Home > Florida > Animal Kingdom > Dinosaur > Review Comments

 Review of Dinosaur @ Animal Kingdom
0 Rating Posted by: tacoking on 11/21/2004 10:29:00 PM
I didnt know what to expect when I first went on this, so I was kind of thrilled to be going on it my first time. I found it be quite a thrilling attraction. Easily the best ride in the park. Doesnt quite top Universals rides, however.

Review Comments

Swimace on 12/26/2004 8:57:22 PM said:
Yeah, this ride is kind of in the shadow of Spiderman. However, I was hoping the first half of ROTM would be more like this, just substitute the return to the future with the coaster segment, which would be awsome
mrceagle on 12/27/2004 2:08:15 PM said:
Spiderman was built a few years after this ride. its a compleatly deforent set up. Rides like this made Spider man posible.
Docter on 12/28/2004 10:39:17 AM said:
Both Spiderman and Dinosaur are great rides but I like Spiderman alot better.
Swimace on 12/29/2004 2:23:10 PM said:
I know. Dinosaur was a one of a kind ride when it came out, but many people forget about this ride now. Its a really fun ride, but if someone was to come to Florida and you asked them about a dark ride, they would most likely think of Spiderman.
mrceagle on 12/29/2004 10:10:56 PM said:
First yould have to explain to them what a Dark ride is. But Dinosour wasnt a one of a kind ride. it uses the same ride mechinism as Iniana Johns in Disney land. But the effects Animatronic effects are far advanced.
Docter on 12/30/2004 11:54:51 AM said:
I give Disney credit for making this type of ride.Dinosaur is the best ride in animal kingdom.Of course that could all change when Expedtion Everest opens.
mrceagle on 12/30/2004 10:20:34 PM said:
Everist is a much needed atraction for Animal Kingdome. now we only need to get afew new rides into EPCOT.
Docter on 12/31/2004 8:57:42 AM said:
Yes EPCOT is lacking the most rides.The Future world section of the park Has alot of good rides.Its time for the worldshowcase to get rid of some of there movies and adds some rides.
mrceagle on 12/31/2004 6:31:19 PM said:
But can you understand my hate for replacing rides. Look at Alien Encounter a great attraction. they replaced it with Stitch Encounter. Not its still a bit too intence for its key target group and to cartoonish for most adults. The newer Virstions of the Imagination ride are terable compared to the old atraction. And personaly I miss Juyney of Motion, Take Flight, Herivons, etc. I dont mind some of the movies but I agree allot of them need to go.
tacoking on 1/1/2005 12:20:44 PM said:
I have been hearing mixed reviews of Stich Encounter. The animatronics are easily the best ever created, I hear, especially the one of Stitch. The effects are great throughout it, but what ruins the ride is the story. This supposedly takes place some years before the movie, yet he is already speaking English and calling himself Stitch? What? They heve the effects down, but not the story.
Swimace on 1/1/2005 4:41:37 PM said:
I want to ride Stitch Encounter, it looks interesting. As for a new ride for Epcot, Theyre getting Soaring put in right now. However, the building which houses Soarin is very tall and clearly visible from the world showcase. It apparentlt towers over Canada, ruining Disneys well planned atmosphere. For this reason there have been rumors about a new "mountain" for Canada with a rapid ride. As for a new thrill ride, I think MGM should get a stunt themed Booster Bike
mrceagle on 1/2/2005 12:44:35 AM said:
I wouldnt get any hope up for a rapids ride in Canada. A flume woudl make more sence. but no mater wich one they use they are copyign another ride in Disney world.
Docter on 1/2/2005 8:52:41 AM said:
Maybe instead of adding more rides they should build a new themepark.On a website called WDWmagic.com they have roumers of a new Disney Theme park coming in 2008.
Swimace on 1/2/2005 12:38:57 PM said:
They should build a thrill park. They have the room and the money, and it would be really popular. Too bad Disney wont do it
mrceagle on 1/2/2005 5:34:07 PM said:
Doc is you ferther those rumers. they have Hong kong opening. that new rumered park coudl be the rumerd.Texas, Asia, of Canada park. anyways they need to get the resto of the parks in order before they invest in another park. though I think a park with higher thrills wouldnt be a bad idea.
Docter on 1/4/2005 7:51:59 AM said:
Yes i agree adding a park to thrills wouldnt be such a bad idea.And Disney has to keep expanding in Florida because they have so much compition like Universal,the Busch company,and all the small attractions like splended China,the international dr attractions,and the beaches.
mrceagle on 1/4/2005 10:55:05 PM said:
not to mentioned the newly expanded Cypress Gardens. But Lets see a few more atractions for the parks every year till say 2010 then open a major thrill park.
Docter on 1/5/2005 7:59:17 AM said:
I know one of the companys are going to have a theme park before 2010.Universal has about another 200 acres and im sure there going to add a theme park or another resort pretty soon.Same thing with Disney.I bet there Desighning a theme park right now.
mrceagle on 1/5/2005 11:25:49 AM said:
Disney is disignign theme parks constantly. most of them dont get built. Right now there finishing Hong Kong. i wouldnt expect any sort of new park untill construction is done on that one. Pluse Disney is addign atraction to every park and tryign to get EuroDisney back on track.
Swimace on 1/5/2005 5:11:46 PM said:
Doctor, where does Universal have 200 acres? It sure doesnt have that much free land in Orlando.
Docter on 1/5/2005 5:34:38 PM said:
I didnt mean 200 sorry about that I ment 2000 acres.I dont know if they have the 2000 acres im pretty sure they do or plan to anyway.It will be on the other side of I4 im not sure where.I got this infomation from the 2004 Econoguide to Walt Disney World and Universal Orlando.I dont know if the infomation is accurate but I dont think they will put false infomation in a major guide.
Scott on 1/5/2005 6:39:09 PM said:
2,000 acres?! I doubt it...
woofboy111 on 1/5/2005 6:54:51 PM said:
Universal did have a whole bunch of land on the other side of I-4 behind International Drive. It was the old Lockheed Martin Factory or something. Its a huge plot of land, but I am pretty sure that it was sold when NBC took over Universal. I heard some guy who wants to open another religious theme park bought most of the land. I personally hope that NBC didnt sell all of Universals land, and kept enough for another park, but Im not really sure how much was sold.
Docter on 1/5/2005 7:13:58 PM said:
2 Things.One who orignally owned Universal and how did NBC take over Universal.I knew NBC and Universal were together but i didnt know NBC owned it.Also why would they open another Religous place anyway.They already have the Holy land experence.
Scott on 1/5/2005 7:19:37 PM said:
I was about to say the same thing... about the religious park.
mrceagle on 1/5/2005 9:54:00 PM said:
Vivindi was the last owner of the Universal theme parks and entertainment companies. its a europian company that owned a few stations in europ and a hand full of parks. With IOA and a few additions to the europian park they wore themselfs thin. insted of declaring bankrupsy they opted to sell there Universal asets. NBC won there bid nearly a year ago and it took a wile to get it cleared by the FTC. this was finalized only a few months ago.
woofboy111 on 1/6/2005 6:51:58 PM said:
Yeah... In my opinion another religous place would be a waste. I havent heard anything about it in a while though. The last time I heard about it is when NBC sold the universal land. It mentioned the religious park in the Orlando Sentinel.

