James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
You're comparing full service/table service to something that genuinely is the quick service cafeteria for the park.
I agree. However, I would say this is a failure of Disney to update and provide adequate capacity, not a failure of concept.I remember the excitement of anticipation in trying out all the cool new technology.
Until....
1. It was all outdated. My IBM PCjr had more power and abilities than their displays.2. With only a few dozen displays and a few thousand guests, you could never get to a groovy new-tech console to try it out because of the lines.
Quickly outdated and eternal miserable capacity.
I was comparing centerpiece restaurant to centerpiece restaurant... Yes I understand it is a literal cafeteria... and I have said, I do not find Connections particularly egregious...I think the bigger failure is that nothing else in this "Celebration Gardens" area...the core of the entry point into the park, reaches higher than business park or college campus cafeteria...You're comparing full service/table service to something that genuinely is the quick service cafeteria for the park.
I think this kind of hits on why I am so curious about the alternatives suggested by critics of Connections as being too much like a modern cafeteria, contemporary corporate architecture, etc. The example of the Atlantic Restaurant just suggests more "stuff" equals more theming/more Disney, even if that busy kind of design isn't really appropriate for the original Epcot aesthetic that they have at least attempted to update.I think my relation point was the fact that the Atlantic Restaurant is the main restaurant for the park core of Epic...much like Connections is the main restaurant for the park core of the front half of EPCOT.... they are similar use areas....
but yes it should always be contemporary and fit the aesthetic of the modern building... It just could have been so much more interesting.... My problem with the area is really everything else...." Celebration Gardens Corporate Business Quad" and the Communicore Hall Cafeteria and Flex Building... If those areas had been more engaging, Connections would not even be noticed as not being so "Disney"...
Well, this is the one alternative people suggest! That, to me at least, seems like nostalgia talking. I can't imagine what people would have said if this really re-opened looking like a freshened up Tomorrowland Terrace or Cosmic Rays.Oddly enough, Electric Umbrella (and before it, Stargate), Odyssey, Cosmic Rays, Tomorrowland Terrace have the fitting aesthetic I think.
Space 220 seems very "EPCOTy" to me.I think this kind of hits on why I am so curious about the alternatives suggested by critics of Connections as being too much like a modern cafeteria, contemporary corporate architecture, etc. The example of the Atlantic Restaurant just suggests more "stuff" equals more theming/more Disney, even if that busy kind of design isn't really appropriate for the original Epcot aesthetic that they have at least attempted to update.
I don't think you are claiming that aesthetic would work here, though, so that still leaves the question of what would. I have yet to see anyone specify an alternative style for those interiors without using vague concepts about being more engaging, optimistic, forward-looking, or just more Disney.
Well, this is the one alternative people suggest! That, to me at least, seems like nostalgia talking. I can't imagine what people would have said if this really re-opened looking like a freshened up Tomorrowland Terrace or Cosmic Rays.
You realize that most of us here are not architects, designers or imagineers, right? Instead, we walk into a space, and it can either feel right or it doesn't. It is the job of these groups to make it feel right for us. My expectation is for Disney to give me something that makes me go wow, or surprises me, or makes me say, "I would have never thought of that, but this is awesome." I don't expect to walk into a space at WDW and have a feeling or boredom or feel like I am just at any other place. Is that really unreasonable? I don't think so.I think this kind of hits on why I am so curious about the alternatives suggested by critics of Connections as being too much like a modern cafeteria, contemporary corporate architecture, etc. The example of the Atlantic Restaurant just suggests more "stuff" equals more theming/more Disney, even if that busy kind of design isn't really appropriate for the original Epcot aesthetic that they have at least attempted to update.
I don't think you are claiming that aesthetic would work here, though, so that still leaves the question of what would. I have yet to see anyone specify an alternative style for those interiors without using vague concepts about being more engaging, optimistic, forward-looking, or just more Disney.
I doubt people would get much pushback if they phrased it like the second part of your statement (e.g. looking for a surprise factor, content, or focal point that's lacking). The issue is that people do show up and comment on the architecture and design, so others are obviously going to question that; claiming ignorance of those subjects ex post facto doesn't mean people were in the wrong to respond directly. Also, that we're in the Electric Umbrella deification phase of this topic is nuts.You realize that most of us here are not architects, designers or imagineers, right? Instead, we walk into a space, and it can either feel right or it doesn't. It is the job of these groups to make it feel right for us. My expectation is for Disney to give me something that makes me go wow, or surprises me, or makes me say, "I would have never thought of that, but this is awesome." I don't expect to walk into a space at WDW and have a feeling or boredom or feel like I am just at any other place. Is that really unreasonable? I don't think so.
I doubt people would get much pushback if they phrased it like the second part of your statement (e.g. looking for a surprise factor, content, or focal point that's lacking). The issue is that people do show up and comment on the architecture and design, so others are obviously going to question that; claiming ignorance of those subjects ex post facto doesn't mean people were in the wrong to respond directly. Also, that we're in the Electric Umbrella deification phase of this topic is nuts.
Indeed, I think that's what I was getting at. De-90s the colour and neon and I think you have a good internal structure that is useful, fits the existing design language, and is interesting. I don't know how the capacity of Connections compares with Electric Umbrella but the upper floor added at least some interest and a nice alternative space.That said, aesthetic aside, I do think Electric Umbrella was a more interesting space at a base level because it had more than one floor, offered a nice combination of both inside and outdoor seating, and did a bit more to break up space overall. Connections would have benefitted from some second floor seating at the very least.
It wouldn’t have. It would make no sense. It would require reworking Journey of Water to be a central theme that cuts across the area.Imagine if they had updated the Electric Umbrella with some new lighting technology, color palatte, and a water/thunderstorm motif to tie into JoW on the opposite side (with maybe some playful warnings about electricity and water and umbrellas).
Nah. Never would have worked.
And I think they should stay away from new lighting technology for the moment.It wouldn’t have. It would make no sense. It would require reworking Journey of Water to be a central theme that cuts across the area.
I certainly do understand just not liking a space without necessarily being able to articulate why.You realize that most of us here are not architects, designers or imagineers, right? Instead, we walk into a space, and it can either feel right or it doesn't. It is the job of these groups to make it feel right for us. My expectation is for Disney to give me something that makes me go wow, or surprises me, or makes me say, "I would have never thought of that, but this is awesome." I don't expect to walk into a space at WDW and have a feeling or boredom or feel like I am just at any other place. Is that really unreasonable? I don't think so.
Electric Unbrella was a lousy design. It did not have good bones. Like so much of the Innoventions work it was dark and poorly laid out. It had to have a mezzanine shoved into it because it didn’t really have enough space, just making it all the more cramped.
More what though? The space is broken up in the way different parts wrap around. You can go sit outside in the center and windows offers views to that space. It does have different levels. The problem with a lot of these criticisms is that they’re contradictory.Connections is basically just a big open cafeteria, though. It needed more. As I said above, even if the actual layout was poor, breaking up space, a second floor, indoor/outdoor seating, etc. is all better than what's offered at Connections. And that's not because I'm praising EU as something great.
Maybe they could have added a fountain in the middle?It wouldn’t have. It would make no sense. It would require reworking Journey of Water to be a central theme that cuts across the area.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.