The Great Gremlins Adventure

[S.W24]

After just raveling my big mouth about the stage show not being used well it is currently now being used. All New Looney Tunes LIVE Show at Warner Bros. Movie World - What’s Up Rock?! Join all of your favourite Looney Tunes characters including - Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Lola Bunny, Tweety, Sylvester, Wile E. Coyote, and Taz along with Kids’ WB! stars Georgia and Shura in a fun, animated and interactive musical show that will entertain and excite kids of all ages. What’s Up Rock?! tells a comical tale where Kids’ WB! stars Georgie and Shura are mysteriously trapped in their dressing room and Bugs and the Looney Tunes gang must save the day and run the show! But which naughty Looney Tune locked them up in the first place….The show features music and dancing from rock ‘n’ roll to show time hits including ‘There’s No Business’, ‘Rock ‘n’ Roll Medley’,’ Shake your Tailfeather’ and more – kids can rock along with their favourite stars and even meet them for a photograph after the show! Catch the What’s Up Rock?! show live daily at 11:30am at the Show Stage. The show is set to begin on sunday.

[MickeyD]

^ the stage has been used for Toon shows on and off for the last few years now. Personally I think it's a waste.. How do the Looney Tunes Characters fit into a Western themed area anyway? I know they don't have room in their own "land" for a show any more but it seems like a pretty piss poor excuse to fill a gap in their entertainment program to me? As for the Maverick show, it was a flop from day one. They spent MILLIONS on the set and even got Arthur Coghlan in to assist with the development of the illusions. Unfortunately the show never lived up to the promise of the set. The script was reworked countless times after it got off to a ludicrously shaky start and was never really that well received by it's audience. There have been tentative plans to rework the venue since Maverick was inevitably shuttered. A new show, Holiday events, a new ride or simply a function venue are all things that were being touted. Now that Events have Main Street sorted out with it's roof and the Maverick venue has been used time and time again for Holiday "Filler" shows, I think it is only a matter of time before the area is eyeballed for a new project. My money is on a new ride. A new Live show would take dozens of cast members to run whereas rides have greater appeal for repeatability and take only a fraction of staff members to operate.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

My money is on a new ride. A new Live show would take dozens of cast members to run whereas rides have greater appeal for repeatability and take only a fraction of staff members to operate.

Shows however are capable of soaking up a greater number of guests, do add value to the park as well (as a ride might take 10 minutes to experience, a show would take the best part of an hour from seating to finale) to help make the park more of a full day experience. As far as more cast, here is a typical show from my days at Wonderland: Action Man - cast - AM, Fidget, two sidekicks. Dr X, Felix, two sidekicks. Stunt co-ordinator, audio coordinator\pyrotechnics, two ushers. Thats 12 people including technical crew to put on a show that went for almost 40 minutes, and could seat 1000 people in a full arena. Millennium Magic \ Spellbinding Sorcery: cast: Tony, Juleen (or casey laura), 4 x magic movers, stage manager, audio\lighting manager, two ushers. Thats 9 people, with a show that lasted an hour, and could seat 750 people in a full arena. Now staff wise, it uses more cast and crew, but costs far less than the operation of a ride. An attraction with the same hourly capacity as either of those attractions would be running 2 or 3 full time staff, and the operating costs on the rides - generators \ hydraulics \ pneumatics etc would cost an enormous amount in power - take ToT as a prime example for power consumption - from what I recall they had to upgrade their power facilities in dreamworld to cope with it. Operating costs on the big attractions at Wonderland if you wanted to hire the park out privately after hours cost about $1200-$1500 per hour, and their wouldn't be much profit built into it because they would make their money from food and beverage packages - so if you think about the hourly rate for 12 skilled staff - call it $40 an hour, and thats being generous, you're only talking about $480 to run the attraction for an hour show. There is less likelihood of breakdowns, maintenance is far less costly (you don't need an electrician, an engineer, a carpenter, and other grease monkeys). Your lighting\sound guys are normally ably qualified to do what little maintenance is needed - light globes and the like, which are also far less costly. The cost for a park to put on 3 shows a day, to soak up anywhere up to 1000 people for an hour at a time reduces the loads on other attractions throughout the park, meaning less staff required on each of the other attractions, and less wear and tear on the rides. It's the same principal as to why a lot of american restaurants (and Sizzler here in Aus) serve a type of bread before your meal - fill them up on the cheap stuff before they get to eat the expensive stuff. All you can eat chinese buffet places have a similar concept - you can't have all you can eat if it's just king prawns - cause the prawns are the most expensive. I have no doubt that we will see new attractions at movie world, but I think it would be a smart idea, considering all of the infrastructure that is already in place, that they would continue to use the old maverick area for shows, rather than rides.

