Eastonm7
Member
Then please explain why little kids will want to go to Epcot?
-
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
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
There is no amount of "changing with the times" or "relevance" that will make a contradiction suddenly cease to be contradictory. If a topic is actually engaging then it doesn't need help or to be tricky. Covering every dish in ketchup may get some people to try different foods, but they're hardly trying much when there is only one dominate flavor repeated over and over.
Last edited:
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Perhaps not all parks need to be suitable for toddlers, This is the root of many of WDW's problems, Because it skews so heavily towards the under 8 set people get the impression that everything is for toddlers, When we brought the whole family down DBIL's kids (all older than 8) said 'Do we HAVE to go to WDW that's for LITTLE KIDS' they wanted to go to the park up I-4. Yes they finally realized that there were 3 other parks which were NOT meant for the toddler crowd they were happy and had a good time.
Walt's idea was to create parks with 'Something for Everyone' not 'Everything must be suitable for toddlers'.
Yes adults can enjoy a toddler ride as well. DW in her 30's got her first ride in Dumbo with her dad, When she was of appropriate age her dad was in the Marines. It's still a treasured memory for both of them especially considering how we needed to drag her dad down for his first trip after he retired (now we can't drag him AWAY from the place).
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
And we both KNOW people who do exactly that....
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
For the most part, I agree, but characters do need to be in Epcot in some capacity. In the early 80s, you had characters in country appropriate garb around World Showcase and that seemed to fit. I have less of an issue with character meet and greets in Epcot than I do characters being infused into attractions.
I could see the characters being used as the lazy teaching tool inside Innoventions, but I suspect that if the Innoventions concept is continuing, the sponsors aren't going to want to have characters in their mini attractions.
The issue has been that character infusion has historically been lazy in Epcot. The Seas with Nemo and Friends is a bandaid, as was Gran Fiesta Tour. We don't know whether or not Frozen will be a bandaid, but it looks to be a bit more than that. Regardless, it's a weak fit and takes away from Epcot's original theme. The park has become increasingly less inspiring since the late 90s.
I think the damage being done to Epcot will hurt the next generation of Disney fans, there isn't much to inspire those younger guests to return. Add in that many of their parents can't afford to go in the first place and it's possible that irreparable harm has already been done.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
When I'm talking 'Characters' I'm primarily referring to the 'Fab 5' and thematically inappropriate movie characters,
I for one think that Baymax would be a great lead-in to a 'Soft Robotics' exhibit or a health exhibit or a fusion of both because I know people working on soft robotics as muscle replacements and next generation prosthetics. The Fab 5 um no.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Fab 5 + Chip and Dale appeared in World Showcase in 1983. I've got photos of Minnie in a Kimono, Goofy in a Kilt, and Chip in a Rice Paddy Hat.
I also think they could just make Innoventions West a bunch of character meet and greets, over and above the Character Spot.
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
Too narrow a focus and derivative of some of the other history attractions in the park's history. What made the original attraction so special was that it was a celebration of creativity as a whole from how the creative process works to the various ways we have of expressing our creativity, with the most futuristic aspects being showcasing new technological creative toolsets.
The entire Imagination Institute concept on the other hand just reeked of a very simple minded idea of Future World just being "Science Land", when human culture was just as much a part of Future World as the science and technology stuff.
prberk
Well-Known Member
The same reason that I did back then. It was cool... and something different.
We do children a disservice when we assume that everything has to be associated with a familar cartoon character. Remember at their age, most everything, including those cartoon characters, was new recently. So, "new and exciting" can also be its own attraction. Couple this with the proven concept that attraction-specific characters (like Figment) can be interesting as well, and you have a formula that speaks to some very young children without talking down to them, assuming that they need characters as "ketchup" to entice them to try everything while overwhelming the natural "flavors" of awe and wonder.
While I agree that not everything at a world-class resort needs to be "toddler-friendly," or even "kid-friendly," and therefore not necessarily even for them; I also agree that even when we want to be inclusive of children, we do not need to talk down to them or underestimate them.
How many kids like "Animal Planet," or hunting/fishing/camping, or Sea World, etc.? A great many. Of course, not all, but a great many. And all of which is without movie "IP" character number one around. I don't know whether you have ever been to a Bass Pro Shop on a Saturday afternoon, but I don't see just old men in fishing caps there. I see children galore. And even without a meet-n-greet of Chip or Dale!
Remember also that WDW is a complete resort. MK is often the "weenie" (using Walt's term) to get people there, but as they discover the place and the inclusive ticketing, they will discover other places. And, done well, EPCOT will inspire the awe and wonder that it was meant to when it opened -- probably to someone who first came because they were also coming to "Disney World" (a/k/a the MK) and someone told them about the other things to do. But not as much if it is just the bait-and-switch of being sold as "a discovery park" that is nothing more than the same characters they found in MK play-acting in futuristic or world settings with very little actually made to inspire. (Ketchup overwhelming the flavor, to continue borrowing @ford91exploder's analogy above.)
