The "Theme" in Theme park

[Captain Schnemo]

I should mention that, from what I understand, the people working on Disneyland are a bit more respectful of the customers. (They still call them names, but sometimes they actually do try to placate them.) This could be because the execs tend to work in California and they occasionally see Disneyland with their own eyes. It probably also has something to do with the fact that locals (aka passholders aka Disney freaks) make up more of the customer base at Disneyland.

It might also have something to do with the tireless efforts of some people in the online community, who made a point of humiliating Disney by posting pictures online of burnt-out light bulbs and chipping paint.

The problem with that kind of thing is that to show what's wrong with Future World, all you need to do is take a picture of Nemo, but there's no way Disney would admit that there's any kind of problem with that. I doubt they would even understand the point.

Anyway, I don't follow the internal politics, but I do know that WDW consistently gets the short end of the stick. WDW is my frame of reference for "Disney", however, so I thought I should mention that, since it affects all my commentary.

[Len90]

OK, so what's futuristic about...fossil fuels, the internal combustion engine, hang gliding, singing fish, Flash animation, and stuff you can find at the Best Buy?

There's almost nothing even slightly futuristic there. Whole pavilions are based on outdated tech...outdated even at the time of their creation. The Energy pavilion is a complete joke.

Not everything in Future World lived up to the motif (Kitchen Kabaret was always a huge WTF attraction), but at least they were trying. There's no evidence that there is any sense of thinking about the future with the new stuff.

Hence the theme that I have found in Future World: Futuristic ideas of the past that have come to existence. Unfortunately this theme has been consistent over the years.

[Captain Schnemo]

Futuristic ideas of the past that have come to existence.

Aside from the fact that that would be Present World (everything was futuristic at one point in history) what does that have to do with singing fish or movies of landscapes? And, seriously, based on that definition, is there anything at all in the course of human history that wouldn't be worthy of a pavilion?

"The Spears and Levers Show featuring Og"?

Clearly, the intent was to be properly futuristic. Just look at the architecture.

Even if we interpret your definition (as a number of the attractions have in the past) to be "Well, that's where we've been, here's where we're going...", where's the second part in the new attractions?

[Mr.ToadWildRider]

I'm no apologist or Pollyanna but I can't truly blame Disney for its actions. Walt was from a different time; there were no Six Flags or Busch Gardens, there was no Islands of Adventures - there was just Disney. Now the argument I'm sure I'll get is that's exactly why Disney needs to be more like original Disney and why original Disney was so wonderous considering it CHOSE to be so well themed in an era where there was no true competition. I can agree with that to an extent, but here's the kicker. The parks have to make money, and although it will I'm sure peeve some of the posters they have to make a LOT of money. Disney never has and never will have limitless resources. Instead, what Disney has is a ton of competition. Competition has always been one of the biggestsources of innovation but its also been the force behind the collapse of so many pioneers. Look at Ford- it basically created the market now it's declining and declining as more competition springs up. And the reasons behind Ford's problems aren't because they lack the original spirit of Ford, in fact some may argue BECAUSE Ford has held onto the past in its product that it is no longer as competitive. I think it's unfair to say Disney is just doing it for the dollar as though it's a negative - the dollar = survival in a market where there are ever increasing numbers of vacation destinations whether theme park based or other. Is it good for the company to market the characters before the parks themselves? I think the answer is yes and no. To the average visitor the face of Disney isn't Tom Morrow or Figment - heck it's not even Mickey Mouse any more; it's Nemo, it's Buzz and Woody, it's maybe Ariel, Belle, Aladdin, and Simba. People identify Disney with the characters. When they go to the parks they expect to see those characters. The longest lines in the parks are almost always to meet the characters or for rides based on the films. Am I happy about that? No because I feel that change everytime I go into the park and feel like I'm increasingly more and more in an above average park as opposed to WALT DISNEY WORLD - the crowning jewel in the world of theme parks. Do I think that the children of today are being deprived the truly memorable experiences I had the priviledge of experiencing through the 80's and early 90's? Yes. But the fact of the matter is the parks were dying , in particular EPCOT. People found it boring and dated and I completely agree that they COULD and more importantly SHOULD just upgrade appropriately but instead Disney has gone for what may eventually be seen as a quick fix - but at the end of the day it was still a fix. At the end of the day I'd still prefer a dumbed down WDW that has traces of its former self than no WDW at all and in this market and in the current economy it's getting harder and harder to survive. Disney's had its share of recent financial woes and I don't think it's fair for us long-term WDW fans to completely chastize management for some of its more clearly profit driven moves.

[Captain Schnemo]

As I said earlier, it doesn't cost extra money to have a good idea. I don't think anyone's complaining that they aren't spending enough money building the new attractions.

They're clearly moving to "screens"-style entertainment, to save money on maintenance, but if they were more clever, innovative, and paid attention to theme, they could be both efficient and terrific at the same time. The screens are lame, because they are deployed in lame ways. When you get right down to it, half of the Spider-Man attraction (by far the best dark ride in the world) is "screens", but no one complains about that.

As for the characters, people (especially children) know what they are marketed. Walt had an hour a week to show off his goods on television, Disney owns multiple networks. As has been mentioned on the EPCOT Central blog, Disney is wasting all kinds of branding opportunities. Everything doesn't have to flow downward from the latest Pixar movie or half-assed Disney Channel cartoon.

"EPCOT" could become synonymous with Discovery and Travel Channel-style entertainment. Futuristic shows could sport the "Future World" brand, while travel shows could capitalize on the "World Showcase" label. Figment could host (or, if I'm going to suck it up and compromise) be a part of imaginative programming.

I don't want Disney to become unprofitable, I want them to create stuff I want to pay for.

If the EPCOT brand was perceived as "boring" (which is debatable), that's Disney's fault. The way to make something less boring is not to simply throw singing fish at it (well, that is one way).

I want the Disney brand to represent all the things it used to that people have forgotten about, like innovation, science, nature, environmentalism, education...actual thought!

All of that can be done in ways that would actually increase profits, but it would require the Disney execs to understand their own brand. Which they don't.

For those of you who think I'm talking crazy, this is how it used to be done. This show, along with a few others, shaped public opinion about space travel and led directly to the creation of NASA. Eisenhower showed this to his people and essentially said, "Give me this!". (NOTE: Show contains OMG REAL NAZIS!)

I want a Disney that's relevant.

[Future Guy]

Amen, sir.

Back when I was in the fifth grade and Thomas Jefferson was president, my teacher used to take her class on a field trip to EPCOT each year. I'm sure lots of other teachers in the area did the same thing, because although EPCOT was fun, it was also considered to be educational. Each kid had to pay admission, of course, and they would always spend money while they were in the park. And now, thanks to their mismanagement, Disney has screwed themselves out of that revenue. Now that EPCOT is all about thrill rides and cartoon characters, I think it's safe to say that there are no more class trips.

I understand that there are more entertainment options in the Orlando area now than there used to be. But when I see pictures like this one of the long line to get into the Universe of Energy circa 1985, it reminds me that the way Disney used to do things worked. Sure, if that show was still playing today it would be even more embarrassingly dated than Ellen's Energy Adventure, but there still is a market for thought-provoking entertainment. If only Disney would recognize it.

[slylandro]

I truly love Disney, I am a kid who grew up in the transition beetween the old Disney and the new Disney. But I see that most of what they do, (not only WDW) is not as good as it used to be. I must admit tho that Wall-E was on the good track. Both enjoyable for younglings and adults.

This is not the point tho, the point is that I want to do something to get things changed. I am NOT somebody who sit down and complain...and do nothing about it. I am asking you this question? Is there something we can do? If yes... WHAT?

[Captain Schnemo]

That is the zillion dollar question. Direct appeals to the company won't do anything. Neither will getting lots of us nerds to agree with you online. Boycotting is pointless.

One thing that has worked in the past is to get the media involved.

However, the press are a bunch of useless lunkheads...or at least anyone who would be reporting on nerd dissatisfaction is. Relegated to the "Living" section of the paper, next to the story about how to get more good cholesterol in your diet. And, really, we don't have a compelling newsworthy story.

"Disney is worse than it used to be."

Well, so freakin' what? So is a lot of stuff.

