WDW 35th and Epcot 25th Rumors

[Cheshire Cat]

I really would like Future World and Tomorrowland to be just that. Not Fantasyland.

I know where you're coming from by saying this, but I think of Tomorrowland and Furture World as two seperate entities. Tomorrowland is "the future that never was" and deserves some far fetched ideas. It's acceptable for tomorrowland to lean slightly to a more "fantasy" style theme like science fiction. Future world is "the future that very well may be" (even if it's not living up to that subtitle) and so Future World should have more realistic technologies. I know that that wasn't Tomorrowland's original purpose, but now that Future World is right down the street (or drive to be specific), it would seem monotonous to have them both themed to showcase the possible future.

[frantheman76]

I'd really like to see Tapestry Of Nations return in EPCOT to celebrate the 25th Anniversary. They wouldn't have to put much effort into bringing it back but it would at least commemorate the event.

[Esmeralda]

Is there a Spaceship Earth antenna topper out there yet? I'd love to have one for the big 25th!

[TikiTikiRoom]

This is a Disney-based forum, and yet people are arguing. It's sort of an oxymoron.

[FlatlandMounty]

I agree about the Nemo Ride not fitting into the whole Epcot theme. Neither does Soarin'. Epcot's theme has always been discovery and such it has had an underlying theme of education. The Lad boat ride, the world showcase exhibits and rides, universe of energy, test track, mission space, and even Turtle talk have a degree of learning. Imagination has always been the oddball. But now the Nemo ride has no element of learning except for the 1 sign in the queue that mentions protection our oceans. (dare you to find it)

That being said. There is nothing wrong with making a ride that children would enjoy and connect with and parents wouldn't absolutely hate. It makes people visit the "Nemo fish" exhibit and talk to the Animal Science people and learn about clownfish and Regal Tangs. So I guess in a way it still has an element of learning, its just indirect.

I personally feel like my Disney childhood has been crushed (except for Spaceship Earth) A lot of the classic rides have been removed for what seems like cheap thrills. But I try to remember that Disney is trying to please everyone at once, and sometimes I'm not in the majority. Sometimes no one is in the majority (2nd version of Journey into the Imagination). I try to let go of the past and be nostalgic when I can, but enjoy the new rides as if they didn't replace World of Motion.

EDIT: Schnemo is right. Arguing about stuff is half the fun of being on these boards. Expressing an opinion and trying to defend it before an international forum. If you find an isssue strong enough, maybe you rally up to make a change. Maybe you just debate it and help someone enjoy the park a little more. Maybe someone sees something in a new light. Or maybe you get no where. But assuming arguing gets you nowhere eliminates all the other possibilities.

[Captain Schnemo]

This is a Disney-based forum, and yet people are arguing.

You have no idea how much that sentence depresses me. Not that I want people to argue, of course, but thoughtful discussion of what made us all like Disney enough to visit to this forum should be encouraged.

"Disney" isn't a naturally occurring phenomenon...there are people behind every choice, and people aren't infallible and shouldn't be immune to questioning.

[rdeacon]

This is a Disney-based forum, and yet people are arguing. It's sort of an oxymoron.

We are arguing?

I didn't take it that way.. just some opinions flying back and forth. All in good fun.

I love a good debate.


Rich

[Mr.ToadWildRider]

You can have some really good attractions in a park without the need for rollarcoasters, just look at mission space

Sorry but that gave me the shivers... Mission:Space is a cool concept but a very bad attraction imo. It's too tame for real thrill people and too extreme for non-thrill people. It has no real target audience and has brought nothing but bad publicity, legal problems, and a moster price tag to WDW/EPCOT. I honestly think that a rollercoaster on par with BTMR would've been a better choice than this - although I do think the effort for a new brand of ride was much needed.

