Bob Chapek Confirms Disney Will Overhaul Epcot

[HauntedMansionFLA]

Sponsors are still welcome. We’d have a Japan attraction and a new Imagination if they’d signed up.

Disney or potential sponsor to sign up?

 

[marni1971]

Disney or potential sponsor to sign up?

If potential third party sponsors had signed on the dotted line.

 

[flynnibus]

Well, they were still going on the idea that, if you want to go overboard with spending, corporate sponsors can help fund that. Disneyland had to get corporate sponsors to be built and the MK had corporate sponsorship as well. You have to remember that EPCOT Center was, like Disneyland before it, a completely new concept. Yes, it was modeled after World's Fairs of the past, but nobody had ever built anything on this scale, especially someplace that was meant to be permanent

Except WDP was in an entirely different position in the late seventies. Disneyland used sponsors completely out of necessity - Walt effectively mortgaged the project to ABC and others to make it viable. And as soon as they were able to, he bought out all the 3rd party operations. By the time EPCOT was on the drawing board... WDW had been the most successful theme park resort ever... and was racing to new record numbers. At that point, sponsors were more like we are used to in DL and MK... product placement, by lines, advertisements, and name association.

But with EPCOT they took the approach of 'no sponsor, no pavilion' and that mantra continued through the nineties.. even meaning attractions would shutdown without sponsors paying for ongoing costs. They basically reserved a refresh/reboot until they lined up a sponsor and then would align the work with that new sponsor (and their $$). This carried through all the way to the latest SSE reboot. It seems now, this is finally softening to the more traditional sponsor model we see at the other parks.

I've always said I think this approach was a mistake by Disney, and a stubborn position that failed to acknowledge the shift in corporate marketing in the modern age of digital, mass media, and deregulated travel.

Where the problems arose is when it became apparent that, in order to remain a technological showplace, it would have to be updated on a much shorter timeline than Disneyland or the MK. The sponsors didn't see the kind of return on their investment that they had hoped, so some dropped out and had to be replaced, some who stayed demanded drastically different or even brand new attractions for their money, and some pavilions lost sponsorship altogether

Yup, and where I fault Disney is not so much for those decisions in 1976-1980 - but those decisions in 1988+ where they held onto the old model until it was pried from their cold dead fingers 30 years later. This meant pickings were lean through the 90s, and went full barren by the 2000s.

Disney didn't NEED those sponsors for their business model - they simply chose to not live WITHOUT IT.

 

[trainplane3]

Sponsors are still welcome. We’d have a Japan attraction and a new Imagination if they’d signed up.

This just got me thinking. Imagine OLC funding an Imagination/Figment attraction for TDS. The merch sales would probably be huge too.

 

[monothingie]

If potential third party sponsors had signed on the dotted line.

Disney imposing onerous conditions on sponsorship of an already expensive sponsorship which took the synergy away ?

 

[Rich Brownn]

do you think that's because it was supposed to mimic a world expo type vibe, where every exhibit is sponsored by a corresponding industry that *could* or *is* involved in developing whatever the attraction is showcasing?

The emulated a very specific World's Fair - namely the NY 64/65 which was heavy on corporations rather than countries. Ironically that's because most countries boycotted the NY World's Fair as it was unsanctioned ... the official Worlds Fair was Expo 67, which was most definitely NOT corporate heavy.

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

This just got me thinking. Imagine OLC funding an Imagination/Figment attraction for TDS. The merch sales would probably be huge too.

I think if any other park were to obtain Figment and do it properly, it would be Tokyo.

 

[imsosarah]

I think all it shows is that I appreciate things that don't cater to a 5 year old. But I know many guests today would rather enjoy something that doesn't require intellectual stimulation. That's why Disney is turning Epcot into the new Magic Kingdom.

I think it more shows you are out of date with where technology is today and how far behind Epcot is...the kids are bored because it isn’t relevant look at future, tech or imagination....

 

[mikejs78]

I think it more shows you are out of date with where technology is today and how far behind Epcot is...the kids are bored because it isn’t relevant look at future, tech or imagination....

That's the thing - if you took the idea of EPCOT Center and applied it with today's technology and today's vision of the future, you'd have one hell of a park.

 

[phillip9698]

But why gut several omnimovers for thrill rides? Horizons and World of Motion could still easily work today and we could also have a Space pavilion and Test Track. We shouldn't have lost rides for quick thrills. We should have expanded. The park would be in a whole lot better shape for many reasons.

Those quick thrills that are trashed so much here are some of the highest rated rides at the parks.

And those rides needed gutting and re-imagined to remain relevant. You have to make a decision on if you want to completely rework a ride every 15 years or build something that can stand the test of time. TGMR fell in the same category, it needed to be reworked every 20 years to stay relevant.

 

[Rich Brownn]

Those quick thrills that are trashed so much here are some of the highest rated rides at the parks.

And those rides needed gutting and re-imagined to remain relevant. You have to make a decision on if you want to completely rework a ride every 15 years or build something that can stand the test of time. TGMR fell in the same category, it needed to be reworked every 20 years to stay relevant.

Actually, as pointed out, the majority of the old EPCOT rides were designed to be easily updated - the majority of the ride dealt with the evolution of the tech and when it got into the future it was usually a film (Energy, SE, Wonders of Life) or modular (Motion, also Seas, Living With The Land). The only ride where the majority of it took place in "the future" was Horizons.

 

[flynnibus]

Actually, as pointed out, the majority of the old EPCOT rides were designed to be easily updated - the majority of the ride dealt with the evolution of the tech and when it got into the future it was usually a film (Energy, SE, Wonders of Life) or modular (Motion, also Seas, Living With The Land). The only ride where the majority of it took place in "the future" was Horizons.

I think that is giving them a bit too much credit.

Remember we were talking the era of NTSC level television screens everywhere... and even the stories about 'today' or 'present' are a huge moving target. Your argument is basically the CoP model... but even that shows how the updates bleed into everything and not just the final set. Attitudes of how things are represented... focus areas.. all change (see how SSE has changed).

Looking at an example outside of disney.. like the Terminator show illustrated how a show ages poorly because of the reliance on heavy video and narration.

FW would still have needed significant refreshes - because our world was changing so fast. Both 'current thinking' and 'view of the future' are very time dependent. The show scripts very much themselves were tied to the train of thought of the period... not just the predictions. Call it the curse of reality... instead of a story of pure fiction in fantasy places.

BTTF and T2 both show how attractions can age really badly if not refreshed. WoL had that problem from day two... the early 90s vibe it had fell out of favor real quick.. as well as it's presentation of the state of things now.

You can lump 'current' into just as hard to keep fresh as you do 'future'

 

[Rich Brownn]

I think that is giving them a bit too much credit.

Remember we were talking the era of NTSC level television screens everywhere... and even the stories about 'today' or 'present' are a huge moving target. Your argument is basically the CoP model... but even that shows how the updates bleed into everything and not just the final set. Attitudes of how things are represented... focus areas.. all change (see how SSE has changed).

Looking at an example outside of disney.. like the Terminator show illustrated how a show ages poorly because of the reliance on heavy video and narration.

FW would still have needed significant refreshes - because our world was changing so fast. Both 'current thinking' and 'view of the future' are very time dependent. The show scripts very much themselves were tied to the train of thought of the period... not just the predictions. Call it the curse of reality... instead of a story of pure fiction in fantasy places.

BTTF and T2 both show how attractions can age really badly if not refreshed. WoL had that problem from day two... the early 90s vibe it had fell out of favor real quick.. as well as it's presentation of the state of things now.

You can lump 'current' into just as hard to keep fresh as you do 'future'

Nope, they were specifically designed that way. They didn't even really do "current". Think about it... Energy's ride portion current was dinosaurs, Spaceship Earth jumped from the Sistine Chapel to the moon landing (1968), The Seas didn't even bother with anything other than the formation of the seas before the ride, World of Motion ended way before the 70s... etc. etc. Even Horizon was though to be a future "so far out" only the IMAX film would need updating. The real current (and semi-future) stuff was either in the post-show area or over in Communicore, designed to be updated.

Of course, as lines diminished and corporations found newer places to spend ad money (internet mostly) the upkeep of these very-expensive rides spelled doom for them.

 

[flynnibus]

Nope, they were specifically designed that way. They didn't even really do "current". Think about it... Energy's ride portion current was dinosaurs, Spaceship Earth jumped from the Sistine Chapel to the moon landing (1968), The Seas didn't even bother with anything other than the formation of the seas before the ride, World of Motion ended way before the 70s... etc. etc. Even Horizon was though to be a future "so far out" only the IMAX film would need updating. The real current (and semi-future) stuff was either in the post-show area or over in Communicore, designed to be updated.

You're simply wrong about the attraction content - go back and watch again.

SSE had the home computer scene and the office computer scene.. and of course the entire script about the network... and the network operations center... all the video in the decent...

WoM had tons of video content in its show scenes that wouldn't have aged well as a presentation format (looking at you River De Tempo..)... all the speed tunnel stuff at the end was contemporary stuff.. and the entire 'brighter future' finale was all about the future. Then of course the entire preshow area was a mix of contemporary education and future concept stuff...

Horizons... all I have to say is the script itself "tomorrows horizons are here... today!" - the whole transition from the way the past viewed the future is transitioned by what they know today.. as being on the threshold of all these future things... the idea of playing up satellite views of the earth... etc decoding DNA... THEN it switched to visualizing the future.

