"Adios" El Rio del Tiempo!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Wilt Dasney

Well-Known Member
People seem to forget that WDW is not an altruistic experiment, but a vacation destination. You are never going to really "educate" people in a theme park ride; you can give them inspiration, but nothing more than a jumping off point. While a dose of education and to broaden your horizons is a good thing (to pardon the pun), the simple fact is at WDW people come get away from schools/jobs/etc. and while it's great to intertwine it, WDW was never meant to be an educational institution.

I concur. There's only so much "larnin'" you can fit into a theme park experience. In depth learning is by nature something that requires time to listen, ponder, debate, hypothesize, etc. Theme parks are by their nature places where people are quickly shuttled through areas and herded on to the next experience. The two are simply too different to fully intertwine. Even the parts of Epcot that have remained relatively untouched (SSE, the WS films) are more like brief primers on the subjects they ostensibly teach about.
 

jedimaster1227

Active Member
my problem is the blatant disregard for the original concept of Epcot. Disney magic doesn't mean Disney characters.

EPCOT Center was a blatant disregard for the original concept of E.P.C.O.T. How can you say that the current park is a disregard for what E.P.C.O.T. was when you know not of what you are referring to? Very little of what E.P.C.O.T. was supposed to be ever surfaced at EPCOT Center. The two are completely different and comparing them doesn't make any sense at all. E.P.C.O.T. was designed to be a city of tomorrow. EPCOT Center was a park design to bridge the gap between education and entertainment. The first concept never saw fruition and the second failed in a matter of years. If the transition hadn't been made from EPCOT Center to Epcot, then you probably wouldn't have ever seen MGM or Animal Kingdom built because Disney would have been too busy trying to pull in guests to a failing park. Disney magic doesn't mean an empty park.
 

Main Street USA

Well-Known Member
Your frustration is palpable, Zac, but I hardly see where GenerationX's post showed him to be the slow knuckle dragger you painted in your previous post. He expressed his distaste for the current incarnation of the ride in a very well-stated manner. I think the ride as it stands is charming enough, but I'm not going to write off anyone who finds it lacking as a moron prima facie. Different strokes, after all.
It was his statement about all older EPCOT attractions in genreral, not to El Rio alone.
 

Erika

Moderator
Think whatever you want, but what I said is true. And for the record, I never said I didn't like change. You completely missed the point of my post.

I said THE change. Not change. If I am incorrect in thinking you are unhappy with the change to El Rio, then I did indeed completely miss the point of your post.

Regardless, I found the tone to be rude, and I am asking that you express yourself in a more appropriate manner.
 

Main Street USA

Well-Known Member
I concur. There's only so much "larnin'" you can fit into a theme park experience. In depth learning is by nature something that requires time to listen, ponder, debate, hypothesize, etc. Theme parks are by their nature places where people are quickly shuttled through areas and herded on to the next experience. The two are simply too different to fully intertwine. Even the parts of Epcot that have remained relatively untouched (SSE, the WS films) are more like brief primers on the subjects they ostensibly teach about.
So, basically, because EPCOT didn't fit the definition of a modern "theme park" we're supposed to believe that it wasn't worthy of the public's attention?

You can say that the original concept failed, and you can say that there was too much to "learn" at EPCOT Center, and you can say"if it were that great, people would've kept coming." Here's the problem with those statements:

None of those are at the fault of the EPCOT Center, or the designers and Imagineers that created it. Those are the faults of the generally.....let's say......."under-intelligent" public that didn't see the near genius that had been plopped down before them.
 

Victor

Active Member
Here is a great post from the Epcot Central blog, which everyone should visit:

Everything Pixar, Cartoons, or Television?

You’ve heard the alternate meanings for EPCOT for years: “Every Person Comes Out Tired,” “Everyone’s Paycheck Comes On Thursday,” “Employees’ Polyester Costumes of Terror” … but here’s a new one, and it’s not all that funny.

The announcement that Kim Possible is going to be taking up residence at Epcot makes it clear that Disney’s “brand managers” are either sleeping on the job or have a very bizarre sense of what makes up an individual brand.