If there were some sort of protests, it'd get covered, but more as a curiosity than anything. The story would be "Look at these lunatics protesting Disney. Don't they have anything better to do with their lives?"

If an influential person could be swayed, that could get us somewhere, but 1) what famous person is going to challenge Disney and 2) what famous person would possibly care? Even Roy E. Disney wussed out after playing his only card.

I've spent some time thinking about this, and I haven't gotten anywhere, but there's nothing wrong with brainstorming.

Any better ideas?

[slylandro]

Roy died before EPCOT was born...afterward they change EPCOT plan...or something like that...the spirit was still true when Roy was living.

About what we can do...I think the best thing we can possibly do is to be stuborn...raly people around us...YES they won't change their mind ...well most of them...but remember it only take a ear to spark an idea! it only take a listening ear and some judgment and you can divert things in rather strange way. I think imagineer ARE from times to time surfing about on the main web based Disney fansite! Forgot about administration and lets aim at the imagineer!

[Captain Schnemo]

Roy died before EPCOT was born...

I was talking about Roy E. Disney (son of Walt's brother Roy), and his actions a few years ago.

Since then, I've been pretty unimpressed with Iger, although he does seem slightly less horrible than Eisner.

I think the best thing we can possibly do is to be stuborn...raly people around us...

Again, not to be a killjoy, but this kind of thing has been going on for years and years with no effect. I completely agree that we should do this, if only to keep the ideas alive, but even if all the Imagineers agreed with us, it wouldn't matter, since they are only taking orders from above.

They can try to make the best Kim Possible tie-in they can, but they can't talk the marketeers out of the bad idea in the first place. The Imagineers know these ideas are online (they even participate in the discussions), but a lot of them don't even agree with us (or at least don't like us).

I can understand their point of view, since we attack the work they've put their best efforts into, and it's human nature to resist. Looking to the Imagineers to come up with the brilliant ideas isn't the way to go anyway, and never was.

If we could somehow manage to change the opinions of the majority of Disney customers, that would probably have some impact, but the majority of Disney customers don't read Disney forums and obsess about details (or, really, even care about theming).

Anyone on this forum is more of a Disney fan than the average customer, and even we don't all agree about the problems.

[RREng77]

I'm fairly certain the execs understand, in general, that their success has been taking a nose-dive. In the example Captain Schnemo mentions, they probably don't even understand the true root-cause of their problem:

Captain Schnemo wrote:
The problem with that kind of thing is that to show what's wrong with Future World, all you need to do is take a picture of Nemo, but there's no way Disney would admit that there's any kind of problem with that. I doubt they would even understand the point.

Unfortunately, Disney believes it is looking to the guests for input: they have people fill out surveys during their visits, either verbal question-answer sessions or written/electronic surveys after a visit (at least I've been approached during or after each trip).

The problem, as with nearly every poor survey, is that the questions are either loaded or mis-aimed or both. Questions such as "Did you (and your party) enjoy yourselves in [Park Name Here] during your visit?" or "Did a cast member greet you with a smile?" really don't get at the problems we are expressing in this thread (and others).

Instead, questions like, "Which ride was your favorite and why?" or "If you could summarize your party's feeling about [applicable Disney park] in one word, what would that be?" seem like they might not provide the simple, direct input most execs look for, but could be monitored over time to see if a "trend" was moving in a desired direction.

Another problem is, as was stated earlier, our current cometitive entertainment market. There are few adjustments that can be made to quickly change survey responses and simultaneously earn someone a hefty bonus each year.

[slylandro]

I'm fairly certain the execs understand, in general, that their success has been taking a nose-dive. In the example Captain Schnemo mentions, they probably don't even understand the true root-cause of their problem:
Quote:

Captain Schnemo wrote:
The problem with that kind of thing is that to show what's wrong with Future World, all you need to do is take a picture of Nemo, but there's no way Disney would admit that there's any kind of problem with that. I doubt they would even understand the point.

from what my mom told me about managing and such things, every big company one day or another diverge from what they used to be. At that precise point the management team is blinded. In short, they think that they are still one their previous way. Once they realise that they are not on the previous way (wich clearly they did not). Either they go back to the old way or try to define a new one. In both case those choice are good because you leave the blind spot. The third option occur when they are still blind and never get ahold of the situation until permanent damage occur (wich is...a little bit the case here). BUT, there is one thing that surprised me ...for the good. I red recently that Disney will do a new movie based on their OLD animation style. Maybe some of them are not that blind anymore!

In either case, I wish I had a spark, an idea to find a solution. RReng got any idea?

[Jacca5660]

Amen, sir.

Back when I was in the fifth grade and Thomas Jefferson was president, my teacher used to take her class on a field trip to EPCOT each year. I'm sure lots of other teachers in the area did the same thing, because although EPCOT was fun, it was also considered to be educational. Each kid had to pay admission, of course, and they would always spend money while they were in the park. And now, thanks to their mismanagement, Disney has screwed themselves out of that revenue. Now that EPCOT is all about thrill rides and cartoon characters, I think it's safe to say that there are no more class trips.

I understand that there are more entertainment options in the Orlando area now than there used to be. But when I see pictures like this one of the long line to get into the Universe of Energy circa 1985, it reminds me that the way Disney used to do things worked. Sure, if that show was still playing today it would be even more embarrassingly dated than Ellen's Energy Adventure, but there still is a market for thought-provoking entertainment. If only Disney would recognize it.

First of all "YOU CRACK ME UP!! LMAO!!"

It seem this whole discussion has become some what generational.

Yes Disney has gotten way off mark and seems to market itself to the lowest common denominator... I. E. Kim Impossible. Disney doesn't seem to care about it's core market or concepts. They're building attractions for the short term. In another five years they'll just build some more trash to get the parents of the 8 thru 14 year old into the gate.

Disney is like the auto makers, they aren't building anything of value any more. I feel they aren't building anything that will stand the test of time, nothing cutting edge. I've seen a few people here talking about the technology of some of the new attractions. SO WHAT? Let me show you my new phone, next year I'll show you another new one. All because it new tech, doesn't give it any value.

I feel sad reading this tread and realizing how old some of us really are. There are so many writing here that just don't understand where Disney came from, they don't realize the significance of the history and what Disney truly stands for.

Walt didn't build Disneyland or WDW targeting an age group. He envisioned a place where young and old alike could enjoy things together, where everyone could escape too.

When he built PoC, HM, Splash, SM, and so many others, there weren't any movie or property tie ins. He built the parks for just the park's sake.
EPCOT's future world was actually a look into what could be, not what is. Us older Disers understand this.

I feel sad that there are so many that don't!

After reading what I've just written, "HOLLY COW...I'M ONLY 48!! I swear I'm not 90!!" "Back when I was in the fifth grade and Thomas Jefferson was president!" OY!!

[Captain Schnemo]

The problem, as with nearly every poor survey, is that the questions are either loaded or mis-aimed or both.

That is an excellent point. I'd always respond to surveys and the result was always depressing. As you said, you can tell what they were thinking by the questions they asked.

It's as if we were standing in the middle of an open pit of raw sewage, and they asked me to sniff two dead skunks to determine which was the cause of the mysterious odor problem. As long as they don't recognize the larger problem, we're not going to get any positive change.

Disney is like the auto makers...

That's an excellent analogy.

As Thomas Friedman has been pointing out lately, how did they respond to rising gas prices? By giving customers a discount on gas!

No attempt whatsoever to address the actual issue, because the solution was so far outside of the box they were in, they couldn't even imagine it, much less see it.

[subsonic]

As Thomas Friedman has been pointing out lately, how did they respond to rising gas prices? By giving customers a discount on gas!

No attempt whatsoever to address the actual issue, because the solution was so far outside of the box they were in, they couldn't even imagine it, much less see it.

As I've been saying a lot, "Short Sighted". Disney use to see so deep and far that it's attractions were beyond our imagination. Again, I think Spider-man the ride did this. I haven't been on Toy Story Midway Mania yet, people say it's very "fun". From the video I've seen it looks like a bunch of video walls with no detail whatsoever. I don't doubt that it's fun, I'll probably ride it a bunch of times throughout my life. But, I'll bet it could have been so much better. What I'm trying to say is that the older "caring" Disney would have gone the extra step to make everything seamless while now it's "Good enough. Guests won't notice". Which is most likely true.