News Morocco Pavilion redevelopment

Disney Analyst

Disney Analyst

Well-Known Member
castlecake2.0 said:
l'hotel du Canada's roof has been painted to look like copper and not been real copper for almost 40 years and no one seems to be bothered by it? The parks have always been a blend of authentic materials and theatrical tricks.
Click to expand...

That's always the beauty of what Disney does.

Looks like wood? Likely made out of cement.

Thatch Roof? Made out of metal.
 
hpyhnt 1000

hpyhnt 1000

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
In any event, something being cheaper and/or easier isn't an inherently bad thing. If the final product is more or less indistinguishable, does it really matter?

And people should assume that Disney is going to take the cheaper/easier option most of the time, unless they have a strong reason to believe that the more expensive/harder option will result in enough of a revenue difference to make the added expense/difficulty worth it. They're a massive, publicly owned corporation. That's what they do. There's nothing malicious about it.

People will tell you Disney used to be different. While there are are some indications that might be true, I certainly don't know enough to make that claim. But today's Disney is run exactly like the massive conglomerate it is, for better or worse.
Click to expand...
It certainly wasn't always the case, but I do feel it used to be different, even just 10-15 years ago. Case in point, we had a whole pandemic web series from Joe Rohde on all the authentic features that can be found throughout Animal Kingdom:



Some quotes from the video:
- "So, when it was time for us to do Anandapur at DAK, rather than us doing a whole bunch of designs based on us studying these windows, we went directly to these wood carvers in Nepal and commissioned all the wood from them."

- And in talking about the larger Asia section of DAK: "But they represent real places because we want to talk about real things, and the level of realism partially comes from the fact that these objects are real, made by real people in real places."

Now, I'm in no way saying 100% of DAK or the Morocco pavilion is 100% authentic - obviously not the case. But there is something to be said about using authentic processes or artistry or materials in a section of the park that is based on real people and cultures. And, in my opinion, it's worth it because (most of) DAK and the Morocco pavilion are some of the most immersive and transportive areas of any Disney park. Details matter.

LittleBuford said:
Then you'll know what I'm talking about in terms of the pavilion's signs being rather different from what one finds in Morocco itself. It is a Disney, after all. A bit of inauthenticity is to be expected and has been part of the pavilion since its inception.
Click to expand...
I've made no comment on the artwork or typeface or information displayed on the signs; at least we don't have any backward Arabic script like we did on the infamous spice cart. Rather, my critique was and continues to be that a supposed ceramic tile sign could and should have been made of ceramic tiles, especially because it's placed in a building/pavilion that is filled with real examples of said tile.

If using real tiles proved impractical or too expensive, then the sign's artwork could have been painted onto the building as I feel that would have been more in keeping with a level of authenticity the pavilion is trying to espouse.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
castlecake2.0 said:
l'hotel du Canada's roof has been painted to look like copper and not been real copper for almost 40 years and no one seems to be bothered by it? The parks have always been a blend of authentic materials and theatrical tricks.
Click to expand...

Exactly the kind of thing I was talking about -- there was really no reason for Disney to put an actual copper roof on that building. That would just be an expense without any corresponding benefit; the vast majority of people will never notice, and it's such a minor thing that it shouldn't make a difference to people who can tell.

Compare it to something like the France expansion, which does have some noticeable problems that actually do detract from the area.

Of course, it's all relative/subjective anyways. The France expansion is also 100% fine for plenty of people, and I'm sure they're not going to lose any revenue over the problems I personally see.
 
Last edited:
LittleBuford

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
hpyhnt 1000 said:
If using real tiles proved impractical or too expensive, then the sign's artwork could have been painted onto the building as I feel that would have been more in keeping with a level of authenticity the pavilion is trying to espouse.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the pavilion is striving for the level of authenticity you’re ascribing to it. It’s a theme-park evocation rather than a like-for-like recreation, and if the metal signs successfully mimic tilework, then they’ve not only done their job as a place-making effect but also continued a venerable tradition of Disney illusionism.
 