As more and more companies are trying hard to establish distinct brand identities for distinctly different products (think Coca-Cola and its trademark drink, its Dasani water and its Tab energy drink – each of which has a very different look, feel and consumer proposition), Disney is blending its brands more and more to the point that its “brand recipe” is becoming a tasteless, bland, overcooked stew with too many ingredients.

Epcot is a perfect example. I wouldn’t be surprised to soon see it renamed “Disney’s Epcot,” ostensibly making the concept “more” Disney but completely and permanently distancing itself from its roots. Back in the late 1990s when it lost the name “EPCOT Center” in favor of the less meaningful, more confusing, “non-acronymed” Epcot, it began losing any sense of identity. The very things that made it so unique – its lack of connection to any of the other theme parks, its focus on the real world instead of the fantastic, its efforts to blend education with entertainment – seemed to become liabilities. More than anything, the fact that it never really was hospitable to Disney characters became something that brand managers seemed to feel had to be fixed.

So, we got an influx of Mickey, Minnie and the gang and a bizarre daily character “bus ride” through World Showcase, which has morphed into the “Character Connection” in Future World. (As one reader pointed out, Disney even stoops to calling these characters “characters,” something it never would have done a few years ago when it insisted on making sure they always appeared in a story context.)

Then, we got character dining, both in Future World and World Showcase. Then, we got Nemo swimming into The Living Seas.

Now, it’s rumored, the oh-so hip and trendy Kim Possible is going to make a new home in the Imagination pavilion.

Never mind that Kim Possible has absolutely no connection whatsoever to the pavilion, or that guests (both hardcore Disney fans and those who visit only occasionally) have long complained that Imagination needs Figment and Dreamfinder – its original animated inhabitants.

What matters most to Disney is that it can cross-promote and “synergize” itself to within an inch of its life.

But, creatively, is this the best Disney can do? Just drop a character into a theme park, whether or not it belongs? Frankly, this latest announcement about Kim Possible in particular strikes me as a Six Flags-style move – you know, like when you’d see Looney Tunes cartoons in line for a roller coaster just because both happened to be owned by Time-Warner?

Not only does Kim Possible have absolutely no connection to Epcot and its themes, the character is usurping what was once one of EPCOT Center’s most celebrated areas, the ImageWorks. Rather than upgrade the area and put some genuinely new and exciting thought and imagination into it, Disney’s marketers took over and figured it would be a good place for a standard character meet-and-greet; it’s almost certain that you’ll see signs and brochures for the Disney Channel throughout the pavilion once Kim Possible arrives, bringing more crass commercialism into the parks.

On top of this creative brain fart that it’s hard to redeem or excuse in any way, Disney announced just this weekend that it’s raising prices at its Florida theme parks; it’ll now cost $67 for a one-day ticket to Epcot.

Think about that for a minute: A family of four spends a few days in Florida as mom or dad attends a convention and decides to pop over to Epcot for the afternoon. For their nearly $300 investment, they now get not the best creativity and inspiration that Disney’s Imagineers have to offer, but come ons for the Disney Channel, for the Disney Vacation Club and for Pixar movies.

Epcot – like much of Walt Disney World – is evolving into an unimaginative dumping ground for quick marketing projects for cartoon characters, Pixar movies and television shows.

What used to be a park with a bold vision of informing, exciting and educating people about the world in which they live has become another place to shill Disney entertainment. It’s like serving a TV dinner on your best china – even if it looks good, it’s still lousy to eat and a really insulting way to utilize such beautiful craftsmanship. The plate deserves better, and you deserve better.

Epcot deserves better and its guests deserve a heck of a lot more respect than this.

For those of you who haven't visited: http://epcot82.blogspot.com
 

Main Street USA

Well-Known Member
I said THE change. Not change. If I am incorrect in thinking you are unhappy with the change to El Rio, then I did indeed completely miss the point of your post.

Regardless, I found the tone to be rude, and I am asking that you express yourself in a more appropriate manner.
My typing tone? Please don't cross direct wording with a harsh "tone." For the record, I think El Rio needs an update to better represent Mexico. If the Three Cabs can add some flair to it, then by all means, go ahead and slap them in, too. I'm simply being realistic. As it's been said above, it's WAY too late for the original EPCOT to be saved to be worrying about it now. My posts are only referring to WHY the original, brilliant EPCOT was killed. Now that it's been turned into Magic Kingdom South, there's really no reason to fight the character invasion.
 

Victor

Active Member
EPCOT Center was a blatant disregard for the original concept of E.P.C.O.T. How can you say that the current park is a disregard for what E.P.C.O.T. was when you know not of what you are referring to?

You're right, I have no idea what I'm talking about. :rolleyes: Of course I know all about Walt's original vision for E.P.C.O.T. But when that obviously ended up being unfeasable, the imagineers did their best to embody the ideas that E.P.C.O.T was to have supported.

Very little of what E.P.C.O.T. was supposed to be ever surfaced at EPCOT Center. The two are completely different and comparing them doesn't make any sense at all. E.P.C.O.T. was designed to be a city of tomorrow. EPCOT Center was a park design to bridge the gap between education and entertainment.

WOW! Never knew the difference, thanks for the history lesson! I never compared the two btw...

""EPCOT will be an experimental prototype community of tomorrow that will take its cue from the new ideas and new technologies that are now emerging from the creative centers of American industry. It will be a community of tomorrow that will never be completed, but will always be introducing and testing and demonstrating new materials and systems. And EPCOT will always be a showcase to the world for the ingenuity and imagination of American free enterprise." - Walt Disney

Aside from the community aspect, I believe all those other concepts were on display at EPCOT Center. And call me crazy if they weren't.
 

FigmentJedi

Well-Known Member
I don't really like that Epcot Central blog. While it does make some good points, it gets really whiny and b*** about the slightest notion of characters coming into the park, taking only really one character addition far too seriously(Nemo, the KP thing was just a test after all), and saying that Epcot's going to burst into flames as characters take over everything and the damn point of the park being a place to discover the world around us being annihilated when in contrast, the characters actually help things by helping kids to actually care about those discovery ideals.
I do agree with them though that Norway is not a place for a Princess Character meal and that the wand needs to get the fudge out...(and who really disagrees about the latter?)
 

pheneix

Well-Known Member
Epcot Center was successful for Walt Disney World because it drew a segment of the general public that would have never spent a day in a theme park otherwise. Most of the expanded development that came to WDW afterwards, such as Pleasure Island, West Side, the expanded golf courses, and the Disney Institute*, can pretty much be credited to Epcot bringing in guests that wanted to do more than run around a theme park all day riding rides and then crashing in their hotel room for the rest of the night. Turning Epcot into Magic Kingdom lite has been disasterous for its attendance, and things will never magically turn around no matter how many characters they force feed to the park.

I agree with Main Street USA that the immediate gratification mentality of many guests can be the blame for the dumbing down of Epcot, but quite frankly that mentality is carried by the lowest common denominator of theme park guest. Epcot Center was built to draw a different kind of person than that. Unfortunately, affluent well educated people are far more difficult to entertain than normal theme park guests, so to keep that kind of park running requires more money and effort. To create a mature experience that educates while it entertains requires storytellers who actually care about inspiring others to do better things while also convincing the analysts and the accountants and shareholders than what they are doing truly is the right thing. That kind of storyteller was chased away from Disney a long time ago. It is going to take a lot to bring them back.
 

wdwmagic

Administrator
Moderator
Premium Member
My typing tone? Please don't cross direct wording with a harsh "tone."

You've been around here long enough to know that direct wording comes across on the internet as being harsh. Without the benefit of having the conversation in person, and seeing the expression and tone of voice, it just reads very aggresively.
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Why?

Why not, is the better question.

Disney has a huge library of characters that people enjoy. People come to Disney to see that. I don't see how the difference between a stuffy old man hosting a ride, or a character, really matter if the show is done properly.

People like characters, they think they are fun. That is why people go to Disney!

We can call them sheeple, or slow, or what have you, but characters have always been there. The 3 Callebros have been meeting and greeting at Mexico since the park opened. There seems to be this misconception that Epcot used to be devoid of characters - it's simply not true. Doesn't anyone else have pictures of themselves with Minnie in her space suit? The truth is, characters (the walk-around type) used to be much rarer in ALL the parks (even MK). The characters were there, even if they weren't hosting rides.