The real issue is the sponsors. A lot of the decision making depends on them as they are paying a big ol' chunk of the fees that go into the ride. They were planning a Mt. Fuji rollercoaster at the Japan pavillion years ago and I even remember it got to the point where they were airing previews of it on the Disney Channel when I was a kid and then the whole thing disappeared. I think it had something to do with the Japanese sponsorship. I think part of the reason why we haven't seen much change in the WS since they added Norway is the sponsorship. Norway is, or at least was, sponsorless for a while (and I believe is still) which is why Disney started adding character dining in the pavillion. It's too bad too because I think a couple of actual rides over in the WS, especially the far banks/right side area would solve a lot of problems: a) there really isn't anything on the Japan, Canada, UK, Morocco, France side of AA in terms of attractions other than the aforementioned dated 360º movies; b) Disney seems intent on getting more thrills in EPCOT because for a period of time there, and even currently (although they have improved) the guest numbers were pretty low for EPCOT and it seems that their feeling was it was due to lack of thrill rides - hence Fast Track, Mission: Space, Soarin' - and the sponsorhip seemed to agree; and c) they presumably wouldn't have to remove popular rides to make room for the new (I realize this provides cost issues as now they have to budget upkeep for 2 attractions instead of 1 but that's where the issue of sponsorship comes in) but they wouldn't have to worry about costly rehab or reconstruction of an entire building, they could just clear a little land behind the WS which there seems to be room for and start from scratch which is usually cheaper than the other options.

[TikiTikiRoom]

You can have some really good attractions in a park without the need for rollarcoasters, just look at mission space

Sorry but that gave me the shivers... Mission:Space is a cool concept but a very bad attraction imo. It's too tame for real thrill people and too extreme for non-thrill people. It has no real target audience and has brought nothing but bad publicity, legal problems, and a moster price tag to WDW/EPCOT. I honestly think that a rollercoaster on par with BTMR would've been a better choice than this - although I do think the effort for a new brand of ride was much needed.

The real issue is the sponsors. A lot of the decision making depends on them as they are paying a big ol' chunk of the fees that go into the ride. They were planning a Mt. Fuji rollercoaster at the Japan pavillion years ago and I even remember it got to the point where they were airing previews of it on the Disney Channel when I was a kid and then the whole thing disappeared. I think it had something to do with the Japanese sponsorship. I think part of the reason why we haven't seen much change in the WS since they added Norway is the sponsorship. Norway is, or at least was, sponsorless for a while (and I believe is still) which is why Disney started adding character dining in the pavillion. It's too bad too because I think a couple of actual rides over in the WS, especially the far banks/right side area would solve a lot of problems: a) there really isn't anything on the Japan, Canada, UK, Morocco, France side of AA in terms of attractions other than the aforementioned dated 360º movies; b) Disney seems intent on getting more thrills in EPCOT because for a period of time there, and even currently (although they have improved) the guest numbers were pretty low for EPCOT and it seems that their feeling was it was due to lack of thrill rides - hence Fast Track, Mission: Space, Soarin' - and the sponsorhip seemed to agree; and c) they presumably wouldn't have to remove popular rides to make room for the new (I realize this provides cost issues as now they have to budget upkeep for 2 attractions instead of 1 but that's where the issue of sponsorship comes in) but they wouldn't have to worry about costly rehab or reconstruction of an entire building, they could just clear a little land behind the WS which there seems to be room for and start from scratch which is usually cheaper than the other options.

if it's so tame then why does it need air-sickness bags?

[rdeacon]

It’s funny how different people view Epcot differently.

This seems to have always been a problem for Disney, and leads to so many different opinions, and debates, like we have in here.

The Learning or teaching tag is the albatross round Epcot's neck. Sorry to say people don’t want to learn anything on vacation, at least not when they go to Disney World. I know plenty of people that won’t take their kids to Epcot cause its “boring and educational”. I think Disney is trying to shed that non-kid-friendly view of Epcot.