UoE - the whole preshow is based on that eras approach to energy... which as we all know has changed radically in the 'green' era.. Only the dino scenes are really about the past. The whole second theatre portion is all contemporary.. focusing on finding fossil fuels, the very early renewalable energy approaches, etc.. with the finale being all fluffy feel good stuff. Then there is the whole post show areas.. again all contemporary focused.

WoL is dated by the all the video content that was contempory at the time.. and of course the 'flavor of the month' medical focuses..

I could go on and on.. but I'm not getting paid for this.

 

[Rich Brownn]

You're simply wrong about the attraction content - go back and watch again.

SSE had the home computer scene and the office computer scene.. and of course the entire script about the network... and the network operations center... all the video in the decent...

WoM had tons of video content in its show scenes that wouldn't have aged well as a presentation format (looking at you River De Tempo..)... all the speed tunnel stuff at the end was contemporary stuff.. and the entire 'brighter future' finale was all about the future. Then of course the entire preshow area was a mix of contemporary education and future concept stuff...

Horizons... all I have to say is the script itself "tomorrows horizons are here... today!" - the whole transition from the way the past viewed the future is transitioned by what they know today.. as being on the threshold of all these future things... the idea of playing up satellite views of the earth... etc decoding DNA... THEN it switched to visualizing the future.

UoE - the whole preshow is based on that eras approach to energy... which as we all know has changed radically in the 'green' era.. Only the dino scenes are really about the past. The whole second theatre portion is all contemporary.. focusing on finding fossil fuels, the very early renewalable energy approaches, etc.. with the finale being all fluffy feel good stuff. Then there is the whole post show areas.. again all contemporary focused.

WoL is dated by the all the video content that was contempory at the time.. and of course the 'flavor of the month' medical focuses..

I could go on and on.. but I'm not getting paid for this.

Thanks for proving my point... the computer scene and office computer scenes were additions to update the attraction, as they did not exist in the original version. The speed tunnel and future city were films and modular boxes easy to swap out. The IMAX in Horizon was a film that could easily have been updated. And the second theater in Energy was a film also easily updated (as it was). And WoL was video and modular also easily updated. The actual hardcore stuff never dated because it had nothing to do with future or present.

The imagineers themselves have stated that these particular designs were indeed so they could easily be updated and adapted without too much cost. In a cruel sense of irony the current attractions - Test Track and Mission:Space - will outdate themselves faster than the originals (I mean, OnStar? ).

 

[HMF]

Nope, they were specifically designed that way. They didn't even really do "current". Think about it... Energy's ride portion current was dinosaurs, Spaceship Earth jumped from the Sistine Chapel to the moon landing (1968),

Hate to be a stickler here but SSE jumped from the sistine Chapel to the Industrial Revolution (1860s) The (1969) moon landing was not even brought up in the ride at all until the 2007 refurb ( Never mind the big historical issue of a 1982 Beatles album being in said scene.)

 

[flynnibus]

Thanks for proving my point... the computer scene and office computer scenes were additions to update the attraction, as they did not exist in the original version.

Survey says.. BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTTTT. Wrong - those are from the 1982 version.

And the other pieces were not just films to swap out... unless your entire point is 'screens vs sets' - of which, it's not even worth addressing as some future proofing plan.

 

[imsosarah]

That's the thing - if you took the idea of EPCOT Center and applied it with today's technology and today's vision of the future, you'd have one hell of a park.

I disagree because the idea was that people could go and learn about the future - today, we just need to open our phone.

At the rate AI, ML and immersion experiences are going they’d spend a fortune trying to stay even the slightest bit relevant. 5 years in tech now is like 25 when Epcot opened.

Thing of this: the iPhone is only 10 years old and didn’t have mass distribution until 2010/2

I do think they could use the tech to do coasters and rides that are similar to the stuff Unversal does which is far more tech reliant than actual tracks. It fits more into theme

 

[Bocabear]

It was not about learning about the future... It was inspirational about how we can build our future and the possibilities ahead of us. The points could all still be relevant today, but there are so many that think it was as simple asd "This is about learning about the future" Which it clearly was not...

 

[imsosarah]

It was not about learning about the future... It was inspirational about how we can build our future and the possibilities ahead of us. The points could all still be relevant today, but there are so many that think it was as simple asd "This is about learning about the future" Which it clearly was not...

I guess I meant the “how we build our future” anytime tech is involved (which it is on everything now) still is going to feel dated quickly as it moves so fast, it would need to be designed with 3-4 year refreshes in mind.


I think most of us under a certain age have always seen EPCOT as the place with the aquarium and to learn about different cultures ...