People keep holding onto this concept they believe Epcot was about, but forget that Epcot has always been, in it's final design, a theme park. We can talk about what Walt wanted to build, but we all know that battle was lost before ground was broke. ANd, to be honest, if they HAD built the city...uh, not so much fun. Practical, but not someplace one would take a vacation to visit.

I LOVE the older dark rides. Horizons, WoM, R.I.P. I love that type of experience, and I do miss it at Disney. But I think in the end, characters or no, it comes down to : is the attraction entertaining. Characters shouldn't be the "be all end all panacea", but they also aren't the bane of existence.

People seem to forget that WDW is not an altruistic experiment, but a vacation destination. You are never going to really "educate" people in a theme park ride; you can give them inspiration, but nothing more than a jumping off point. While a dose of education and to broaden your horizons is a good thing (to pardon the pun), the simple fact is at WDW people come get away from schools/jobs/etc. and while it's great to intertwine it, WDW was never meant to be an educational institution.

Just like people who want MGM to be a "real working studio!", sometimes you just have to let it go.

AEfx

nice post
 

Main Street USA

Well-Known Member
You've been around here long enough to know that direct wording comes across on the internet as being harsh. Without the benefit of having the conversation in person, and seeing the expression and tone of voice, it just reads very aggresively.

How it comes across and what it is are two differnet things, but your point is taken. :)
 

Victor

Active Member
Epcot Center was successful for Walt Disney World because it drew a segment of the general public that would have never spent a day in a theme park otherwise. Most of the expanded development that came to WDW afterwards, such as Pleasure Island, West Side, the expanded golf courses, and the Disney Institute*, can pretty much be credited to Epcot bringing in guests that wanted to do more than run around a theme park all day riding rides and then crashing in their hotel room for the rest of the night. Turning Epcot into Magic Kingdom lite has been disasterous for its attendance, and things will never magically turn around no matter how many characters they force feed to the park.

I agree with Main Street USA that the immediate gratification mentality of many guests can be the blame for the dumbing down of Epcot, but quite frankly that mentality is carried by the lowest common denominator of theme park guest. Epcot Center was built to draw a different kind of person than that. Unfortunately, affluent well educated people are far more difficult to entertain than normal theme park guests, so to keep that kind of park running requires more money and effort. To create a mature experience that educates while it entertains requires storytellers who actually care about inspiring others to do better things while also convincing the analysts and the accountants and shareholders than what they are doing truly is the right thing. That kind of storyteller was chased away from Disney a long time ago. It is going to take a lot to bring them back.

That about sums it up right there. :cry:
 

jedimaster1227

Active Member
You're right, I have no idea what I'm talking about. :rolleyes: Of course I know all about Walt's original vision for E.P.C.O.T. But when that obviously ended up being unfeasable, the imagineers did their best to embody the ideas that E.P.C.O.T was to have supported.

Sorry to tell you but you have no real information to back up that statement. After Walt's death, the Imagineers took over the E.P.C.O.T. project and made it into EPCOT Center. Saying that the Imagineers did their best would be a biased statement as you most likely don't know what their best is, nor do you probably know the extent of the ideas that were in Walt's Epcot. Unless you have in your hands a press packet with concept art and information about the project (happy to say that I do), you probably can't make the assumption that you know every staple detail that went into the design of this project.

WOW! Never knew the difference, thanks for the history lesson! I never compared the two btw...

""EPCOT will be an experimental prototype community of tomorrow that will take its cue from the new ideas and new technologies that are now emerging from the creative centers of American industry. It will be a community of tomorrow that will never be completed, but will always be introducing and testing and demonstrating new materials and systems. And EPCOT will always be a showcase to the world for the ingenuity and imagination of American free enterprise." - Walt Disney

Aside from the community aspect, I believe all those other concepts were on display at EPCOT Center. And call me crazy if they weren't.

That quote was made by Walt before his death. Sorry to tell you but the majority of the new materials and systems were (and still are) present at the park (those that are no longer were there long past their welcome). Where in that quote does Walt talk about a portal to the rest of the world, or the imagination of other countries. It seems like half of the park was left off... The quote doesn't do the park justice because the park itself is not what is referred to in the quote.