Maybe that is where much of the debate resides. If you hold Epcot to its true idea, like Schnemo does, I can see where there would be some great disappointment, as Future World has greatly strayed from its original theme. They have not pushed the bounds of future thought/education with the new attractions such as Nemo and Soarin.

I guess I don't force Epcot into that Educational box. So maybe I am soft on them in that respect.

With that being said, I do understand what Schnemo is talking about with the Nemo Living Seas. I was a former Marine Biology student who loved the Marine Bio angle that the Living Seas had. It was soo cool for me. So in that respect I do miss the old. But as a frequent guess to Epcot and the Living Seas I also noticed several things, that sadden me on my visits before the refurbs.

• 1. The livings seas was a stale, non-crowd drawing pavilion. It was dying a slow death like the Wonders of Life Pavilion.
  2. The people and kids that were in the Living seas referred to all the fish as Nemo’s and the turtles as crush.

So it was a natural transition that Disney Nemo-ized the Living Seas.
I do feel Nemo fits, but do understand that its not as purely educational as it used to be. It’s now indirectly educational, and a very popular pavilion. So is it better to indirectly education mass crowds with cartoon characters, or be more educational and draw less people?

I do understand they are stretching the themes so suit marketing demands, I guess I accept that to a certain degree, as long as the attraction is done well, where as this is an abomination to Schnemo. I think they are marketing the ride to increase appeal, and yes of course sales. Think people tend to forget that Disney is a publicly traded company and not a charity.

The main areas that really annoy me are poor shows, ie bad maintenance and poor ride design/refurbs.

Even with that I still can enjoy the parks, even if I feel they have dropped the ball so to speak. I hope that maybe with the new regime, ie Lasseter, imagineering will return to a higher standard, and Schnemo can once again go to a WDW park and smile.


Rich

[TikiTikiRoom]

i think I'm getting a little misty eyed.

[subsonic]

That being said. There is nothing wrong with making a ride that children would enjoy and connect with and parents wouldn't absolutely hate. It makes people visit the "Nemo fish" exhibit and talk to the Animal Science people and learn about clownfish and Regal Tangs. So I guess in a way it still has an element of learning, its just indirect.

Here's the thing, maybe I was easially entertained, but as a child I LOVED Horizons and World of Motion. There wasn't any tie in to a popular movie, they were educational, and there was plenty of detail to look at.

This is a Disney-based forum, and yet people are arguing. It's sort of an oxymoron.

Heated arguments are quite okay on this site. It's alright for people to express their opinions. Flame wars and insults are NOT, fortunately, we don't have any of that here.

[Mr.ToadWildRider]

ACP, while I agree with your points that it is important to give the people what they want to keep them actually coming to the parks and that Schnemo has something of a biased view as only basing his judgements off of what he hears than actually going I do disagree with you on a lot of issues.

First, I think some of your statements suffer from the same issues facing Schnemo - you haven't actually experienced a lot of the stuff, you just read about it online. I think that both of you have gotten some weird view of the parks as they were, in your case, and as they are, in Schnemo's case, and have come to conclusions which really aren't on the mark. I'm 22 years old and I've been going to the parks fairly regularly since I was about 5, I haven't been there every year but I've been down there maybe once every two years since then. As such, I think I have a good understanding of both sides of the argument and maybe even a third, important perspective - early EPCOT as a child. Honestly, when I was a kid I found EPCOT pretty boring. I didn't like the WS except for Mexico (and later Norway when it was added), and I thought that UoE and the Living Seas were so boring. I also think I didn't appreciate a ride like Horizons as much then as I do now because now I've seen what Disney has done to EPCOT. I always liked Horizons but it wasn't til I grew up and it was gone and then replaced by Mission: Space that I started to love it. It's nostalgia, which can be a very negative emotion, but I think in some of these instances it's very positive and in my case actually based on the screw ups of the so called progress of the park.

