether.

 

[jmc]

The thing with screens is, you know immediately they are just that even if its only subconsciously. I feel it takes you out of the experience because in the back of your mind you note that you’ve just switched from a nice physical set to looking at a giant screen. However, as has been said, there are good examples of them being used well even without the mega Disney/Universal budgets. One of which is I think is Underlandet at Liseberg:-


From: https://youtu.be/yqZzOGCR7E4


They are used subtly and effectively, and I think they compliment the set pieces rather than distract from them (in fact, I’d be happy if the new HH was of similar overrall quality).

In terms of marketing, I may be totally off the mark but Friday the 13th is approaching which might be a good day to market something spooky…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Trooper Looper]

John pretty much stated that the rides reridability will come from small and hidden details you won't have noticed on the first ride, and will encourage guests to ride it more than once.

Still hoping they're keeping the rides most detailed scenes, even only a bit of it. His statement does go against some of the original set pieces he designed like the Grand Hall. Originally that scene was designed to look really simple purposely not to distract guests from the upcoming Demon scare, but Tussauds heavily altered that scene in 1993 with wall decor, dining tables, moving chairs, lots of cobwebs, and a terrible layer of paint on the walls with bat shapes painted everywhere. Since then, the only thing that's changed in that scene is the prop with the repaint and the relight around the Demons. With John W on Board, I can see him removing a lot of the decor from that scene. The mirrors used in that scene by the columns are still a really impressive illusion to hide the Demon Ghoul and with them staying to old fashioned illusions, I can see this element potentially surviving. That scene did look like a cluttered mess after 92', but still worked well, until the Demon animatronics started to slow down over the years.

I'm surprised many people haven't brought this up, but the poltergeist room practically hasn't changed since opening day with the exceptions of relight and the targets added, unlike with its redo of Duel like repainted props, addition of Zombies, new sfx, the first scene was practically untouched and I think it still holds up pretty well, if only they gave them damm moving wall mechanisms in there some oil XD. The squeaking is louder than the music!

 

[rob666]

The squeaking was louder than the music.