You need glasses then. And better hearing given the audio system was recently revamped.
But seriously, a new version is on it's way. Slowly.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Possible Attraction in France pavilion (Epcot) Update - new Attraction Greenlit
- Thread starter doctornick
- Start date
But seriously, a new version is on it's way. Slowly.
I would think so. Disney knows that if they built a pavilion and just had food/shopping without a major attraction that they would be shredded by the online community and even casual guests would be unhappy.
That's the one reason I wouldn't mind seeing a new country be built -- because it pretty much b y default would have to include a big attraction and the WS needs it. So, I'd be happy if something were announced at D23 or the like.
But honestly I'd rather see Disney invest money on expanding the existing pavilions with new rides or other attractions. I'm one of those that feels every pavilion should have at least one big entertainment offering (not just streetmosphere).
21stamps
Well-Known Member
You see what you just said there? Something understandable. Something that makes sense.
You can say that without the generic and contradictory word tracks containing such statements as "dumbing down our children" "insulting to Walt" "insulting to us" "cancelling out the educational aspect of WS" and so on.
It's a theme park. Fantasy and Reality and Fun all coming together. We all won't like every decision made, but we all love it (hopefully if someone is on this site).
I don't need a ride in every pavilion..but I don't care if there is one. The Mexico ride is fun but forgettable to me, and I don't consider it at all educational. My 5 year old (at the time) absolutely loved Morocco, and it was again his favorite part of WS at age 6. He's talked about that pavilion, but he's never talked about Mexico. He probably would have enjoyed Frozen.. and the thing with FEA is that it's tucked away, it's not in your face at all and completely avoidable. Anyway, point being- you can enjoy rides, and you can enjoy atmosphere, but let's leave the intellectual arguments out of it. They hold very little weight in reference to the topic, especially if someone is claiming that a pavilion is less enjoyable without a ride. My opinion.
Last edited:
Tony the Tigger
Well-Known Member
[/QUOTE]
Maybe you can help me understand the following..
So the "general" thought process on this site is that we need more attractions (as in rides) in the WS to make it more interesting and attractive, as long as those rides have nothing to do with Disney characters?
One is intellectually unappealing, but the other is not? This is interesting to me and I'm trying to understand that point of view.
Don't get me wrong, I love rides, I'm just attempting to understand how something is deemed as fitting or not in the WS.[/QUOTE]
You know what? I don't care what is the consensus of imaginary imagineers.
1. They are a vocal minority who do not represent the average parkgoer or the bulk of WDW income.
2. There is no right or wrong. There is WDW doing as they see fit and people can like it or not. Super fans are not the curators of what Walt wanted, what were original intentions, etc. Original intentions were to put a weather-proof bubble dome over the whole thing. I guess there's no magic without that.
3. Repetitive arguments by a dozen people doesn't make them correct or more valid in their opinions which some insist on presenting as facts.
So rude. I'm surprised at you, I didn't think you were like that. We may agree or disagree on various topics, but that's not a cool tactic.
And that's obnoxious.
Do you fancy yourself Harry Potter yapping at Voldemort now?
Folks: perspective. This discussion is mostly inconsequential as are most of our opinions.
Maybe you can help me understand the following..
So the "general" thought process on this site is that we need more attractions (as in rides) in the WS to make it more interesting and attractive, as long as those rides have nothing to do with Disney characters?
One is intellectually unappealing, but the other is not? This is interesting to me and I'm trying to understand that point of view.
Don't get me wrong, I love rides, I'm just attempting to understand how something is deemed as fitting or not in the WS.[/QUOTE]
You know what? I don't care what is the consensus of imaginary imagineers.
1. They are a vocal minority who do not represent the average parkgoer or the bulk of WDW income.
2. There is no right or wrong. There is WDW doing as they see fit and people can like it or not. Super fans are not the curators of what Walt wanted, what were original intentions, etc. Original intentions were to put a weather-proof bubble dome over the whole thing. I guess there's no magic without that.
3. Repetitive arguments by a dozen people doesn't make them correct or more valid in their opinions which some insist on presenting as facts.
So rude. I'm surprised at you, I didn't think you were like that. We may agree or disagree on various topics, but that's not a cool tactic.
And that's obnoxious.
Do you fancy yourself Harry Potter yapping at Voldemort now?
Folks: perspective. This discussion is mostly inconsequential as are most of our opinions.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
While small, I find the imagery to be quite clear. It's like watching YouTube on my iPhone. I really think it is the fountains that are the problem. If they were more impressive, the "boring" middle section wouldn't be boring. The rest of the show is still strong.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Simple. Read this:
He managed to sum up pages of posts in a simple sentence. I'm also not sure there is a general thought process for this site. Its a bunch of individuals with their own thoughts.
