|
One reader of my Aquatica review a few weeks ago perceptively noted that it's
hard to judge whether I was enthusiastic or not because they didn't know what
else was in Orlando, or how I felt the new water park measured up to the
existing offerings. Good point. Others wrote that they had no idea what Disney's
water parks looked like, and could I provide a brief overview? I'm amenable to a
column that details all the parks.
However, I have a roadblock right away in the road to fixing this problem: I
haven't been to Universal's Wet and Wild. Oh, clearly I've been to *a* Wet and
Wild park at some point in the past (it was the Las Vegas one, which closed in
2004), so I have a tiny bit to fall back on. And clearly, I can see at least
some of the Orlando Wet and Wild just by virtue of driving past it on
International Drive. The fences are short and see-through, and the rides are
tall and not hidden, so this is a given. And clearly, I can head to the
Universal website like anyone else and look at pictures, and read about the
rides.
Judging by my past experience, my drive-by view of Universal, and the website
visit, I can only assume this is a fairly typical water park. The rides are
unthemed as anything other than giant waterslides. There appears to be a theme
of sorts inside some of the rides; for instance, the Disco H2O ride promises
lights, lasers, and disco balls. The Brain Wash ride may offer more conventional
thrills, and despite the fun name of Bomb Bay, this drop out ride doesn't appear
to eject you from a B52 bomber or any other themed building. In short, theming
is minimal. The thrills I cannot judge from a distance. They may even be intense
and rewarding. But the theming looks pretty standard, which is to say, not very
involved.
You can't miss the name of the park, that's
for sure.
Aquatica shares some features with Universal. The towers of staircases are
large, ungainly, and unthemed. The tubes and flumes are brightly colored, which
may inject some fun and playfulness into the day, but that's not to be confused
with a theme.
One difference: Aquatica does have an overarching sense of place: it tries to
be New Zealand, so stylized cartoony kiwis and similar creatures are used on the
signage, and voice-overs have that down under accent.
And Aquatica does have those animal exhibits (really too few for a typical
Busch park) and it does have some landscaping (really too little landscaping for
a typical Busch park).
But that still doesn't equal a theme. The rides still don't pretend to be
anything other than slides. They don't have a raison d'etre (reason to exist)
other than to be slides.
Why am I harping on this? Because Disney's parks do have that kind of theming.
The slides do have a reason to exist other than to just be slides. The Disney
water parks, in many ways, embody that over-hackneyed phrase "The Disney
Difference." They really do stretch the imagination and have enough hidden
details that the viewer may start to feel immersed, as if he is somewhere else
at the moment.
I've called this the Immersion Toward Interesting Illusion before, the subtle
accumulation of hundreds or thousands of tiny atmospheric details which together
imply a false reality convincing enough to let the viewer indulge the fantasy.
It's not just "immersion"; an important part of the equation is that the
immersion happen toward an "interesting" illusion. What's interesting about
slides built so we can slide down them?
Disney designers did something similar to the usual water park with River
Country. This original park was attached to Fort Wilderness and had the typical
exposed bodyslides simply built on wooden struts. The minimal theme was that of
a backwoods country swimmin' hole, so things were supposed to look a little
cobbled together and not be too fancy. After the two big ticket water parks
opened, with much more elaborate theme, water slide systems, and soaring budgets
to match, River Country simply closed down. It remains off to one side of Bay
Lake, forgotten and rotting in the sun. A fence prevents curious visitors from
getting too much of a look, though now and again an enterprising soul has made
it back there and posts photos for the world to see.
Typhoon Lagoon, which opened in 1989, boldly charted a new course. It would
not be enough to simply have the slides lying around as if they were built for
people to slide on. Nor would the towers be out there for all to see. Instead,
the whole park depended on a backstory, a theme to explain its existence. The
idea was that this tropical beach resort, a lagoon, was an idyllic place to
visit and get a good suntan… until a typhoon came by and blew everything
sideways, over, and upside down. Runoff from the storm down slight mountainsides
created the occasion for the slides.
See that leak in the middle of the dam? It's
unnecessary theming! How awesome!
The theme does get a touch thinner for Crush 'n Gusher, a new attraction
built in 2005. This Master Blaster is like a water coaster, and it does have
exposed tubes that violate a bit of the way things were done before. Ostensibly,
the tubes and the building were part of a fruit-packing operation before, and
there is a blown-over truck with fruit crates lying around as proof, so at least
the attempt is there to theme it.
The Master Blaster at Typhoon Lagoon creates
some 'bare coaster' look to the place.
But this aberration aside, the theme is consistently applied around the park,
and with some great results. The weenie at the middle is a boat, stranded high
and dry by winds and high water, atop a gushing geyser that provides needed
kinetics and orientation.
Every park needs a weenie.
The snorkel-with-sharks exhibit (yep, for real, and it's included in the
price of admission) includes an upside down keel of a ship that doubles as an
underwater viewing platform.
Shark reef is free (above).
And you can view the marine
life underwater (below) without getting wet, if you want.
The shacks for shops and food are leaning to the side, as if blown over by
hard winds.
The eatery is called Leaning Palms.
|