Oh, and please don't plug the blog over and over again, even if it isn't yours-as we have already seen your link to it several times on this thread. :wave:

Epcot Center was successful for Walt Disney World because it drew a segment of the general public that would have never spent a day in a theme park otherwise. Most of the expanded development that came to WDW afterwards, such as Pleasure Island, West Side, the expanded golf courses, and the Disney Institute*, can pretty much be credited to Epcot bringing in guests that wanted to do more than run around a theme park all day riding rides and then crashing in their hotel room for the rest of the night. Turning Epcot into Magic Kingdom lite has been disasterous for its attendance, and things will never magically turn around no matter how many characters they force feed to the park.

Not quite...Epcot lost many of its guests after a short time due to its lack of exciting attractions for the family. The park had one of the lowest attendance ratings of the three parks (this was before Animal Kingdom was built) and when Test Track was opened, the park's rate shot up. Mission:Space followed in this tradition and Soarin' has done the same. History shows that the "edutainment" implemented at EPCOT Center didn't work. It was time for a change and that change is one of Walt Disney World's most profitable successful investments it has ever made (or will ever make).
 

Victor

Active Member
Sorry to tell you but you have no real information to back up that statement. After Walt's death, the Imagineers took over the E.P.C.O.T. project and made it into EPCOT Center. Saying that the Imagineers did their best would be a biased statement as you most likely don't know what their best is, nor do you probably know the extent of the ideas that were in Walt's Epcot. Unless you have in your hands a press packet with concept art and information about the project (happy to say that I do), you probably can't make the assumption that you know every staple detail that went into the design of this project.

As much as I respect Walt's vision, do you really think it would have been possible? I believe that with Walt being alive and pushing it forward, it could have been, so yes, maybe you're right that the Imagineers didn't give it their all.

Oh, and please don't plug the blog over and over again, even if it isn't yours-as we have already seen your link to it several times on this thread. :wave:

:veryconfu Hate to break it to you, but I posted the link ONCE. Are you using your jedi mind tricks to confuse me otherwise? :wave:

And even though we've gone back and forth, no hard feelings here. Anyone with jedimaster as an id and a Dreamfinder avatar has my respect.
 

Wilt Dasney

Well-Known Member
So, basically, because EPCOT didn't fit the definition of a modern "theme park" we're supposed to believe that it wasn't worthy of the public's attention?

You can say that the original concept failed, and you can say that there was too much to "learn" at EPCOT Center, and you can say"if it were that great, people would've kept coming." Here's the problem with those statements:

None of those are at the fault of the EPCOT Center, or the designers and Imagineers that created it. Those are the faults of the generally.....let's say......."under-intelligent" public that didn't see the near genius that had been plopped down before them.

Those really weren't my points at all. My point is that any educational theme park experience is going to be somewhat lacking just by the nature of the beast.

I missed out on Horizons and WoM, so I can't speak for those attractions, but SSE is a perfect example of this in my mind. It's more of an "inspirational" attraction, to use AEfx's term, than an educational one to me. Sure there's some information, but it's shallow and fleeting. I know the narration has changed, but I assume the rest of the ride is pretty representative of the original EPCOT Center. Assuming that SSE does represent what Epcot is "all about," I don't see a huge departure from that to having Donald and friends explore Mexican culture in a boat ride. They're both quick, entertaining, and only marginally educational in my mind.
 

jedimaster1227

Active Member
As much as I respect Walt's vision, do you really think it would have been possible? I believe that with Walt being alive and oushing it forward, yes it could have been, so yes, maybe you're right that the Imagineers didn't give it their all.

:veryconfu Hate to break it to you, but I posted the link ONCE. Are you using your jedi mind tricks to confuse me otherwise? :wave:

And even though we've gone back and forth, no hard feelings here. Anyone with jedimaster as an id and a Dreamfinder avatar has my respect.

I do think it would have been possible. Walt pushed projects until they were completed to his satisfaction, and if they weren't up to his standards, he would make sure they would be fixed until they were.

My Jedi mind tricks don't work via internet...Sorry! :lol:

As for the discussion, no hard feelings taken, and I hope none have been recieved on your end either. Make sure that you only respect a Jedimaster with a 1227 at the end of his name and a Figment with the Dreamfinder in his avatar (though I might be changing it soon...I'm trying to decide what to change it to at the moment).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom