DaptoFunlandGuy

You're thinking about this development and it's impact on you, and that's ok, we're all a bit selfish over what we want the parks to build. The reality is that a park full of headlining thrill coasters doesn't survive. The coasters are extremely expensive to build and maintain, and they alienate a large portion of the population that are either under the height requirement, don't like the thrill\upside down\G-forces associated or have medical conditions that prevent them from riding. While this doesn't in and of itself mean the coasters wouldn't have a bunch of people queuing to ride them - it's the rest of their family group that aren't interested in visiting. Even the big thrill parks Stateside with the most coasters in the world still have smaller attractions, kids rides, family rides, flat rides, small fun coasters with minimal thrills, and honestly - this is the gap Movie World is filling. Magic Mountain and Cedar Point both have well rounded rosters and not everything has to be a record breaker. Road Runner can't be ridden solo under 120cm. it's 110cm with an adult. Spongebob solo is 110cm, 90cm with an adult. I think Kansas Twister is going to fall somewhere in between those two and it lowers the bar for kids at Movie World, plus it offers a "less thrilling" rollercoaster experience for the adults who don't like being balls to the wall. Unfortunately too many people have lost their heads (literally) entering a ride envelope when they shouldn't. Our safety rules require fences that prevent opportunistic entry. Wild West Falls used to have a gorgeous themed timber post and rail fence but too many people were climbing the fence to retrieve hats and what-not and so the big pool fence got put up instead. I don't see that there's much difference between these fences and the ones at Jet Rescue or Storm... if anything this mesh is a tight diamond rather than the standard 'cyclone' mesh at Sea World, which IMO looks nicer (though it probably makes it harder for the die-hard photographers to fit their lens through the gaps). We're also seeing the view from the back of the land, and i'm sure there is more attention paid to the optics from the 'front approach'.

This is just embarrassing. You close the park for half the year, and you can't even reopen with everything open? Temple of Huey and Little Rippers are both down for the same dates, so its the entire slide tower. If it's maintenance, there's no excuse - which is why I said it can't just be maintenance - because its unbelieveable that they could be in this position without something else playing a factor. I understand why fully six has slides down. and triple vortex has ongoing issues. we all know this. But with temple and rippers down, they've opened for the season with 8 slides offline. *facepalm*

Because you don't have a white card? no. Because clause 25.0-25.4 of the standard HIA contract you signed with the builder prevents you from accessing the site without providing 24 hours' written notice to the builder and complying with the builder's WH&S requirements means you can't just decide to 'look things over' without clearing it with the site manager \ builder's representative first? yes. And yes, I know many home buyers love to go and walk through and take photos of their new home under construction, and most of the time, it's no skin of the builder's nose to look the other way, as long as they're passive observers and not obstructing the works or causing issues while on site - but the clause is there, and enforceable, and pernickety clients can be breached if they're making the builder's task difficult, not to mention people allowing their kids to go running around the unfinished house in thongs or barefoot is just asking for trouble and is precisely why owners aren't allowed to just waltz onto the site whenever they feel like it. (To be clear, for the avoidance of doubt, i'm referring to residential construction, which of course has several differences to commercial works, but the text quoted at the top of this reply specifically asked about building a home, and that is what I have responded to) the site says that people who need a white card 'include'. it does not limit the list to only those dot points. it does not exclude all others. the fact that the site gives a few examples doesn't mean that others don't need it, it only outlines those who specifically do. A builder could require that all persons on site hold one. while not legislatively required, the builder can set their own WH&S requirements if they've conducted a risk assessment and reasonably concluded a risk mitigation is required. I've seen sites that don't allow Orange hi-vis and specifically requires everyone to wear yellow hi-vis. Turned out many vehicles occupying the site were a similar colour and the orange hi-vis didn't stand out. There's a lot of complexity involved and some things are unique to sites - which is why i was asking what point was being made - but I guess we'll all just have to accept on blind faith the suggestion new display name is implying because he knows something we don't...

I really applaud your self awareness. I didn't want to name names but your honesty is admirable.

I didn't claim she wasn't in the building. it's clear several shots are within, but they all appear to have been *just* inside the doors \ walls. the edge of the building could be defined, really, as being in a room that has an external wall, or on the outside of the same room adjacent to the wall. Would you get to an actual point? have they breached something in your mind? did they do something wrong? or are you making a lot of assumptions and mudslinging because you've got nothing better to do when you're not staring at yourself in a mirror?

I see plenty of jokes daily.

I don't have inside knowledge of the exact arrangement of the site. It looks like there's a shed wall directly behind the machine, so it does seem like it might be on the edge of the building, yes. It's a fair assumption they've done things by the book unless there is reason or suggestion that they haven't. If nobody can provide proof that they have flouted regulations, it's fair to assume they did the right thing by WH&S obligations as well as the welfare of the child. If this were an adult talent - would we be asking the same question? Asking a question myself - this can't be the first time filming of progress has occurred on a construction site - plenty of media out there giving updates on everything from cross river rail to Wizard of Oz - Does the child have to complete their site induction or is the supervising parent (who is themselves employed onsite) sufficient to ensure the child is supervised and doesn't enter high risk areas?

