VR is Anti Theme Park and thoughts on VR usage in Derren Brown's Ghost Train

I can’t remember where the murmuring of VR coming to theme parks began; all I recall is that I felt repulsed by the concept from the start...

I’m not really a fan of screen based attractions full stop, to be honest. Only Universal do them well and even there I find their prevalence annoying, having to put on 3D glasses for what feels like every single attraction. I sometimes wonder if my dislike for them is just defiant principle. Somehow, using film cheapens the physical, spacial experience that makes theme parks special. The acclaimed Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man is so good due to the use of projections to do what conventional dark rides cannot - to keep up with an intensely physical, fast-paced experience. The sets are really there; you navigate through real space and interact with real scenery. The screens display the action and interact with surrounding sets and the whole thing is seamless, or… Well, near enough. It would be ridiculous to say that it's difficult to tell where the set ends and screen begins, but that's part of why Spiderman’s cartoon styling makes for a better attraction than Transformers next door. It helps my brain excuse the screens, lending to that “suspension of disbelief”. Of course, both are really outstanding, well made attractions.

Spiderman's elaborate physical sets.

Photo credit: Heavy Structures

Nemesis at Alton Towers - Review

Last year, I had planned to write a piece for Nemesis’ 21^st birthday. I never got round to it, but decided that this ride was worth writing about regardless. So, happy 22^nd season to Nemesis!

Isn’t it sort of crazy how legendary Alton’s B&M invert is? Few coasters get the kind unanimous praise and fascination amongst enthusiasts as Nemesis. But is Nemesis really as good as people say?

This way...
Photo by author.

Banksy’s Dismaland and theme parks as an art medium

I want theme parks to be taken seriously by academics. I want them to receive the same critique that fine art, literature, film and now gaming "enjoys". Firstly because I just find it interesting to read someone else’s over-thinking on my favourite subject, but also because I like to think it benefits the medium in some way. When questions get asked about the lacking female representation in gaming for example, some developers respond with increasingly better female representation in gaming. It's far from perfect, but we're on a road started by that discussion. Criticism matters.

Photo by Nic Jenkins

Audience misinterpretation of hyperrealism in theming…. Or, “why Dinoland USA is interesting but ultimately flawed”.

I was reading what fellow theme park nerd friends had to say about Disney’s Animal Kingdom recently, specifically Dinoland USA. The usual comments: the area is vile, doesn’t fit in or feel very Disney-like in execution and other perfectly valid and true criticisms… But I felt the need to chime in and defend the cleverness of the theme.

Then I thought, wait, what am I doing? The answer: Playing devils advocate, mostly.

See, Dinoland USA is perhaps the most self-representational, metaphorical, hyperreal commentary on the amusement industry that exists as an actual attraction. And that’s kinda cool from an “arty-farty lets have a discussion about theme park theory” point of view.

SkyRush at Hersheypark - Review

Hersheypark feels like a small family owned park… With a number of large, steel thrill coasters. There’s some genuine backbone to the place which evokes an old fashioned, caring company that puts their heart before, or at least in line with, their head. Hersheypark originally opened as a leisure park for employees and families of the Hershey Chocolate Company, which is the most wonderful thought in itself. Whilst the reality today is business, the illusion carried on by the park’s accumulated history is magical.

It’s a weird place, certainly not what I expected it to be and far from a perfect park. In fact, despite how much I truly love the place, there are very few obvious positive points to make. It’s pleasantness rests mostly on the atmosphere. It’s very much an amusement park, not a theme park, which surprised me on my first visit. This “family theme park” is dominated by some very large, unthemed roller coasters, and they pay particular interest to dressing them in strings of lights like a classic amusement park of the golden era. Yet somehow, the park feels big budget too, and not just because of it’s high entrance fee and expensive ride hardware. Like a nice Blackpool Pleasure Beach, nice in that it’s clean and friendly and appropriate for contemporary audiences.  The huge rides are cluttered and dance over your head and each other and every path in such a way to really make you feel apart of the place and the carnival fun it promotes. At night, the place truly comes alive. It all feels very honest, very authentic, very friendly and nostalgic.

Walt Disney World… Some Initial Thoughts

Having only just visited Walt Disney World Resort in Florida “properly”, I thought it would be apt to jot down some of my initial thoughts.

Epcot was our first park. We arrived in Orlando fairly late in the day, so it seemed logical to pick the park with the least to actively do. To my surprise, Epcot would be a park we would revisit. I struggled to be impressed with the dull Future World section of the park at it’s entrance, though visiting in January without the foliage displays I’d seen in photos was disappointing. I enjoyed how the landscape doesn’t feel like a theme park in places, but more akin to a resort or recreational park. But I couldn’t get past how dated parts of it look. I gather that might be half the charm for many, or perhaps the entire point – but I find that somewhat unconvincing logic based not on personal taste or experiences, but someone else’s preconceived idea. Like the nonsense of “its classic, therefore it’s good”.  The aquarium especially looks incredibly dark and brutalist, reminiscent of London Zoo’s aged architecture. I always thought of Disney attractions as being timelessly relevant and not appealing to contemporary designs of when they were build, but we found more outdated environments at the Transport and Ticket Centre and in Tomorrowland at Magic Kingdom. I felt like the intentions of this section of Epcot were no longer relevant, and possibly never was? I know little of the park’s history, so my opinions are purely objective to my experience in early 2013. Who in their right mind would pay that much for what is essentially a museum?

Realism of Theming at the Merlin Theme Parks

Realism is a funny term with various meanings. When realism is discussed in artistic theory, it’s not usually looking at the accuracy with which something was visually drawn or painted. It’s not interested in the accuracy of portrayal of perspective, for example. Realism is concerned with objective reality – in portraying the mundane truth, not romanticized ideas. This is usually achieved by exaggerating negative aspects such as ugliness or dirtiness.

With regard to theme parks, there are so many things to consider when exploring “realism”. Typical theme parks are fake by their very nature, removed from site history. They are purpose-built environments, usually trying to emulate some real place elsewhere; think of somewhere like Walt Disney World, built on otherwise useless swampland. There are exceptions, such as theme parks that have long been leisure venues of some kind like Alton Towers, which was once a pleasure garden and holiday home. The oldest amusement park in the world, Bakken in Denmark, started its life as a pleasure site when a natural spring was discovered in 1583. Along the way, it’s evolved into the amusement park of today, acquiring various entertainment venue qualities along the way.  These spaces can feel more genuine because their history is accumulative and feels less purpose-made. But the art of hiding that, and making you feel like the environment has been that way forever with the use of scenery, is another kind of realism altogether - realism in the skill of fakery. How much like a rock does this pretend rock look? It’s very difficult to make an imaginary place seem real, and in complete juxtaposition of the realism which seeks to portray objective reality, making the imaginary look real involves using a lot of romanticized clichés. In trying to communicate to someone what something looks like, it’s easier to conform to stereotypes, which may be less accurate, and so less real. It’s funny how being more realistic in some ways makes something less realistic in others.