[DonjaiInLA]

if i remember correctly, didn't Movie World buy the IMAX projector from South Bank IMAX cinmeas in hope to use it as part of a "Soarin'" style attraction hosted where the Maverick show was... Except themed to Soarin' Over Australia? I know the idea cost estimates were to high to pursue, but does Movie World still own the IMAX projectors? I think its sad this idea wasnt pursued by the park... A Disney quality attraction possibility and they choose against it? fail. The staff demand for this type of ride would have been reasonably low, and could work at varying capacities... if one chair/lift thingo was broken, the other two or just one could still operate... and of course it would showcase Australia to overseas tourists and who knows, the state government might have thrown some money at it... they throw money at the film studios at movieworld and how many quality movies are filmed there these days....

[MickeyD]

^ I'm not sure if they did in fact acquire the IMAX projector or if the plan is still in the pipeline for a version of Soarin. I do know that was something that was tossed about before Superman was decided on. Who knows maybe it's still on the back burn? One thing is for sure the Maverick show venue is a hot spot for redevelopment. Personally I think a version of Soarin would make for a magnificant addition to MW's line up and would be a HUGE draw for international tourism. It could easily be themed to the western area with an appropriate Aussie outback themed entry. Something like this would be not only a massive crowd eater but would also prove relatively inexpensive to operate, needing only about 3 staff.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

I don't think you guys quite understood my point when it came to staff. Only needing three staff is fine, but an attraction like Soarin would chew through the power bill. Of course, so does every other attraction in the parks, but a show venue would use much much less.

[MickeyD]

I get you Alex but it depends on the type of show you are looking at really - both maverick & PA costed loads to run, hence why maverick was no longer viable to continue with. Not only were there pretty big casts for each show, there was also of course the back of house operations such as animal care (old western action show), mechanics, show techs, pyrotechnicians, prop, wardrobe and costume shops, trainers, audio visual, fitters etc.. Even with only 2 - 3 shows a day, operationally and cost wise, they were very much considered MAJOR attractions. I very much doubt a version of Soarin would cost as much as this. It's basically the functionality of the Batride with a big screen. Keep in mind I spent the best part of 10 years working in Operations at MW in a fairly senior role so I have a pretty good idea of backend running costs. Even so, MW management have always been very cautious with 'over capitilising' their Park. SW has it's exobedant costs of animal care whilst MW spends loads more on the behind the scenes stuff you don't see. I think this is the main reason why we haven't seen so much growth as we have seen replacements and upgrades (Gremlins, Western show, Studio tour, MM, PA). There is the obvious need to keep the place fresh as parts of the product date quickly but the main back end reason is to control capital expenditure and keep it in line with attendance growth. As I said, I believe the Maverick venue is the site for the next Major Attraction. Traditionally they have added a major ride to the park every three or so years & that number comes up again for MW xmas09. I don't regard Hollywood Stunt Driver as a major initial cost outlay, the venue is already there & the massive savings made from not running Police Academy can be dumped in to the initial set up cost of this new show. With other additions to the park over the years such as Wild West, batman, a bigger Looney tunes area etc, they no longer see it viable to run two major shows that swallow 1500 - 2000 guests at a time... However, we haven't really seen a new people eating addition since Wild West, that didn't already replace something else (unless you can't Batwing, Roadrunner, intencity)

[Gazza]

^ I'm not sure if they did in fact acquire the IMAX projector or if the plan is still in the pipeline for a version of Soarin. I do know that was something that was tossed about before Superman was decided on. Who knows maybe it's still on the back burn? One thing is for sure the Maverick show venue is a hot spot for redevelopment. Personally I think a version of Soarin would make for a magnificant addition to MW's line up and would be a HUGE draw for international tourism. It could easily be themed to the western area with an appropriate Aussie outback themed entry. Something like this would be not only a massive crowd eater but would also prove relatively inexpensive to operate, needing only about 3 staff.

Hmmm, The Aussie/Western theme seems a bit tenuous at best.....No doubt it would be an awesome addition regardless, but you know me, I'm a stickler for proper intergration....Dunno, maybe market it as revolutionary new type of movie? I mean Ideally this sort of thing would probably suit SW best (More internationals, the park is based around the natural world) but of course there are the height and space issues.

I know the idea cost estimates were to high to pursue

I wonder if they would reconsider it...Intamin gives a breakdown of the costs of one in this PDF, $12.5 Mil USD does not seem out of MWs price range, and is actually quite a good price for the major attraction it would be.

[DonjaiInLA]

I was doing some research into the ride.. I think this is exactly what Movie World should pursue next! It is like the optimum (non-rollercoaster) ride! and its not like there isnt enough nice places to film in Australia... they could even do a fun take off from Movieworld.... We have gone so far off topic.

[MickeyD]

Yeah!! How bout those Gremlins huh?

[Original]

I would imagine a show would be a fair amoun to run, especially from movie world. One their major attraction shows are usually massive, PA, Shrek, all shows at SW. Then I would imagine all those lights that are used during the show would chew a fair bit of power, along with the air-conditionong with 1000 people in their. Then there's the maintence on props, costumes etc. I don't know exact pricing on each running a ride and a show but really they both have their pro's and con's and movie world just neeed to decide which one they want, or survey the public and see what they want, with a new being put in at the moment if they were developing it now a ride would probably be better.

[ads086]

I don't think Movieworld has actually bought that projector just yet. I know that Southbank still have the IMAX screen, and to the best of my knowledge, they received an IMAX copy of The Dark Knight (since it was apparently shot on IMAX stock). If they haven't or can't get hold of one, surely it wouldn't be that hard to get 4 digital projectors and hook them up into some kind of splicing setup, and have the giant image split up across the projectors, like they do with plasma screens on stages. re: Gremlins - never seen the movie, nor rode (ridden?) the ride. Although, from the clip on youtube, I think Scooby was a better investment

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

It is MUCH MUCH harder to link multiple projectors to have a seamless projection than it is to Matrix TV or PC displays together. The films have to be custom made, and cost a fortune. Clint would be able to explain a bit more about the intricacies on Matrix Projection - as he is in control of the largest matrox projection screen i've ever seen - at Outback Spectacular - and they only use TWO projectors (although the Barco is significantly more sophisticated than an ordinary projection system)

[DonjaiInLA]

From what I have googled, and Googled i have, WVTP had some kind of Lease on the IMAX projector to protect it from investment by another privet group. This lease meant it was still kept by the Southbank 5 cinemas either on site or at another location. I emphasise had because its been many years and you would think that if WVTP gave up the idea... they probably didnt renew and lease. As to Southbank still using the IMAX i find this rediculous as they are currently plannin to turn the Southbank 5 into the Southbank 6, by dividing a cinema. No prize for guessing which one. Remember the reliability of the internet when reading this post.

[rappa]

Okay to start off with yeah, the set looks good, but underneath not so hot. The show control system for Maverick was a serious install, much more full on than anything we've got at AOS were all our systems are pretty well separate from each other. It was really set up much more like a ride than a show in terms of operation. As for projection, well Digital projection is really getting there now in terms of brightness to be able to do large format projection like IMAX. However you would still need to stitch multiple machines together to do an image as big as IMAX, but it's not that hard to do. Just as an example your 30k Lumens projector (biggest digital) uses a 6000watt lamp. IMAX uses a 30 000watt lamp. You're biggest cost in running these things is lamps themselves. Even Shrek would chew through 100 grand a year in lamps. Over at AOS we use still image large format PIGI projectors, and each one outputs 90k lumens, thats 3x brighter than what digital can currently do. At the parks its all your labour and parts that cost the money, electricity is so ridiculously cheap its not much of a factor.