You'd likely be the only one, so not a great loss...

I don't usually use headphones when watching videos (I watch them at home on my TV) so I didn't notice any panning issues. Ick if they didn't address the stereo channels though.

It looked like each scene was on the very edge of the relevant section. I've absolutely no doubt given the construction manager was the other guy in the video that they would have cleared whatever relevant steps they needed to. The sunlight and shadows shows they filmed it very late in the day too, so no active work was going on at the time either. I'm sure anyone who thinks Dreamworld has flouted WH&S will have already contacted WorkCover Queensland to dob them in.

Ehh. we said that about Superman and Rivals earlier in the year and turned out Superman had a major mechanical issue. by the sounds of things the dates weren't planned, so I doubt this is for any sort of retheme and is probably something they didn't plan for.

It's ok, we know Movie World prefers to weather their themed elements naturally. (it's a joke not a dick, don't take it so hard.)

There's more than one way to skin a cat. Rides not designed for fasttrack tend to utilise the exit lanes. You could reconfigure the queues differently. You could utilise the outside queues. There are plenty of ways you could do it to split the queue into a showing for each film. You can self sort in the morning if you're there all day, but for many folk dropping by after school or early work finish, who can only get there in the afternoon, or for people with classes on in the afternoon who only have the morning, they don't have the choice which is the original point I made about the half-day showings they have been doing.

Won't be this year...

I mean - they do need something to replace doomsday, and It makes logical sense to get Intamin to do them a deal given the doomsday issues, so I wouldn't be surprised if Village are already negotiating something with them - but announcing your next big thing before you've even opened your current construction site makes no sense - a bunch of people are no doubt holding off buying passes until the new things are open - if there's ANOTHER new thing coming, maybe I wait another 6-9-12 months until the other new exciting thing is in too? (Honestly the dreamworld \ intamin announcement puzzles me - i can't imagine DW would want to take the shine away from Jungle Rush unless it was ABSOLUTELY necessary...

Yeah look - truthfully both parks have been spurred on to "something" because the park across the road did "something" too. Sometimes its a media post. sometimes its a main attraction. There is nothing wrong with the parks competing for our attention and our dollars, and it is way better than a monopoly without direct competition. But the expression 'not to be outdone' is as much journalism filler as anything else you may read into it. Whether or not the park media teams are tit-fot-tatting or not, I doubt Brad was suggesting DW was first in the train reveal stakes

That's even more reason to alternate the showings. Like I said earlier - people who don't care which one they see would 'self sort' into the shorter lines, while people hell-bent on seeing a particular showing will queue for the one they want and will be happy to wait longer (an additional cycle of the other film for example) in order to see the one they want. Of course, if one queue is empty, you could always run the other show to empty the one that is occupied too? I'm visualising the queue area and imagining you could do the 'outer' queue room like multiple boarding gates: Dare I say it - you could have a turnstile at the gate that counted how many seats were left for this 'flight' and when the next 'flight' would commence boarding...

Not at all. The studios can handle more than one production at a time IF the productions are scaled appropriately. When Disney did pirates, they had exclusive licence over the entire premises, but smaller productions working out of one sound stage don't need everything and multiple productions can co-exist in the same studio lot. Foreign versions of BB have established "the house" entirely free standing inside of a soundstage. You don't need to build a new stage.

gee i don't know. If you're keen to see a specific film, i'm sure you can be in line near the top of the hour when it starts, and you're pretty likely to get in to see it before it changes next hour. If you don't care which one you see because you're using it for an air conditioning break then you won't mind and just join whatever line. It doesn't have to be over complicated. I suppose you could trial it and see how people took to it. You could always repurpose the fast track queue line for the second film and literally alternate films all day - just taking from each queue in turn. People would self sort if they wanted 'a ride' they'd join whichever line was shorter, and if they wanted a specific film they'd join whichever queue they wanted. Honestly the way the indoor queue is set up, it wouldn't take much to have two queues - there's already 3 places guests can enter the pre-show from the queue (front of line, fast track, first switchback).

If you read very carefully, you'll note that I said: You can rest assured that Fright nights and Christmas events would have been planned for by the maintenance team to have the trains available - I was referring to times that weren't peak periods: Highly unlikely if the event was sold out. They've had staffing woes for several years now. It may be an ongoing thing, but if they're still battling with an inability to recruit and retain good staff - this is no longer an issue with recruitment, it's an issue with culture.

Just because a TV show returns, doesn't mean everything about it would be the same. It would technically be possible for them to do it at Dreamworld. Although BB Studios has been bulldozed, the Dreamworld Exhibition Centre could technically host the live evictions should that be an option. Production facilities were installed onsite, but technology to do production remotely from another location is far better than when they started the show 24 years ago. Production facilities can work out of trucks like they do for award night broadcasts. Not the most comfortable for the crew, but you can make it work. No. they're not doing it at dreamworld. If you're tying it to a park, yes, but there are soundstages \ film studios in places other than Oxenford. This could have been a new thread...

Thanks for sharing your perspective. I can understand where you're coming from, though I haven't had the same experiences. I think having some alternate films running periodically is a good thing. Clearly they can run more than one film in a day so it isn't a programming issue - though I'm not a fan of the "10-2is film A, then 2-5 is film B" approach because it forces you to get to the park early enough and then stay for both (which is a good thing for the park, but doesn't work for those who might be tempted to drop in for the new film, if it doesn't suit their schedule. Even switching every hour would be a good compromise, in my opinion - but again, i'm not sure what the financial costs are with showing one of the other films, so if it needs to be limited runs, I can understand that. I do agree it's not a massive priority for them - but these new Africa films do sound like something different and i'd be keen for them to come to Dreamworld.

@Brad2912 - to be very clear, nobody was providing you with stats on other installs to try to change your mind or prove your opinion was wrong... I asked you how you were measuring it being long overdue. I included a comparison to the Soarin films as an illustration of why I was asking the question. New Display Name replied to the question I asked you. His answer was that everyone had seen SV's film, but plenty of people hadn't seen Disney's, and that's why. The following posts, by myself and tricoart were responding to that reply rather than yours - outlining that the disney parks didn't have a high degree of 'new' visitation to warrant keeping the films for so much longer in comparison. Nobody is trying to change your opinion. It would seem several people disagree with you, but as all have pointed out, opinions are certainly something to which everyone is entitled. I am still asking you the question - by what measure do you think it's overdue. I've known you on these forums long enough to know that you generally have a reasonably developed position on a topic you comment on - i'm just enquiring what it is as I can't comprehend the viewpoint and want to understand more about it? The films are expensive to produce, and naturally the Australia one was commissioned as part of the overall capital expenditure on the original attraction - but there's a reason why most of these Brogent installs tend to just show one of the other films within the 'brogent family' of Flyover attractions - producing new ones isn't cheap, and generally needs a return on investment to make it worth it. We already know Sky Voyager didn't give the park the attendance or profit bump the management of the time had hoped for, and while the attraction is a solid part of the park's lineup, it isn't the showstopper that has people rushing to the park when a new film is added (which has happened twice to-date with no major change in attendance patterns or queue lengths). So I don't think the park is going to justify producing a new film. I've no idea of the licensing obligations for the films, so I don't know if they have to pay every time they show the other films, or if its more of a one-off purchase to show certain films (the limited run would suggest it's pay per play), and i'm not sure I want the park spending more than they already have on the various films. And i'm very happy with the Australian one. The underwater one sucked. That said - obtaining one of the other films for a limited run is clearly something the other FlyOver installs have shown is very possible - which would we all like to see? Flyover Canada Flyover Iceland Believe Chicago Flyover Hawaii The Real Wild West

please. tell me. in your opinion. by what metric is Sky Voyager well overdue for a new film? What constitutes "long overdue" in your opinion? Is there a specific timeframe for which you think a film should be changed? Should that timeframe be influenced by budget, funding, and popularity of the attraction, or should it be replaced regimentally at the same age in the cycle? How does the geographic location of the attraction influence the replacement interval of the film? What other factors are impacted by the Unique Geography of the Gold Coast, in your opinion?

I wasn't going to bother, but since we're boiling down to pedantry. You said "it's well overdue" (It. Is. Well. Overdue.) Not "it's well overdue in my opinion" I'm totally ok with not changing your mind about feeling like they're overdue for a new film, just as i'm totally ok with the original Aus film remaining as is. I simply asked by what metric you were determining it as overdue - as - the only metric I could compare it to would be the other flying theatres i've been on, all of which have had significantly longer runtimes than Dreamworld's current iteration. Not at all - just the closest available comparison for statistics. There isn't as much information available on some of the other flying theatres around the world, but if you can find some, i'd be happy to hear some that offer an alternate view on the age of the various films? (and i've just seen Tricoart has added some of the more accessible installs, so i'll just add: Flyover Canada opened in 2013 and continues to show the canada film, alternates with Flyover Iceland, and switches out seasonal films for halloween and christmas Flyover America opened in 2016 and continues to show the USA film, alternated with the Canada film from 2017, and from 2020 showed the Hawaii film as it's alternate (continues to show USA) Flyover Iceland opened in 2019 and currently shows the Iceland film and "Believe Chicago" Flyover Las Vegas opened in 2021 and shows The Real Wild West, Flyover Iceland, Believe Chicago and Canadian Rockies. It proves all of the flyover installations continue to show their original install video, with seasonal alternates of some of the other regional films - even 11 years later!