LittleBuford

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
Exactly the kind of thing I was talking about -- there was really no reason for Disney to put an actual copper roof on that building. That would just be an expense without any corresponding benefit; the vast majority of people will never notice, and it's such a minor thing that it shouldn't make a difference to people who can tell.
Click to expand...
What about the fake (and very fake-looking) bricks in the UK pavilion? One could certainly argue that Disney should have used the real material, especially considering how cheap and readily available brick is. For me, however, the artificiality is part of the charm—that quirky twist on reality that distinguishes a theme park from the real world.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
LittleBuford said:
What about the fake (and very fake-looking) bricks in the UK pavilion? One could certainly argue that Disney should have used the real material, especially considering how cheap and readily available brick is. For me, however, the artificiality is part of the charm—that quirky twist on reality that distinguishes a theme park from the real world.
Click to expand...

The ones on the building facades? That's never bothered me either. I think I agree with what you're saying for the most part -- the World Showcase generally gives you a sense of the real place; I don't think it's supposed to be (or needs to be) an actual replica of it. I think Animal Kingdom actually goes harder for realism than the World Showcase does.

That's part of the problem with Frozen in Norway for me -- it's just not Norwegian. It's giving you a sense of Arendelle; not a sense of Norway. Even if it was actually set in Norway and was specifically Norwegian in various ways I wouldn't really be a fan (not a big fan of Ratatouille in France either), but that would definitely be better.
 
hpyhnt 1000

hpyhnt 1000

Well-Known Member
LittleBuford said:
I don’t think the pavilion is striving for the level of authenticity you’re ascribing to it. It’s a theme-park evocation rather than a like-for-like recreation, and if the metal signs successfully mimic tilework, then they’ve not only done their job as a place-making effect but also continued a venerable tradition of Disney illusionism.
Click to expand...

LittleBuford said:
What about the fake (and very fake-looking) bricks in the UK pavilion? One could certainly argue that Disney should have used the real material, especially considering how cheap and readily available brick is. For me, however, the artificiality is part of the charm—that quirky twist on reality that distinguishes a theme park from the real world.
Click to expand...
Combining these two quotes because I think they are related.

For me, the Morocco pavilion has always been the most unique of the World Showcase pavilions because it seemed the most "real" of any of them. The other 10, though especially the European pavilions, are all very clearly idealized representations of their countries with a lot of the edges smoothed out and different styles/architectures/regions/time periods melded together in a small space. As you say, the artificiality is part of the charm, and that's why things like stamped brick don't feel as jarring (though they should still try to make it look as real as possible).

That's not to say the Morocco pavilion isn't heavily idealized either, but I feel it's not quite to the same degree as the others. Some of that is probably because there is no such thing as a perfectly clean and orderly souk - the chaos and decay is part of the charm so you don't want to strip it all away. But there is a look, a "feel" to the area that's different from the other pavilions somehow. It's a subliminal thing you can't quite put your finger on.

And a lot of that, I think, is because Moroccan craftsmen had such a hand in it's construction. Now, if the King wants to send his artisans to Orlando to help build the thing, who is Disney to refuse (I certainly wouldn't!). But with that came an added dose of authenticity that I think should be celebrated and enhanced, and I think it's a shame to move away from that, even if in a very small way by faking tiles for a restaurant sign. I mean, Zach even made it a point that they added an "authentic mosaic fountain," so why go for the same authenticity for the sign?

Anyway, I'm willing to agree to disagree on this going forward if you are, though it's been fun having the back and forth.
 
LittleBuford

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
hpyhnt 1000 said:
Combining these two quotes because I think they are related.

For me, the Morocco pavilion has always been the most unique of the World Showcase pavilions because it seemed the most "real" of any of them. The other 10, though especially the European pavilions, are all very clearly idealized representations of their countries with a lot of the edges smoothed out and different styles/architectures/regions/time periods melded together in a small space. As you say, the artificiality is part of the charm, and that's why things like stamped brick don't feel as jarring (though they should still try to make it look as real as possible).

