Tomorrowland, er um Pixarland

SWHorn · Post by **SWHorn** » Jun Sun 03, 2007 9:48 pm

Captain Schnemo wrote:Frankly, I'd be happy with some proper maintenance, but as long as everyone just wants to see the next new thing, I guess there's not much hope of that.

I'm with you. I would be extremely happy with just some attention to many areas of the parks. The "next new thing" is a dangerous cycle to get into. As long as that is the path they take, they will constantly be needing to get to the next "next new thing."

slotofkit · Post by **slotofkit** » Jun Mon 04, 2007 1:05 am

Schnemo, with all our viewpoints being back and forth, I do agree with you. Maintenance and needed updating of already current great attractions are what's needed most. I think the bit of recent TLC to Spaceship Earth is an example.

Post by **rdeacon** » Jun Mon 04, 2007 7:51 am

Wow.. great debates and thoughts in this thread. Good to see some acttion!

Captain Schnemo wrote: The real Epcot isn't Epcot any more either.

Um when has Epcot ever been Epcot?

If one park has ever had an identity crisis its Epcot. Its a city, its a edu-tainment, its um no one knows!

Walts original idea for a prototype community of tomorrow was really not obtainable as a theme park, which leads maybe to another thought that Epcot should have not become a park at all....hmm Anyway without Walt, Epcot became rudderless. Which is why Epcot has flounder for years and became a poor attendance draw, at least to Disney's standards.

Now I don't want to give the impression that I dislike Epcot, its the reverse. Epcot is my 2nd fav park, just feel its always had some low self-esteem.

Rich

casrin · Post by **casrin** » Jun Mon 04, 2007 9:30 am

Does it really have lower attendance compared with the other WDW parks?

It's odd to me, or I guess I am just odd - hehe - because I prefer Epcot to Animal Kingdom by far. I guess I'm more an edu-tainment person in the way that Epcot pavillion's presented thinsg than in the way that Animal Kingdom "teaches."

Post by **rdeacon** » Jun Mon 04, 2007 10:12 am

casrin wrote:Does it really have lower attendance compared with the other WDW parks?

I posted the 2006 attendance figures in another post:

viewtopic.php?t=2817&highlight=attendence+attendance

But historically I don't believe they have never challenged MK.

Rich

casrin · Post by **casrin** » Jun Mon 04, 2007 11:48 am

*nod*

Epcot probably does attract a different sort of crowd with its edu-theme, no matter how much more "fun" they make it with the thrill rides. Interesting.

Captain Schnemo · Post by **Captain Schnemo** » Jun Tue 05, 2007 2:04 am

rdeacon wrote:Um when has Epcot ever been Epcot?

Epcot has never been the Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow, but I don't think there's ever been any question about what the original park attempted to achieve. There's a plaque at the park explaining it, just like the one at the MK. It's not fair to compare it to something it was never trying to be.

The capsule summary is "Permanent World's Fair".

Anyway without Walt, Epcot became rudderless.

It never manifested itself into the entity Walt wanted, but I don't see how you could describe it as "rudderless". What it was trying to achieve was very clear, although certainly different from what Walt wanted.

Which is why Epcot has flounder for years and became a poor attendance draw, at least to Disney's standards.

I don't agree with that assessment at all. Epcot is consistently the #3 park in North America, behind only the MK and Disneyland...the pinnacle of theme park achievement.

There's never been anything as iconic and must-see in the theme park world as the castles. The castle-based parks are the anomalies.

Post by **rdeacon** » Jun Tue 05, 2007 11:11 am

I don't feel they had a completely clear view of what Epcot was supposed to become after Walt's city idea, and once Walt passed.

They scrapped the city idea, then had 2 seperate park ideas that they just pushed together. Not saying they didn't shape it into an idea, just at some part there were several ideas of what Epcot should be.

Maybe the bigger disconnect is what Epcot means to the avg visitor. I don't think the avg visitor has a clear idea of what Epcot is. Most view it as an "adult orientated" part and not kid friendly. I just think for the avg visitor Epcot is hard for them to wrap their arms around and embrace. I doubt many visitors actually read or know there is a plaque that explains Epcot's purpose.

Rich

JWG · Post by **JWG** » Jun Tue 05, 2007 1:21 pm

rdeacon wrote:I don't feel they had a completely clear view of what Epcot was supposed to become after Walt's city idea, and once Walt passed.

