Rumor Brazil is the frontrunner for a new World Showcase Pavilion

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
The unfortunate thing about Brazil seemingly being built without a ride is that that section of WS could really use some sort of attraction especially given the amount of space. There's a big gap between China's film and America's AA show. It would be unfortunate if all we have in that area (Africa Outpost - Germany - Brazil - Italy) is food and shopping with some live entertainment tossed in. We'd even be losing the train garden in the deal.
 
Next Big Thing

Next Big Thing

Well-Known Member
doctornick said:
The unfortunate thing about Brazil seemingly being built without a ride is that that section of WS could really use some sort of attraction especially given the amount of space. There's a big gap between China's film and America's AA show. It would be unfortunate if all we have in that area (Africa Outpost - Germany - Brazil - Italy) is food and shopping with some live entertainment tossed in. We'd even be losing the train garden in the deal.
Click to expand...
The train can be moved.
 
MisterPenguin

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
doctornick said:
The unfortunate thing about Brazil seemingly being built without a ride is that that section of WS could really use some sort of attraction especially given the amount of space. There's a big gap between China's film and America's AA show.
Click to expand...

You aren't the only one who talks about 'balancing' things around Showcase Lagoon with a certain sense of... 'anxiety?'... that there are more rides on one side than the other.

I don't get that at all. If World Showcase were to have four and only four rides and they were located in Mexico, Norway, China, and Germany... it wouldn't bother me at all. And I'd see no logistical reason to 'spread them out.'

This means I can't get on board with some people saying that "Country X should get a ride because of... balance". I would think there are better criteria for deciding where rides go.
 
marni1971

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
MisterPenguin said:
You aren't the only one who talks about 'balancing' things around Showcase Lagoon with a certain sense of... 'anxiety?'... that there are more rides on one side than the other.

I don't get that at all. If World Showcase were to have four and only four rides and they were located in Mexico, Norway, China, and Germany... it wouldn't bother me at all. And I'd see no logistical reason to 'spread them out.'

This means I can't get on board with some people saying that "Country X should get a ride because of... balance". I would think there are better criteria for deciding where rides go.
Click to expand...

A historical reason for what got built and what didn’t is shelter.

Storm shelters are all over the park disguised as attraction and restaurant buildings. The structures available from October 1982 are pretty evenly spaced around the lagoon. This is partly the reason (aside from actually being planned to happen) that the Japan show building was built. You have the Mexican pavilion, China theatre, Biergarten, AmAd, Japan theatre, France theatre and Canadian Theatre. The UK was a supplement shelter on the west side.
 
wdisney9000

wdisney9000

Truindenashendubapreser
Premium Member
marni1971 said:
A historical reason for what got built and what didn’t is shelter.

Storm shelters are all over the park disguised as attraction and restaurant buildings. The structures available from October 1982 are pretty evenly spaced around the lagoon. This is partly the reason (aside from actually being planned to happen) that the Japan show building was built. You have the Mexican pavilion, China theatre, Biergarten, AmAd, Japan theatre, France theatre and Canadian Theatre. The UK was a supplement shelter on the west side.
Click to expand...
They can build an attraction with a theme of storm shelters and its a win-win!
 
MisterPenguin

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
marni1971 said:
A historical reason for what got built and what didn’t is shelter.

Storm shelters are all over the park disguised as attraction and restaurant buildings. The structures available from October 1982 are pretty evenly spaced around the lagoon. This is partly the reason (aside from actually being planned to happen) that the Japan show building was built. You have the Mexican pavilion, China theatre, Biergarten, AmAd, Japan theatre, France theatre and Canadian Theatre. The UK was a supplement shelter on the west side.
Click to expand...

Thanks!

But, oh, the irony that "Maelstrom" wasn't a storm shelter!
 
21stamps

21stamps

Well-Known Member
Princess Leia said:
It's not that I don't like the world showcase the way it is- because I do- but it isn't what it was supposed to be. Germany should have a boat ride; Japan a grand show attraction or a roller coaster; and let's not forget, a Swiss pavilion with a coaster of its own and an Africa pavilion with a stellar attraction. I could have spent another day at Epcot just wandering around the countries without going on a ride, but that shouldn't be the only option. Brazil deserves to have an attraction.
Click to expand...

Right, those were plans that most people probably found out about after they had already visited. They weren’t something that existed and have been taken away.

I understand that some people think rides are a necessity, I’ve just never once sat in World Showcase thinking “oh this is boring, Morocco needs a ride.”
I think the WC is a huge part of what makes Disney so unique.. the same with Africa in AK. I can spend so much time watching street performers and enjoying the details in either of the 2. Maybe if there was rides in the past 20something years then I would feel differently. But there hasn’t been. Can’t miss something that was never there.

More rides in Future World and more street performances in WC would be my perfect scenario.

Idea for Brazil- do a nightly festival atmosphere. The one at AK is great.
 
marni1971

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
21stamps said:
Right, those were plans that most people probably found out about after they had already visited. They weren’t something that existed and have been taken away.

I understand that some people think rides are a necessity, I’ve just never once sat in World Showcase thinking “oh this is boring, Morocco needs a ride.”
I think the WC is a huge part of what makes Disney so unique.. the same with Africa in AK. I can spend so much time watching street performers and enjoying the details in either of the 2. Maybe if there was rides in the past 20something years then I would feel differently. But there hasn’t been. Can’t miss something that was never there.

More rides in Future World and more street performances in WC would be my perfect scenario.

Idea for Brazil- do a nightly festival atmosphere. The one at AK is great.
Click to expand...
We know that. Others disagree with you.
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
21stamps said:
I’m a little surprised that you don’t think the other half of the park needs attractions more than WS. I thought that would be one area where we agree.lol
Click to expand...
Future World has plenty of rides. They need updates. For some reason, however, they frequently decide to bulldoze perfectly fine FW rides that really just needed a renovation while WS stagnates and continues through its fourth decade under-utilized.
 
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
When imagination is basically in utter decay...ans wonders of life was closed for no reason...and innoventions is mothballed...

I don't see how the argument can be made that FW doesn't need attractions?

These must be people who never were there before 2002?
 
ProfSavage

ProfSavage

Well-Known Member
Sirwalterraleigh said:
Why on earth would disney put religious iconography in its parks? That goes against their entire philosophy.
Click to expand...

I was responding to another poster. In this case, Christ the Redeemer, probably the most familiar landmark in Brazil to a North American or European audience, won't be included (@marni1971 has already said as such) not because of religious iconography (which, I don't think you're correct there - there's a torii gate in the Japan pavilion and you know, the whole Candlelight Processional) but because the statue is a registered trademark and not up for reproduction the way a building might be
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom