Thursday, February 16, 2012

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Peril : The Mystery of the Second Temple

One of my Disney and more reader who own my DLP book and have a good eye sent me this question: "On page 138 of your book the rendering of the Temple of péril on the top of the page seems to show TWO temples instead of one. Do you have any idea if this means that WDI originally envisioned to build two temples instead of one only?"

Well, Jim, it's for sure a good question, as indeed two temples are clearly visible on that rendering. And, of course, if a WDI artist painted it, it's because the imagineers did envisioned another temple.

However, it seems that it is only after that the first temple was built that they began to really work on a new temple addition. Why? because the first temple was an instant hit at DLP's Adventureland but had one little problem: the hour capacity. And of course, the best to resolve this problem would have been to build...a second temple!

So, in Glendale, imagineers not only thought seriously - as they always do - about this new temple, but a model was built. And what can we saw on this model? Well, the two temples, of course, with the new one joining the first temple at a 90 degrees angle - imagine a "L" letter upside down, the vertical part of the letter being the first temple and the horizontal part being the new temple. However, there was no link between the two coaster tracks. Instead, the imagineers designed two totally different rides for both temples, with the possibility for the guests to board either at the first or at the second temple.

Another interesting point in this never built concept was that imagineers were not sacrifying the space to eventually build Indiana Jones Aventure in the future. In fact, if my memory is right, one of the "towers" of the second temple would have serve as the entrance for a future IJA attraction.

Now, as we know, this second temple was never built, and the main reason, as usual with DLP was - guess what? - money! At the end of the 1990's Disneyland Paris was in serious trouble financially speaking, and the park's management choose the option to add capacity with more seats for each train. They also choose to have the ride going "backward" , and indeed it was much cheaper to turn each train than to build a brand new temple!

Is there any chance that we see this other temple build in the future? Frankly, i wouldn't count on it, but who knows, as they say at WDI, "a good idea never die". That's right, but sometime a better idea can replace another one an dif DLP finally decides one day to bring Indiana Jones Adventure in Adventureland this for sure will be better than a second temple.

That said, did you know that some great scene concepts for the "first" temple were unfortunately cancelled - like the one below? You'll find this scene and many others in my DLP book and this is what makes "From Sketch to Reality" a great book as you will find in it hundred of WDI artworks, including WDI concepts that never were realized! I also remind you that the pre-order period will end in two weeks and with it the 20% discount that anyone have when you place a pre-order. So, go ahead and place your pre-order now for your collector's edition copy! To know how to order and send your payment please go HERE. Paypal or bank wire transfer payments are accepted.

Artwork: copyright Disney Enterprises Inc

1 comment:

Jones said...

To run the cars backwards was surely one of the worst ideas WDI ever had - I mean, a huge part of the fun of a Roller Coaster is to see the "peril" comming, to see the big drop ahead, the loop, whatever. Also, most of the architecture and theming does not even get noticed by guests if they go backwards. And finally, if you cannot prepare for a turn, it can get pretty unpleasant for your neck...
When I first rode the Matterhorn, I sat behind a large person - no fun at all, because I could not see anything. Second time, I was in front - a completely different ride! (SM at DLP is quite similar - it´s just so much more fun if you sit in the front row of a car).