They scrapped the city idea, then had 2 seperate park ideas that they just pushed together. Not saying they didn't shape it into an idea, just at some part there were several ideas of what Epcot should be.

Maybe the bigger disconnect is what Epcot means to the avg visitor. I don't think the avg visitor has a clear idea of what Epcot is. Most view it as an "adult orientated" part and not kid friendly. I just think for the avg visitor Epcot is hard for them to wrap their arms around and embrace. I doubt many visitors actually read or know there is a plaque that explains Epcot's purpose.

Rich

This I agree with. As we get further from Walt's death and fewer people are familiar with him as a living person - fewer people know the original reasoning or concepts behind the parks or other Disney ventures. So to many, I'm sure no one understands 1) what Epcot is supposed to be or 2) why it is called Epcot.

Its only a small number (in comparison to the visiting population) who know anytying about the history or concepts of the current state. Mostly us internet geeks...

Esmeralda · Post by **Esmeralda** » Jun Tue 05, 2007 2:50 pm

JWG wrote:[2) why it is called Epcot.

Every Person Comes Out Tired???

Cheshire Cat · Post by **Cheshire Cat** » Jun Tue 05, 2007 4:41 pm

It just dawned on me that if WDW had waited a little longer before scrapping 20k, nemo would fit perfectly into the WDW fantasyland lagoon theme-wise and we could still have the original living seas...

Captain Schnemo · Post by **Captain Schnemo** » Jun Tue 05, 2007 7:47 pm

rdeacon wrote:I don't feel they had a completely clear view of what Epcot was supposed to become after Walt's city idea, and once Walt passed.

I think Imagineering was very clear on the details, and the documentation produced at the time seems to reflect that.

They scrapped the city idea, then had 2 seperate park ideas that they just pushed together.

Oh, you mean like some kind future-based land in the same park as a land that allows you to explore the world. Hmm. Geez, imagine how complicated the concept would be if they crammed in visions from America's past and then another whole land of complete fantasy! That's probably too complex for an unsophisticated audience...it'd never work!

I don't think the avg visitor has a clear idea of what Epcot is.

I don't think they have to if it's done well. A well-executed theme just works, even if people don't grasp all the nuts and bolts of it. As a kid, I never made much distinction between Adventureland and Frontierland, but I came to appreciate them later.

JWG wrote:Its only a small number (in comparison to the visiting population) who know anytying about the history or concepts of the current state.

That's Disney's fault. In another thread someone wrote "When I think of Disney, I don't think of history!" about that proposed park in Virginia. Certainly there's no chance of Disneyland's power source running out of juice any time soon.*

Chesire Cat wrote:...nemo would fit perfectly into the WDW fantasyland lagoon theme-wise and we could still have the original living seas...

Another negative result of their short-sightedness. Of course, this is the same company that simultaneously closed Mr. Toad's Wild Ride and released a movie with the same name.

* - Among Disney nerds, there is the theory that Walt's cryogenic chamber (apocryphal, I know) has been fitted with electromagnets and its furious spinning powers a motor that feeds electricity to Disneyland.

Post by **js3901** » Jun Tue 05, 2007 7:47 pm

Esmeralda wrote:
JWG wrote:[2) why it is called Epcot.
Every Person Comes Out Tired???

I've heard a few variations on that:

Every Parent Comes Out Tired
Employee Paychecks Come (out) On Thursdays
Employee Polyester Costumes (aren't) Overly Trendy

I think we heard a few more, but I can;t remember them. We heard them on the Living with the Land tour back in 2002 before they changed it to a pre-recorded speil.

Anyways, back on topic, I've already said my rant on this issue. I'm not going to say anymore...

JWG · Post by **JWG** » Jun Wed 06, 2007 8:50 am

js3901 wrote:We heard them on the Living with the Land tour back in 2002 before they changed it to a pre-recorded speil.

The Land ride is now pre-recorded!?! As in the boat opearator doesn't give the tour anymore? Sorry, haven't been on that ride since 2001, so I'm a little behind. That sucks! I much prefer CM interaction over recordings. I get the risk involved for Disney, but human interaction isn't all bad.

casrin · Post by **casrin** » Jun Wed 06, 2007 9:20 am

The Land ride is now pre-recorded!?! As in the boat opearator doesn't give the tour anymore? Sorry, haven't been on that ride since 2001, so I'm a little behind. That sucks! I much prefer CM interaction over recordings. I get the risk involved for Disney, but human interaction isn't all bad.

Yup.

It's a lot more boring, though probably cost-effective for Disney.