EPCOT Brazil (and maybe others) Pavilion Coming to Epcot [not about Brazilian people nor a country wish list]

[RSoxNo1]

• Mexico's pre-Columbian Pyramid Temple.
• Norway's Stave Church
• China's Temple of Heaven
• Italy's statues of angels and saints
• Japan's Tori Gate (Shinto) and Buddhist Temple
• Morocco's Islamic Mosque Minaret
• Canada's Native American Totems

Many of these things are [indeed] big.

Not to mention lesser religious displays:

• America's Christmas show with religious carols and Gospel readings proclaiming Jesus as the incarnate savior of the world
• all the other pavilions Holiday story tellers telling stories of faith (including Judaism in the America pavilion)
• St. George statue in Germany and Germany's year-round Christmas store

I had a Social Studies teacher in high school that would use the acronym SPIRE when discussing different cultures around the world. It stood for Social, Political, Intellectual, Religious and Economic and these were the areas we would look at. Unfortunately now we're becoming less capable of civil discourse when our opinions differ and the question at least needs to be asked about Christ the Redeemer, "Will this offend people?"

While people are less likely to object to existing religious symbols and structures, new ones are far easier to protest. While our current society is also very much a fan of retroactive outrage, it's far easier to protest something before it's built than afterwards.

 

[Phicinfan]

Alright, I'll get it back on track.

Disney should not want to do a Brazil pavilion for another reason. There is no IP that is worth basing an attraction on for it. Unless they have one planned (see link below). It would actually make more sense to improve their current ride-less pavilions.

Exclusive | Lin-Manuel Miranda may create Disney’s first Latina princess

Cinderella, Snow White and the “Frozen” leading ladies could be dethroned…

pagesix.com

China (Mulan), Italy, Germany, Japan, Morocco, UK (Poppins or Alice), Canada.

except there is no hard fast rule that a Pavilion has to have an attraction, or is IP based. American and Canada does not currently, and last we heard from @marni1971 I don't think the current plan has an attraction. Per all reports this ship has sailed and Brazil is a comin

 

[MisterPenguin]

Alright, I'll get it back on track.

Disney should not want to do a Brazil pavilion for another reason. There is no IP that is worth basing an attraction on for it. Unless they have one planned (see link below). It would actually make more sense to improve their current ride-less pavilions.

Exclusive | Lin-Manuel Miranda may create Disney’s first Latina princess

Cinderella, Snow White and the “Frozen” leading ladies could be dethroned…

pagesix.com

China (Mulan), Italy, Germany, Japan, Morocco, UK (Poppins or Alice), Canada.

Pavilions come into being based on sponsorship money, not because Disney has an IP to plug. WDW has more than enough space for all the IP attractions that they'd want to do.

 

[Lensman]

Pavilions come into being based on sponsorship money, not because Disney has an IP to plug. WDW has more than enough space for all the IP attractions that they'd want to do.

I thought they did it based on the popularity of various ethnic food cuisines?

 

[MisterPenguin]

I thought they did it based on the popularity of various ethnic food cuisines?

There's not enough curry dishes, quick, build the India pavilion ahead of Brazil!!

 

[Kevin_W]

There's not enough curry dishes, quick, build the India pavilion ahead of Brazil!!

You know, I could get behind that line of reasoning!

 

[Phicinfan]

Hopefully that is the old rule, now that "Frozen" and "Ratatouille" have been added. Whether people like it or not we need IP based rides in World Showcase. If Brazil doesn't have an IP based attraction then it shouldn't be added to the park.

So we are now going to remove Pavilions that don't have rides? My issue here is, I don't think the point of WS is to have rides with every pavilion. It is to have Pavilions that celebrate the culture of that land. Not to say I don't appreciate the added rides, and entertainment on that side of the pond, but I don't believe the plan is or will ever be a ride in every WS land. So adding Brazil, if tastefully done with some really good restaurants would be a great add IMO.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Pavilions come into being based on sponsorship money, not because Disney has an IP to plug. WDW has more than enough space for all the IP attractions that they'd want to do.

Exactly. Any ride would need IP under the Bobs. But Brazil won’t get its ride. Its ride would be IP-based.

 

[HauntedMansionFLA]

So we are now going to remove Pavilions that don't have rides? My issue here is, I don't think the point of WS is to have rides with every pavilion. It is to have Pavilions that celebrate the culture of that land. Not to say I don't appreciate the added rides, and entertainment on that side of the pond, but I don't believe the plan is or will ever be a ride in every WS land. So adding Brazil, if tastefully done with some really good restaurants would be a great add IMO.

I think they mean going forward when adding countries

 

[Phicinfan]

I think they mean going forward when adding countries

yeah I know ,but I was just making a point....evidently not that well.

Still, I don't believe we should assume that every add to WS has to have a ride

 

[MisterPenguin]

Well, the national pavilions were original envisioned to have some sort of attraction (e.g., circlevision or a ride). Then that fell by the wayside.

The only reason rides are coming back to national pavilions is to boost Epcot's attendance especially in light of MK's overcrowdedness and the juggernaut that will be Star Wars Land. The festivals can only draw in so many and with diminishing returns.

And so, they're looking to add rides. And if there is some simpatico between a country and an IP, then there's a chance for a ride. If not, the ride can go elsewhere.

It helps if the current sponsors of a national pavilion also want a ride to make their pavilion more attractive and are willing to foot the bill for the ride. If the sponsors of Brazil are willing to pay for a ride, I don't see WDW saying no.

 

[rreading]

Pavilions come into being based on sponsorship money, not because Disney has an IP to plug. WDW has more than enough space for all the IP attractions that they'd want to do.

Isn't that such a nice idea? That they have more than enough space. And yet they sure like to cannibalize older rides over breaking new ground. Avatar, Tron and Rat excepted.

 

[Spash007]

Well, the national pavilions were original envisioned to have some sort of attraction (e.g., circlevision or a ride). Then that fell by the wayside.

The only reason rides are coming back to national pavilions is to boost Epcot's attendance especially in light of MK's overcrowdedness and the juggernaut that will be Star Wars Land. The festivals can only draw in so many and with diminishing returns.

And so, they're looking to add rides. And if there is some simpatico between a country and an IP, then there's a chance for a ride. If not, the ride can go elsewhere.

It helps if the current sponsors of a national pavilion also want a ride to make their pavilion more attractive and are willing to foot the bill for the ride. If the sponsors of Brazil are willing to pay for a ride, I don't see WDW saying no.

If a sponsor wants to fund the ride, does that avoid the IP mandate?

 

[MisterPenguin]

If a sponsor wants to fund the ride, does that avoid the IP mandate?

Not sure. But, I bet enough sponsorship money would overrule IP demands.

 

[nickys]

Maybe not every pavilion, but many of them should eventually get attractions. There's got to be more things to do at Epcot than just get wasted, eat or shop.

So do you think we should still be holding out hope for Japan and Germany?

Hopefully that is the old rule, now that "Frozen" and "Ratatouille" have been added. Whether people like it or not we need IP based rides in World Showcase. If Brazil doesn't have an IP based attraction then it shouldn't be added to the park.

So your opinion is only IP based attractions should be added ..... Care to explain why? And if there’s no place for non-IP based attractions in your vision for Epcot, are you suggesting they should get rid of the existing ones too?

I’d actually like a mixture of attractions.

 

[larryz]

Exactly. Any ride would need IP under the Bobs. But Brazil won’t get its ride. Its ride would be IP-based.

Maybe they could put in a big cable-car gondola ride like they have in Rio...?

 

[larryz]

Well, the national pavilions were original envisioned to have some sort of attraction (e.g., circlevision or a ride). Then that fell by the wayside.

Are you saying buying beer by the liter and stuffing sausages in your mouth isn't an attraction???

 

[nickys]

If Frozen can be put it in Norway than attractions like Alice in Wonderland or Mary Poppins (UK) can be added to the World Showcase. They probably would fit much better than Frozen too.

I think at least half of the pavilions should have attractions.

Coco
Frozen
Mulan
Pinocchio
Snow White or Tangled
American Adventure
Ratatouille
Alice or Mary Poppins

You haven’t really answered my questions. Are you saying you only count IP based attractions? So the American Adventure doesn’t count? And if they were to put in Mount Fuji, it would need to be an IP?

You seem to be focussing on rides as the only kind of attraction. So you’d want a Mulan ride, not just a movie - that kind of thing. I think there’s room for all kinds of attractions, like the museum in Morocco, the gardens in Canada.

 

[nickys]

I'm alright with American Adventure and the movies, but I think from here on out all rides should be IP based.

Why?

 

[TJJohn12]

If Frozen can be put it in Norway than attractions like Alice in Wonderland or Mary Poppins (UK) can be added to the World Showcase. They probably would fit much better than Frozen too.

I think at least half of the pavilions should have attractions.

Coco
Frozen
Mulan
Pinocchio
Snow White or Tangled
American Adventure
Ratatouille
Alice or Mary Poppins

Note than half the pavilions already have attractions, France will now have *two* with the addition of Rat...

Mexico - Three Cabs
Norway - Frozen
China - Circlevision
US - American Adventure
France - Rat & Circlevision
Canada - Circlevision

That’s 6 out of 11 of the pavilions that already have attractions. It looks more like you’re advocating *every* pavilion have a *ride*, not an attraction.