Pixar "Invasion"

[gusgoose]

I'm not cynical about the living seas, I loved the living seas then and I love it now, I just don't see how people can say the Nemo overlay doesn't fit into the living seas well. You may not be a fan of it but that doesn't mean the theming is bad for it's location. Future World at Epcot has the same problem Tommorow Land does, it's pretty hard to but futuristic anymore, there's nothing futuristic about Mickey Mouse shaped pumpkins at the Land, there's no futuristic about hangliding over California. That doesn't mean these are all bad attractions.

I'm right with you here, it's really hard to continue establishing a "futuristic" theme park area with rides that are 20 or 30 years old. It reaches a point where these themes just become a parody of themselves, like in Carousel of Progress where the family is playing a virtual reality game in the "future" that looks about 1/10th as sophisticated as the PS3 and Wii consoles kids (and adults) are enjoying today.

 

[fyn]

I'm not cynical about the living seas, I loved the living seas then and I love it now, I just don't see how people can say the Nemo overlay doesn't fit into the living seas well. You may not be a fan of it but that doesn't mean the theming is bad for it's location. Future World at Epcot has the same problem Tommorow Land does, it's pretty hard to but futuristic anymore, there's nothing futuristic about Mickey Mouse shaped pumpkins at the Land, there's no futuristic about hangliding over California. That doesn't mean these are all bad attractions.

You've switched the causality. I'm not a fan because the theming is bad. The Living Seas was futuristic, despite you ignoring the theme or having issues with its execution. The agricultural techniques the Land is using are bleeding edge, and I'd love to find a farmer who doesn't think Aeroponics is futuristic. As for Soarin', I frankly don't know where it would fit at WDW. Its a great attraction. Does it fit into the overall theme of Future World? Not really, but certainly more than Nemo does.

 

[fyn]

I'm right with you here, it's really hard to continue establishing a "futuristic" theme park area with rides that are 20 or 30 years old. It reaches a point where these themes just become a parody of themselves, like in Carousel of Progress where the family is playing a virtual reality game in the "future" that looks about 1/10th as sophisticated as the PS3 and Wii consoles kids (and adults) are enjoying today.

Read back to my initial post about The Living Seas. I lament the fact that Nemo was done instead of updating the Seabase Alpha theme.

 

[yankspy]

I'm right with you here, it's really hard to continue establishing a "futuristic" theme park area with rides that are 20 or 30 years old. It reaches a point where these themes just become a parody of themselves, like in Carousel of Progress where the family is playing a virtual reality game in the "future" that looks about 1/10th as sophisticated as the PS3 and Wii consoles kids (and adults) are enjoying today.

I am wondering why it is just accepted that it is too hard to continue to update concepts such as future world? I realize the difficulties, but it is not out of the realm of possibility. There is no reason, other than cost, that the last scene in COP could not be updated every five years or so. Perhaps it would make it a bit more popular. As far as the Seas, I also believe that it does not fit the theme of future world. I have no problem with Pixar, I just think that Nemo, in it's current state, does not fit.

 

[nibblesandbits]

No, the idea itself was a slam dunk. It was the execution that was "lame and unfitting."

The problem with The Seas is that it really is a rehased version of the movie; Nemo gets lost and we go off to find him. Sounds a lot like the movie doesn't it? Why couldn't the storyline revolve around discovering more about the ocean? The idea was perfect, and there for the taking! Perhaps something where we meet Nemo and Co. at the coral reef. However, Nemo is bored and wants to learn more about the ocean. Then, maybe Mr. Ray takes us on a journey through the seas? Sound appealing to anyone? Kids would have been interested because of the addition of Nemo and Friends as our "guides" through the oceans. On the other hand, "purists" would have been pleased with the educational content of the ride.

I can't believe it...but I actually kinda agree.

I like the new Nemo ride...I think it's great...however, I think it might have been a bit more appropriate to not make it the exact same story as the movie. Most of the other attractions in Disney (despite the FL attractions, which I guess is the reason a lot of people think this ride would fit better in FL) that involve characters tell a different story than the one the movie portrays. And this would have been an area where I might have liked to see that. Now, whether that means making it more educational or not, I would have no problem...but they could have added to the story and made it a bit more enjoyable.

This of course, doesn't mean I don't enjoy the attraction. I really do. I personally do think the technology on it is pretty cool. I think it's a good ride and a necessary ride to have in Epcot. Plus, I think Nemo really fits the pavillion extremely well.

 

[nibblesandbits]

You've switched the causality. I'm not a fan because the theming is bad. The Living Seas was futuristic, despite you ignoring the theme or having issues with its execution. The agricultural techniques the Land is using are bleeding edge, and I'd love to find a farmer who doesn't think Aeroponics is futuristic. As for Soarin', I frankly don't know where it would fit at WDW. Its a great attraction. Does it fit into the overall theme of Future World? Not really, but certainly more than Nemo does.

I heard this discussed before and was curious on your guys take.

Back when they had Project Gemini, they thought of renaming Future World, Discovery World...if they did end up naming Future World, Discovery World...would that appease those of you better who have a problem with some of the newer rides being built and the fact that they have nothing to do with the Future.

(Personally, I don't think that hard about the fact that it's called Future World...to me, it's just a name at Epcot. Something to call it...however, I can see where it would bother some.)

 

[yankspy]

I heard this discussed before and was curious on your guys take.

Back when they had Project Gemini, they thought of renaming Future World, Discovery World...if they did end up naming Future World, Discovery World...would that appease those of you better who have a problem with some of the newer rides being built and the fact that they have nothing to do with the Future.

(Personally, I don't think that hard about the fact that it's called Future World...to me, it's just a name at Epcot. Something to call it...however, I can see where it would bother some.)

I do not know. If you think about it, the future and discovery kind of go hand in hand. I do not see how Nemo would fit in a discovery land either. I think if Nemo were a bit more educational it might have been able to fit for some. I was watching the living seas film last night and I have to say that it was indeed futuristic. It spoke of the vast undiscovered seas and how new technologies were allowing us to explore that world. I am just not getting that with Nemo. It seems like a proper Fantasyland ride to me.

 

[fyn]

I do not know. If you think about it, the future and discovery kind of go hand in hand. I do not see how Nemo would fit in a discovery land either. I think if Nemo were a bit more educational it might have been able to fit for some. I was watching the living seas film last night and I have to say that it was indeed futuristic. It spoke of the vast undiscovered seas and how new technologies were allowing us to explore that world. I am just not getting that with Nemo. It seems like a proper Fantasyland ride to me.

Quite frankly, Nemo is just the grossest example of Future World's wonderfully cohesive theme taking a nose dive. The other pavilions that have been replaced have at least held on to some semblance of science, exploration, technology, and discovery.

Edit: I found the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Qdu3QCuzgg

Anyone who watches that, especially the last minute or so, and still questions how the Seabase Alpha concept was futuristic...I guess I just wouldn't know what to say at that point.

 

[JerrySchauer]

Disney's Pixar Studios Icon

Could this be the future icon for the Disney Studios? :drevil: :shrug:

 

[EpcotServo]

Could this be the future icon for the Disney Studios? :drevil: :shrug:

Ummm...I think that'd actually look 100 times better than then the hat, sorry.
:lol:

 

[Dragonrider1227]

"WE ARE PIXAR! RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!" :lol:
Seriously though, i've had no issues with Pixar stuff at Disney since the stuff they put Pixar in is usually really good and often better than what they replaced it with. I mean, I never even HEARD of Dreamflights before I came here. :lookaroun I WOULD like more Pixar movies than Toy Story and Nemo to get rides though. I would TOTALLY go on an Incredibles ride. Perhaps even an "A bugs life" ride. (If Toy Story and Nemo can have two attractions, so can the bugs XD)
and you know something, Epcotservo, you're right. It DOES! XD At least it doesn't completely block the theater from view

 

[TinkRBell427]

I think I would like it better if the lamp was turned so it was looking at us! :lol:

 

[Dragonrider1227]

Agreed! :ROFLOL:

I'm not cynical about the living seas, I loved the living seas then and I love it now, I just don't see how people can say the Nemo overlay doesn't fit into the living seas well. You may not be a fan of it but that doesn't mean the theming is bad for it's location. Future World at Epcot has the same problem Tommorow Land does, it's pretty hard to but futuristic anymore, there's nothing futuristic about Mickey Mouse shaped pumpkins at the Land, there's no futuristic about hangliding over California. That doesn't mean these are all bad attractions.

I think it's less actually about the subject matter, and more about the technology used to MAKE the subject matter. There isn't anything futuristic about Mickey Mouse shaped pumkins or hangliding over California, but the technology behind creating this is state of the art.
And for the record, if someone's going to complain that Nemo isn't "Futuristic" enough, then they'll have to complain that The Dreamfinder and Figment arn't "Furturistic" enough either. I see Nemo and the gang more as Mascots of the seas that the pavillion represents more than anything else