Also, NBC owns universal, but remember that General Electric owns NBC, so Universal is really owned by GE.
mrceagle on 1/7/2005 3:13:53 PM said:
I dont even want to visit the religious park they have now. Another one would be a wast. not to mention more agrument over weather on not they shoudl pay taxs.
Docter on 1/7/2005 4:30:33 PM said:
Still I cant believe NBC sold the land that Universal had.They could of made more theme parks and hotels and stuff like that.I dont even like NBC except for there late night talk shows.Anyways I still hope they didnt sold to much.
tacoking on 1/7/2005 10:54:18 PM said:
Didnt Universal (oops - NBC Universal) sell some thousands of acres of land? I know it was more than 2000.....
mrceagle on 1/8/2005 2:31:24 AM said:
There is a couple things to look at when consederign that land. was it safe to use. Did the highway get in the way of safe use. Was the land to protected(wetlands). things like that along with money may have been the reason.
Docter on 1/8/2005 7:12:13 AM said:
Ya there is probably a reason behind why they sold there land.But maybe they didnt seel all of it.There is a rumor on a website.I dont know wich one I think it was IOA central.but it said there might be another hotel.So maybe they didnt sold all of it.
tacoking on 1/8/2005 9:04:03 AM said:
Looking at my last comment, I didnt even understand my question. I know they sold land, but can anyone give me an exact number, to refresh my memory?
mrceagle on 1/8/2005 11:01:44 AM said:
Ive never heard a number only that they sold some land. But another hotel wouldnt be that bad. Ive actually heard rumers about it as well.
woofboy111 on 1/8/2005 2:15:27 PM said:
They probably have enough land on their current property where everything is built now for another hotel, and thats about the only other major thing they could build.

As for the land that was sold. Its all old factorys and stuff like that, so its not protected. Im sure old factorys wouldnt be safe to use, but if they kept the land they would knock the old factorys down anyway. I-4 would be an issue though, as well as the other stuff between the two propertys in connecting them. They could always use buses, or maybe they could have built a monorail or something going from citywalk to Wet n wild to the property that was sold.

But then again, the land was sold (hopefully not all of it), so this will probably not happen.
tacoking on 1/8/2005 6:15:05 PM said:
The number I heard, I believe, was 30,000 acres....I was just wanting to double check that.
mrceagle on 1/8/2005 7:54:22 PM said:
Now if the land had factorys there may actualy be enviromental restrictions. some old factorys cased allot of polution to the ground. they wouldnt be able to use it untill they cleaned the property. a Major coperation dosnt fall into a catigory in which the land can become a Superfund site.
Docter on 1/9/2005 9:19:54 PM said:
The monerail idea connecting City walk to Wet N wild is not a bad idea.the only problem is where would they put the monerail loading stattion.
mrceagle on 1/9/2005 10:48:53 PM said:
They woudl need maltiple stops and they need to get more then two atractions in on the deal.
woofboy111 on 1/10/2005 12:43:00 PM said:
well, if they ever do build another park off of the property they have now, that will add more than two attractions.
mrceagle on 1/10/2005 4:30:49 PM said:
Thats why they likly sold that other property. they dont want to spend the money to transport peopel. look at what they have now its very self contained and they dant need monorails or buses.
Docter on 1/10/2005 4:40:36 PM said:
Ya but how would people get to one park to another.
mrceagle on 1/10/2005 9:12:48 PM said:
They dont have to worry about it. withthe Hotels conectid to the riverwalk area and them conected to the two parks everythign is self contained.
Post Review Comment
You must login or create an account to post a review comment.

Clicky Web Analytics