That's not to say the Morocco pavilion isn't heavily idealized either, but I feel it's not quite to the same degree as the others. Some of that is probably because there is no such thing as a perfectly clean and orderly souk - the chaos and decay is part of the charm so you don't want to strip it all away. But there is a look, a "feel" to the area that's different from the other pavilions somehow. It's a subliminal thing you can't quite put your finger on.

And a lot of that, I think, is because Moroccan craftsmen had such a hand in it's construction. Now, if the King wants to send his artisans to Orlando to help build the thing, who is Disney to refuse (I certainly wouldn't!). But with that came an added dose of authenticity that I think should be celebrated and enhanced, and I think it's a shame to move away from that, even if in a very small way by faking tiles for a restaurant sign. I mean, Zach even made it a point that they added an "authentic mosaic fountain," so why go for the same authenticity for the sign?

Anyway, I'm willing to agree to disagree on this going forward if you are, though it's been fun having the back and forth.
Click to expand...
I largely agree with you, actually. As I’ve mentioned in earlier posts, the tiled courtyard is so close to the real thing that one might actually imagine oneself in Morocco for a moment. But though the pavilion abounds in authentic details in a way that the European pavilions don’t, the signs have never been particularly true to life, which is why I don’t see the new pseudo-ceramic ones as detrimental to, or out of keeping with, the pavilion’s overall effect. I’m happy to agree to disagree on this point.
 
Nunu

Nunu

Wanderluster
Premium Member
For you @LittleBuford :
20210719_164319.jpg

Photo from today.
I'm here right now, if there's something else you want me to check for you here, at the Morocco Pavilion, let me know. :)
 
Robbiem

Robbiem

Well-Known Member
J4546 said:
yeah its crazy thats there no disney version of rome/greece....it seems like it would be such a fantastical place for a disney park to have, yet theres nothing.
Click to expand...
A Grecco / Roman area would be a great addition. Historically Greece made a big contribution to western culture and its different enough from the other European nations to feel different rather than Italy or France 2.0
 
LittleBuford

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Robbiem said:
A Grecco / Roman area would be a great addition. Historically Greece made a big contribution to western culture and its different enough from the other European nations to feel different rather than Italy or France 2.0
Click to expand...
The Islamic Mediterranean (including Morocco) is also heir to the Greco-Roman tradition, which is something that tends to get overlooked in Eurocentric narratives of civilisation.
 
J

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
Robbiem said:
A Grecco / Roman area would be a great addition. Historically Greece made a big contribution to western culture and its different enough from the other European nations to feel different rather than Italy or France 2.0
Click to expand...
A Roman area wouldn't make much sense considering the concept is based around modern countries and we already have Italy. Greece, however, is chief among some of the countries that I feel would make sense for inclusion, plus it could easily be sold to current management due to the potential for IP inclusion with Hercules. I used to think I wanted more from sub-Saharan Africa and southeast Asia, but I feel like Animal Kingdom has those covered now.
 
J

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
LittleBuford said:
Associating those regions with the animal world is more than a little problematic. They deserve, and are long overdue, representation in World Showcase.
Click to expand...
I think simply extending cultural representatives into Animal Kingdom would help. In many ways, the markets, temples, and landmarks of Animal Kingdom represent even deeper research into and appreciation for the areas depicted than the facsimiles in World Showcase. That what is essentially a zoo is attached is not especially problematic, in my opinion. Animal Kingdom is far more than the animals, despite its name.
 
LittleBuford

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
James Alucobond said:
I think simply extending cultural representatives into Animal Kingdom would help. In many ways, the markets, temples, and landmarks of Animal Kingdom represent even deeper research into the areas depicted than the facsimiles in World Showcase. That what is essentially a zoo is attached is not especially problematic, in my opinion. Animal Kingdom is far more than the animals, despite its name.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Animal Kingdom is first and foremost a zoo, and that animal component will always have a bearing on how the rest of the park is perceived.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom