Is there a reason you think he’s over rated?
I can't speak for the other poster, but IMO;
Joe started a trend in WDI that obsessed over detail and forgot the fundamentals about good park design. His obsession with authenticity fails to understand adaptation or the appeal of the Disney parks as romanticized realities. I think a perfect example was when AK opened, and among other things, people couldn't find their way back to the parking lot. He had a vision for the park that did not really suit the needs of guests or add anything more to the "zoo with rides" concept that hadn't been done before besides making it a little more polished in its presentation.
AK, his signature work, was built in the same era of WDI that saw an interest in industrialized environments (factories, studios etc) and technology for the sake of technology (Test Track 1.0 being the ultimate example). Trying to show off technical abilities and how cool the "real world" was instead of presenting something better. The park wants to take you to "exotic" places, but in too literal a sense. It comes across as imitation and doesn't really add anything more besides copyrighted Disney IP (not always Joe's fault). Avatar is the only land that really builds on an concept and takes it further, wisely distancing itself from the narrative of the original movie.
To me, there's a thru line that connects Main Street, New Orleans Square, World Showcase, Mediterranean Harbor etc and its a kind of romanticism. Animal Kingdom Lodge has that, but not the park itself. It's a shame.
I also increasingly appreciate how someone like Claude Coats could use threadbare resources and make something memorable, instead of WDI spending half a billion for something that still feels half baked. Everyone at WDI is guilty of this, but Joe's approach to and advocating of research trips won't teach him or others how to change that.
