-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Big changes coming to EPCOT's Future World?
- Thread starter djkidkaz
- Start date
wdwfan4ver
Well-Known Member
Very true. Too bad that Iger and other people in Disney Management only wants to put IP's into Disneyland and WDW theme parks and wouldn't think of adding Mt. Fuji as a result. I think Soarin' around the around was the last Non IP announcement for Disneyland and WDW in a long time.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
And it's because Shanghai payed the bill.
KikoKea
Well-Known Member
Rhinocerous
Premium Member
I realize I'm nitpicking here, and I'm honestly not trying to diminish the popularity of that band in any way. However, to characterize at least 25% of the Earth's population as "hard core Air Supply fans" is a bit... ambitious, wouldn't you say?
rnese
Well-Known Member
I will pretend I didn't hear that.
Matt_Black
Well-Known Member
Matt, you made me laugh!I love them both
Oh, yeah. Once, my mom & dad were driving down to Florida. My dad, having similar musical tastes, asks to borrow some CDs to listen on the ride down. One of them was Aerosmith's Greatest Hits. So, anyway, they're driving, mom's CD ends, so dad asks if he can put in something. He mentions Aerosmith, and mom says, "Oh, I like Aerosmith!" So dad puts it in and Steven Tyler starts warbling "WALK THIS WAY" and such.
Mom: "What on EARTH is this?!?"
Dad: "Honey, this is Aerosmith."
Mom: "This isn't Aerosmith!"
Dad: "Trust me, this is as Aerosmith as Aerosmith gets."
Mom: "No, this isn't... Oh, AIR SUPPLY. That was the band I was thinking of. I like them."
Phicinfan
Well-Known Member
Well you have no expertise, and I don't see you contributing anything other than being insulting. Opinions are open, and anyone can have them. Just because you want to "follow a group" doesn't mean you can condescend someone against said group.
FigmentForver96
Well-Known Member
But what we do know is that the rides that opened in the park during their time were VERY popular and raised the bar for technical achivements. (Journey Into Imagination turntable for instance). The park never had capacity issues other then the lines were long for all the rides. When the 90s came the big heads thought somehow "Oh my god! EPCOT Center isn't popular! This isn't what the hip kids want!" and thus began the process of ripping apart the very soul of what EPCOT Center was and stood for and that is the biggest crime. The original EPCOT Center celebrated the human achivement and the wonders of mankind. Now it celebrates thrills and what can keep the young ones intrigued while mommy and daddy sip their alcohol. The wonders of energy and how we should look for new and reusable energy sources is going to become a in your face trip with the Guardians of the Galaxy. God knows what else they want to do. But hey what's keeps the young people excited right? Cause Disney should obviously pander to the young people who want thrills since that's all they want anyway.
DinoInstitute
Well-Known Member
I completely see your point and agree; I don't get why people are either unwilling to accept the possibility that the original EPCOT Center wasn't 100% perfect, or simply aren't reading your posts and claiming you to be the silly ignorant one
I'm a young person and I love quality dark rides WAY more than thrill rides. Not all of the younger theme park goers are only interested in thrills. As long as people are open minded and just looking for cool experiences, they can certainly appreciate any great slower dark rides. However, variety is a good thing, and that's really not very debatable (IMO at least). The simple fact of the matter is that not everything is going to appeal to everyone. And before someone just quotes me and says for the hundredth time "But the thing is, if EPCOT was maintained properly and things were updated to today then people would like it!", no, people simply are not going to want to have very similar types of rides all day. I agree an update EPCOT Center would be a much better park, but business wise it just doesn't make sense. You have to be able to appeal to everyone. Saying that other parks have options for the deplorable thrill seekers is just a bad business decision, they are turning people away from buying another park ticket.
Lastly, one thing that is really bothering me is the misconception that if it's not a slow moving, highly educational dark ride, it can't be an inspirational attraction like old EPCOT. So what if things like Soarin and Test Track have thrills? I'd argue they are still very good Epcot fitting attractions that excite and inspire people, with Soarin showing what the world has to offer, and the interactive element of Test Track interesting people in new technologies in the future of automobile development. Soarin less so, but Test Track definitely fits.
GotG...well, that seems harder to justify
But just saying, it's possible.Exactly. A way to try to win a discussion/argument is extremify your opponent. I say, "Thrill rides are a nice addition." You say, "He said he wants nothing but thrill rides."
I say, "Let's order pizza." You say, "He eats nothing but pizza."
I say, "From what I have seen, old Epcot had a lot of slower dark rides." You say, "You're an ignorant uninformed fool because you weren't there."
To which I now ask, "Was there anything up at Epcot until the opening of the first Test Track that could be classified as anything other than a slower dark ride?"
I assume the answer may be Body Wars, but that would probably be the only one--maybe. Although I do believe that certain parts of Maelstrom were a little quick and also went backwards, I doubt that it would have qualified as something thrillier. Thus the answer is "Not really, I suppose, perhaps, sort of--your opinion is worthless, you weren't there, all you want is thrill rides, and go home and order a pizza."
Bottom line: Edutainment doesn't necessarily have to be slow and dark. IDInstitute makes that point brilliantly.
I say, "Let's order pizza." You say, "He eats nothing but pizza."
I say, "From what I have seen, old Epcot had a lot of slower dark rides." You say, "You're an ignorant uninformed fool because you weren't there."
To which I now ask, "Was there anything up at Epcot until the opening of the first Test Track that could be classified as anything other than a slower dark ride?"
I assume the answer may be Body Wars, but that would probably be the only one--maybe. Although I do believe that certain parts of Maelstrom were a little quick and also went backwards, I doubt that it would have qualified as something thrillier. Thus the answer is "Not really, I suppose, perhaps, sort of--your opinion is worthless, you weren't there, all you want is thrill rides, and go home and order a pizza."
Bottom line: Edutainment doesn't necessarily have to be slow and dark. IDInstitute makes that point brilliantly.
DinoInstitute
Well-Known Member
Disagree -> IgnoreThank God this forum has an ignore feature. Keeps the riffraff for polluting the atmosphere
No wonder it's so hard to find mature, level headed debates or discussions here.
Just got a microshot of dopamine. This thread put me over 1,000 likes.
More to the point, I would take the lack of any response to my questions of "Were there any rides in early Epcot that were not slower and darker" to mean that indeed there weren't. Although I wasn't there due to poverty and distance, my inquiry helps me fill out what it must have been like. Again, I know I would have loved it back then, but change for good or ill is inevitable.
Walt embraced change, and made it something fantastic. Disney embraces change, and sometimes it isn't fantastic. Even so, that's no reason to unduly dwell on the past. After all, even Walt had his failures from time to time, yet his commitment to excellence nearly always proved successful in the end.
More to the point, I would take the lack of any response to my questions of "Were there any rides in early Epcot that were not slower and darker" to mean that indeed there weren't. Although I wasn't there due to poverty and distance, my inquiry helps me fill out what it must have been like. Again, I know I would have loved it back then, but change for good or ill is inevitable.
Walt embraced change, and made it something fantastic. Disney embraces change, and sometimes it isn't fantastic. Even so, that's no reason to unduly dwell on the past. After all, even Walt had his failures from time to time, yet his commitment to excellence nearly always proved successful in the end.
Princess Leia
Well-Known Member
Actually, Mt. Fuji wasn't added because Fujifilm was to be the sponsor. Kodak was sponsoring the Imagination pavilion and didn't want the competition to be in World Showcase.
networkpro
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
Obviously Disney should consider the interests of customers when deciding on new attractions for any of its parks, after all its still a business. Why not trot out sacred cows and see if they are ready for the slaugherhouse ? If the customers are more interested in exchanging preachy calls for alternative energy for something that runs off of unicorn tears guess which way they are going to go ?
Its a matter of staying relevant. As the delivery cycle for the conceptual stage to first customer experience is quite long, you want something with staying power... not something stuck into any particular milieu . I've enjoyed some of the quickies such as the HDTV demonstration in 1993, but as they became common it became irrelevant.
wdwgreek
Well-Known Member
I just got to say I hate thrill rides. I'm 22 and anything bigger then thunder mountain makes me super nervous. I really hope that Disney keeps in mind that not every thrill ride needs to be like Superman at Six Flags. Quality over speed, engaging and thrilling over plain scream inducing. I will never ride Rockin Roller Coaster again, because it a poorly re-skinned off the shelve coaster with zero payoff story telling wise or entertainment wise. I'll tolerate splash mountains drop because of the great ride elements, RnR coaster has none of that. RnR is juxtaposed against Test Track, which I really enjoy, yes it goes fast, but its a cool concept with a great pre show and post show. Its fun, engaging, and thrilling. I only hope whatever is in Epcot future its not all Tron coasters.
Monoblanco13
Well-Known Member
A Tron coaster would be sweet in addition though lol
wdwfan4ver
Well-Known Member
I already knew about that, but I made the comments as I did about Mt. Fuji due to the fact Kodak hasn't been the Sponsor of the Imagination Pavilion since 2010. I'll be more than happy to show a link that shows I already made the comment you did back in August of this year on a different thread.
The fact is WDI and burbank does revisit make old concept art that Imaineers did and turn them into rides. WDI stands for Walt Disney Imagineering. That has happened before in some cases and is why I blamed Bob Iger and Disney Executives on Mt. Fuji. I am sure Disney wouldn't have an issue finding a sponsor for Mt. Fuji right now if Disney actually wanted to do that ride for Epcot after 2010.
Earl Sweatpants
Well-Known Member
No there was not.
What's your point?