Bottom line: It doesn't have to be kid-friendly all the time. But even to be kid-friendly does not mean that it HAS to have familar TV cartoon characters. That underestimates children.
I just has to be GOOD.
Last edited:
rnese
Well-Known Member
GhostHost1000
Premium Member
I agree... while we all love the earlier days of EPCOT Center...I think characters need to be in the parks as well. This doesn't mean that things like Future World couldn't have several attractions without any characters, just as they do today.
I know some won't agree with me, but Nemo and Crush in the Living Seas kinda fits... Frozen in Norway...maybe, but my problem there is it replaced an existing ride which was already popular so that IMO was a wrong move.. but I'm sure based on $'s alone. Having some characters around World Showcase works too (Mexican Donald, Mulan, etc.) Spaceship Earth, Universe of Energy, Mission Space, Test Track, Journey Into You Imagination are all without Disney 'characters' as are many attractions even at the Magic Kingdom, DHS, and AK.
I guess my babbling comes down to really what I am saying is each park can have a mixture and then play to all ages. This is where I think most other theme parks completely miss the boat and focus too much on certain demographics (like thrill rides or all little itty bitty ones) and fail to have enough for all in your party to enjoy, even at the same time.
I know some won't agree with me, but Nemo and Crush in the Living Seas kinda fits... Frozen in Norway...maybe, but my problem there is it replaced an existing ride which was already popular so that IMO was a wrong move.. but I'm sure based on $'s alone. Having some characters around World Showcase works too (Mexican Donald, Mulan, etc.) Spaceship Earth, Universe of Energy, Mission Space, Test Track, Journey Into You Imagination are all without Disney 'characters' as are many attractions even at the Magic Kingdom, DHS, and AK.
I guess my babbling comes down to really what I am saying is each park can have a mixture and then play to all ages. This is where I think most other theme parks completely miss the boat and focus too much on certain demographics (like thrill rides or all little itty bitty ones) and fail to have enough for all in your party to enjoy, even at the same time.
HauntedMansionFLA
Well-Known Member
You are right. EPCOT needs at least a billion dollar makeover. Where to start? I don't know. But the potential is there to have a theme park that people would love.I think that over all EPCOT needs to slightly change with the times. Putting characters in WS, etc. I think it is being done tastefully, at least with the face characters. I don't think we can ever go back to 1982. Times have changed. When EPCOT was developed people did not have easy access to other parts of the world. So, edutainment was needed more. Learning about the countries was a new idea back then. Not like you can today with video streaming, youtube, etc. Heck the modern version of the internet today even.
I think that EPCOT needs significant investment. Which is the understatement of the year. While I don't think that every World Showcase pavilion needs to have a kids ride. There could stand to be maybe one more. They should focus most new rides in Future World however. They need to do something with Innoventions both East and West. Not sure where they could expand Future World out at exactly but it could be done.
I still say they should take some of the interactive rides in Disney Quest once it closes and fully flesh out at least one side of Innoventions. They should put them in with Sum of All Thrills. Then at least that side of Innoventions would be full. Maybe make the other side more hands on based classic Innoventions / Communicore style exhibits.
Love it or hate it that's just my opinion.
GhostHost1000
Premium Member
Future World... God help us with UOE, WOL, and Imagination pavilions....and don't get me started on innonventions
Last edited:
lobelia
Well-Known Member
I vote no characters in EPCOT unless it is to supplement or emphasize. They should not be the attraction. The world showcase should not have any focus on the characters. It should be a place where one can get a taste of the cultures in each country. The reason I should visit Norway is to experience some of the Norwegian culture not to see an Ice Princess. Future World might be a bit more whimsical but the use of characters should be left to the other parks. I disagree that Imagineers inherently know what the future holds, however asking scientists, university faculty, industrial leaders. Kids do not need characters to have fun if they have an opportunity to play and have hands-on experiences. If they don't have fun....so be it. Try the other parks. Too many times things are changed to address complaints and then it moves away from the true purpose.
GhostHost1000
Premium Member
the counter argument though is that one can always get a taste of the cultures in each country with or without characters...
yellowrocket
Active Member
yellowrocket
Active Member
I experienced Timekeeper after 9/11. It was awkward for sure, but it was very brief and on only one screen.
Glad someone did!I see what you did there
"Try to imagine... just for a moment..."
Indeed, but not impossible to remedy. The finale of The American Adventure still uses the 1993 New York skyline footage. CGI fireworks now mask the area that suffered horrendously in 2001.
Nick Pappagiorgio
Well-Known Member
Now we just need CG fireworks to cover up Lance Armstrong.
EDIT: First time I wrote it, it sounded violent.