21stamps
Well-Known Member
I wish that was the case. Here's what I've observed (in some threads, not all).
The same handful of people repeating the same word tracks over and over. Then if an actual discussion on why they have that thought process is presented- then the same word tracks get repeated.. or, they just refuse to engage in an actual convo with a different perspective.
Because their way is the only way.
Differing opinions can make for good convo..a discussion on differing opinions doesn't have to turn in to an argument or name calling. Sadly, that doesn't seem possible with said handful of people.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
So you are upset at @Mike S and @wdisney9000 for being rude and obnoxious and in the same post you start out belittling the people who don't agree with you by calling them names. Pot meet kettle
. I think what you fail to realize is that most of us agree that the majority of guests at WDW don't think like the people here and Disney will do what it wants even if we disagree. I also acknowledge that neither this discussion or any other on this board is going to lead to any actual changes. It's just a bunch of people having a discussion.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
In this instance it's better to say they're making more Fantasylands.
Africa, Asia, and Australia are continents. The latter just happens to also be it's own country.
What's obnoxious is how they've come into and hijacked multiple threads now and just keep on doing it. Once one dies down they jump to another.
Please, everyone stop responding.
Last edited:
Rude would be to categorize an entire countries culture as nothing more than food and sports. There is more to Brazil than Pele and dancing.
I was quoting The Emperor from Return of the Jedi and you thought it was Harry Potter? Shame, shame, your Disney card has been revoked!
She is like Siren part deux. The nonsense is hard to ignore.
Of course. Though "Oceania" is growing in usage as a more all encompassing term instead of "Australia" for the continent since it is more grossly inclusive of New Zealand and the various Pacific islands. I just feel that the name Oceania has a bit more of a natural vibe fitting into DAK than Australia -- if they were to go the route of adding such a land to that park.
21stamps
Well-Known Member
Yes, Brazil is more than that, and I definitely didn't say it was not more than that. However a few fitting and fun part of that country's culture to highlight in street shows and shops would be- Soccer, Samba, Food (empanadas, meats, etc..I think a table service churrascaria would be awesome in Epcot) Drinks (caipirinhas etc). Since all of the above are a big part of the culture.
Of course you'd rather argue rather than admit that those things may be fitting in a Brazil pavilion. To each their own.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
I know I over use that analogy and I don't really mean it to be offensive to MK. IMHO we had at one point 4 parks that were unique with their own overall park themes as well. MGM Studios was a working studio park, AK had its animals, nature and conservation, EPCOT was really 2 parts with their own theme but still very unique. MK is basically a grouping of lands around the central hub. Not a bad setup for a park and it works well there and at the other Castle parks around the world. When we see what's happening with DHS they are obviously going away from the working studio theme for the park. We don't really know yet what the new theme will be but it's likely a series of unrelated "lands". When they talk about adding GoTG to the Energy pavilion or Frozen in Norway you are moving away from a cohesive theme for the park and going to more of a series of unrelated attractions. I don't want to rehash the AK discussion here.
For me it's not just about adding IP or IP based rides but rather adding stuff that's appropriate to overall theme and keeping the parks somewhat unique. Obviously MK is the most popular and successful of the 4 Florida parks and it makes good business sense to want to clone it.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
DHS is adopting the same theme as USF where instead of seeing how movies are made we now jump into them. Of course there's also some TV and music thrown in on both sides as well.
HauntedMansionFLA
Well-Known Member
YES!!! And they have the WOL and Energy pavilions next to each other begging to be updated.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Food, booze and sports are a major partof most cultures. If the depth of your cultural knowledge is limited to universal truths, it does not offer much.Yes, Brazil is more than that, and I definitely didn't say it was not more than that. However a few fitting and fun part of that country's culture to highlight in street shows and shops would be- Soccer, Samba, Food (empanadas, meats, etc..I think a table service churrascaria would be awesome in Epcot) Drinks (caipirinhas etc). Since all of the above are a big part of the culture.
Of course you'd rather argue rather than admit that those things may be fitting in a Brazil pavilion. To each their own.
I am meeting my Asian friend to watch the football game. I am sure we will discuss ninjas and Honda Accords. That's what the Asian pavilions highlight , correct?
Mike S
Well-Known Member
Aw, no Nintendo?
21stamps
Well-Known Member
Let's try this another way since you aren't reading nor grasping what I am actually saying-
Do you think a churrascaria would be a nice table service option in Epcot?
Do you think an empanada stand would be nice and appropriate?
Do you think some kind of Samba street show would be nice and appropriate?
Do you think some reference to the World Cup and the Argentina rivalry would be fun and nice and fitting?
Do you think caipirinhas would be a nice and fitting adult beverage option in WS?
If "NO" to all of the above- fair enough. What would your ideas for a street show and a table service and qs options in a Brazil pavilion be?