You're right in that as a kid I probably would've preferred Nemo to Sea Base Alpha (and in some ways may still to this day ) but the problem is even if it makes that ONE pavillion more attractive it detracts from the ENTIRE park's feel. In some ways I'd rather have a pavillion which sticks to the grand plan and is kinda boring and I may never visit than to have one that seriously deviates from what the plae is intending to do just to get a few more bodies through the doors at that one pavillion. I'm not nearly as exercised about El Rio Del Tiempo, one of my ALL TIME FAVES, getting a few Disney characters as I am about the Living Seas getting Nemo even though I never really liked the Seas and it's because the Nemo/Pixarification of Future World is a far greater intrusion to the concepts of EPCOT than adding them in World Showcase.

I think that Schnemo is right in saying that the characters don't belong in Future World (although I do think they're okay in the WS and I'll explain why in a bit) because FW represented the REAL WORLD - not fantasy. They may have depicted the past in whimsical ways such as WoM with Leonardo ignoring Mona Lisa while fiddling with a flying invention or Columbus running into a sea serpent, but it was always intended to represent real things from the past and visions of a plausible future. A display of ACTUAL innovations. Figment was different because he never existed before or outside of EPCOT, he's not the same as Mickey, he is the embodiment of imagination which is a real thing that is very important to real progress. He wasn't really a Disney character despite being a character made by Disney...he was an EPCOT character. The same is true with Buzzy at WoL. The interesting note is that Disney characters have existed in FW for many years and no one seemed to mind them probably because they played such a minimal role. Goofy was always at WOL in a movie show. They added Lion King to the Land to discuss conservation. Every once in a while Mickey and the gang would be greeting folks while in space suits. The thing is, WoL and the Land movie came after years of EPCOT already being character based attraction free - but they were more small sideshows at a pavillion, not a main attraction nor the entire pavillion. Nemo at the Seas IS the pavillion and it's a drastic leap from the Circle of Life movie at the Land. Now, Disney characters, none of them donned in space suits mind you, help welcome you to the park. Heck, a giant Sorceror Mickey hand is the first thing one notices when they gaze up at SSE. What does Fantasia have to do with the real future of our world? Or Nemo? Or Chip and Dale? The characters had a place at the WS because the WS represents the now or the past in many ways. The characters were okay there because they were always "on vacation" decked out in tourist \gear and travelling around on a double decker taking in the sights for themselves. That in itself signified the characters were NOT HOME AT EPCOT - they were visitors as much as we were. That's why Donald taking a tour of Mexico isn't a grand slap in the face to EPCOT imo as it is to Schnemo.

It's just if you had actually experienced it then as opposed to just reading about it you'd get a sense of how EPCOT was a theme park owned by Disney but not really about Disney in the past. There was rarely any crossover between Disney culture at large with EPCOT other than the sense of progress. The thing is EPCOT was what Tomorrowland once was for Walt - a place to look to the real future, not a fantasy world. Tomorrowland took a big deviation when it stopped being the "Land of Tomorrow" and being "The Land of a Future that Never Was" and the whole vision and hope for the future, in park form, rested in the hands of EPCOT - now "Epcot" is following suit with Tomorrowland...

[Mr.ToadWildRider]

if it's so tame then why does it need air-sickness bags?

If you'd re-read my post you'd see I put it in two categories, too tame big thrill people, like myself, and too extreme for the not so big thrill people. Other than the take off sequence which is sort of cool the whole attraction is kinda boring to me. It's just another motion sim to me only this time it makes people much sicker, hence the bags, because instead of just jostling around like Body Wars or Star Tours, it spins at a fast rate. The teacups make me feel sicker than Mission: Space - does that make them a thrill ride?

[TikiTikiRoom]

just throwing this out there, I LOVED the aspect and the idea of an underwater base.....In the middle of orlando. Go figure. Taking a Hydrolater down to the base and than a shuttle. Pure awesome. Loved every second of it. It felt like I was about to save the world from a giant radioactive monster bent on the destruction of mankind.