[Gazza]

So if shrek, with one 3D screen uses $100k a year in lamps, would that mean something like Spiderman (considering the projectors in that are continuous duty) would use $1Mil+ in lamps alone?

[nev]

I'm going to point out the obvious here... The Soarin' system uses IMAX's omniMAX (also known as IMAX Dome) system - where the screen is actually dome shaped and riders are thrust in towards the centre of the screen. Parts of the projector, lenses and screens are all unique to the dome system meaning that it's not just a simple case of buying a standard IMAX projector from Southbank and throwing some new film in. Video stitching software really isn't an option for 'a bunch of digital projectors' because, quite simply, the brightness and image quality is still not on par with traditional film projectors.

[Gizmondo.136]

I just got a question but how much theatres were in the gremlins ride???

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

How... many??

I think from memory there were 8 theatres. Fun fact - one of them still exists beside the scooby queue (the side closest to Superman's show building) and is used as a staff training room.

[Levithian]

Think there was maybe one less at 7. 3 on the gift shop side and 4 on the other due to the placement of back of house areas . The area that makes up the indoor queue / foyer area (where the fountain is) inside the castle are these rooms. The entry corridors are still there as emergency exits out of the building though, so it should give you a bit of an idea of how it fit in the front of the building. I think I remember being told the load station you entered after leaving the theatres is pretty much around where the control room / load dock is now?

Edited March 31, 2022 by Levithian

[Gizmondo.136]

Hey does somebody have a track layout of the gremlins ride or can somebody draw a track layout of the ride I’m trying to figure what still remains of the gremlins ride.

[Slick]

7 minutes ago, Gizmondo.136 said:

Hey does somebody have a track layout of the gremlins ride or can somebody draw a track layout of the ride I’m trying to figure what still remains of the gremlins ride.

As mentioned nothing remains sans the one theatre. I'd recommend checking YouTube for references and drawing up a map from there.

[Gizmondo.136]

On 17/9/2008 at 2:57 PM, MickeyD said:

^^ MW Germany WAS copied from the original GC park - in fact when I was working there, some of my collegues were priviledged to fly over to Germany and assist with the opening of the park. When WB's sold out their ownership of the parks, Germany cut it's ties all together. The Gold Coast park has been lucky to maintain the WB's indicies (VERY marketable) As for Gremlins, ask me anything about it - I ran that ride from a control room that was basically behind the loading dock wall (where BJ sat) for a number of years. Had an awesome time working in there and scaring the little ones:) I have to say I am quite suprised there are so many people on this site commenting about the ride actually being scary? The feedback I got when working in the park was that it needed to be scarier?!?! As for it's removal, there are two main reasons; #1 The rides general repair and upkeep. We had a permanent guy on site that would make the conifains and skins for the Gremlins which would constantly deteriorate under the rides conditions of water and lighting. They would literally melt and fall apart after some time. At any given time there half a dozen odd Gremlins that were out for repair. It was an ongoing nightmare!!! The cars themsleves would often crash into each other around the building and damage the frames. They were fitted with Whiskers at the front that should (in theory) have prevented this from happening - the constant rusting caused by the water and steam effects throughout the ride didn't help either. #2 The rides repeatability. Attitiude of most people on Gremlins was been there, done that. The film itself became quite dated and tedious to those who had seen it all before. The Supervisor had an option to play with long or short show - you would have been quite lucky indeed to see the long version as it was rarely used. Whilst I miss Gremlins and would have dearly loved to see them plus up the ride, the on going upkeep costs really didn't justify it in favour of a new ride that had greater reliability and repeatability

Hey I just have a question about the editing rooms in the gremlins ride, was there any editing rooms on the left side of the room because when I watched footage of the gremlins ride and they go inside the editing room part they only show the right side and not the left side.

 

[Whombex]

Gizmondo had better be recreating this ride in Planet Coaster... so many very specific questions.

[Gizmondo.136]

49 minutes ago, Whombex said:

Gizmondo had better be recreating this ride in Planet Coaster... so many very specific questions.

I’m actually trying to recreate it in minecraft that why I’m asking these questions.