MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[donaldtoo]

It can be. But difficult to do. Most architecture is for human housing, commercial enterprises, and manufacturing. These buildings tend to be practical forms of various shapes of boxes. Then can be decorated to be pleasing to the eyes. But, if they're just a decorated box, where is the transcendent message?

Artistic architecture usually means breaking the mold of the box and introducing a transcendent message like "being one with nature" and so you build a house in the side of mountain with a tree in the middle of it and a spring flowing through the house. But that's not going to house millions of people.

Or, your skyscraper has elements that have a message. The Chrysler building has bold Art Deco decoration that is more than mere decoration... it speaks to a cultural movement.

The shape of the giant waterfalls in Singapore's airport speak to the grandeur of their place on earth. Putting a ship building on top of three skyscrapers is... a bit much.

It's expensive to make those kind of statements with buildings.

Yea, as I, basically, said…

 

[lazyboy97o]

It can be. But difficult to do. Most architecture is for human housing, commercial enterprises, and manufacturing. These buildings tend to be practical forms of various shapes of boxes. Then can be decorated to be pleasing to the eyes. But, if they're just a decorated box, where is the transcendent message?

Artistic architecture usually means breaking the mold of the box and introducing a transcendent message like "being one with nature" and so you build a house in the side of mountain with a tree in the middle of it and a spring flowing through the house. But that's not going to house millions of people.

Or, your skyscraper has elements that have a message. The Chrysler building has bold Art Deco decoration that is more than mere decoration... it speaks to a cultural movement.

The shape of the giant waterfalls in Singapore's airport speak to the grandeur of their place on earth. Putting a ship building on top of three skyscrapers is... a bit much.

It's expensive to make those kind of statements with buildings.

Purely utilitarians buildings are often not considered to be architecture.

 

[donaldtoo]

Purely utilitarians buildings are often not considered to be architecture.

Agreed.
But, beyond that, as requested by a client, for example, to me anyway, the art in architecture is taking something that serves a practical need or purpose and making it beautiful, interesting transcendent, etc. Way different than starting with a completely blank canvas, and that’s always been the challenge in the art of architecture that I love.

 

[MR.Dis]

Agreed.
But, beyond that, as requested by a client, for example, to me anyway, the art in architecture is taking something that serves a practical need or purpose and making it beautiful, interesting transcendent, etc. Way different than starting with a completely blank canvas, and that’s always been the challenge in the art of architecture that I love.

I have often heard Frank Loyd Wright called an artist.

 

[flynnibus]

I've got to disagree with you there.
I believe that the Disney parks were absolutely designed in part to allow guests to step back and admire elements of them.

Would you buy a ticket the same if the whole thing was a walkthrough you didn’t actually grt to do anything there but look at it?

Disney parks are functional forms of a consumer product. Built for the explicit purpose of running an entertainment business.

They are not an exposition. They are not something marked for saving as part of a public trust.

 

[flynnibus]

Is architecture considered art…?!?!?!
I was in architecture for over 40 years, most of that in high-end spec and custom residential design, with most well into the millions of dollars.
I could load this thread up with pics of rough sketches, CAD drawings and rough 3-D modeling I did over the years, and I defy anyone to tell me it isn’t art.
Seems to me the vast majority of Disneys theming has something to do with architectural design.
That being said, I still consider other aspects of Imagineering and theme park planning and design as art, aside from the fact that it has a practical use, as well.
The homes I designed (or any architecture, for that matter) are also art, even though they also have a practical use.
To me, automotive design is art (especially late 50’s-early 60’s), but also has a practical use.
Again, just my opinion, but I stand by it.

I think the conversation here tho was if your output should have been handled and treated as art… aka ‘hands off’ and deserving of preservation as art… over its intended use.

It’s like saying don’t live in that house you built… it’s art!

 

[lazyboy97o]

Would you buy a ticket the same if the whole thing was a walkthrough you didn’t actually grt to do anything there but look at it?

Disney parks are functional forms of a consumer product. Built for the explicit purpose of running an entertainment business.

They are not an exposition. They are not something marked for saving as part of a public trust.

We’re back to a definition that excludes Shakespeare who wrote his plays for the explicit purpose of an entertainment business.

 

[flynnibus]

We’re back to a definition that excludes Shakespeare who wrote his plays for the explicit purpose of an entertainment business.

This is apples and oranges. No one is arguing the global theatre performances should be performed forever because they were 'art'. The author and performers output is art - as is the processes they use to create their output is described as art. But there is still a distinction between the output, the process, and their intended uses.

Not all art is forever, nor was it ever intended to be, nor is all art intended to be form over all function. Art is not mutually exclusive of purpose or practicality. Art is applied to many functional forms, and as functional things, they often are treated as THAT THING - not art. Car bodies are often designed as art.. we admire the output and form as art.. but they are still functional cars.. and has its typically something mass produced, no one fights that each must be preserved because it's 'art'. First and foremost it was a functional tool.

The theme parks follow in that process - they are an output of a creative process (art), but they are functionality entities first and foremost. Their purpose is to function as product consumers enjoy. And as such, their lifecycle is usually dictated by that function -- not by a process that says "is this art worthy?"

Disney used art to create effective theme parks

They were not art creations that were created solely for the creator's expression that later got admired like public museums saving legacy or history.

 

[FettFan]

I was relying on the concept art because that’s all we have.

How unreliable is it? Is it more often wrong than right?

the past 10 years of Disney? More wrong than right.

^ show scene that doesn’t happen

^ fountain fail

 

[Plummet]

the past 10 years of Disney? More wrong than right.

View attachment 919257

^ show scene that doesn’t happen

View attachment 919258
^ fountain fail

I mean i'm sure you could have found some better examples than this. Like objectively.

A single show scene/how some fountains look are in no way comparable to the design of an entire land. I would hav atleast gone for the original TBA concept art instead with the ship + Tiana outside.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

He tore down many notable attractions in his own time, and built new ones in their place.

What are some examples?

 

[GordoInTheParks]

What are some examples?

Disneyland was only open for 11 years when Walt died in 1966, and yet Pirates of the Caribbean wasn't even open until 4 months after he passed... However, a quick search for the Disneyland rides that closed before his death in December of 1966 include: the Main Street Shooting Gallery, Stage Coach ride, Mickey Mouse Club Circus, Flying Saucers, Phantom Boats, the original Astro-Jets (ground-level), 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea walk-through exhibit, Monsanto House of the Future, the Monsanto Hall of Chemistry, and the Viewliner Train of Tomorrow. All of those officially closed in that 11 years, and other attractions (or features) were built in their place. Some weren't torn down, but upgraded or expanded in that time, like Rainbow Caverns Mine Train (expanded, and then finally closed in 1977) and Rocket to the Moon (closed in 1966 and became Flight to the Moon in 1967)

You may not consider any of these attractions to be particularly notable, but I'm sure that some people had fond memories of some of these early attractions... I do enjoy watching historical videos about these lost attractions, as well as Walt's one NY World's Fair attraction that did not make it to Disneyland: that being Ford's Magic Skyway. (featuring the dinosaurs from the DL train tunnel diorama) It's noteworthy that It's a Small World, Carousel of Progress (later moved to MK), and Great Moments With Mr Lincoln all came over from that same world's fair, and are older than their debut at Disneyland. [Edited for correct order of events]

I'm Walt's own words:
"The park means a lot to me in that it's something that will never be finished. Something that I can keep developing, keep plussing and adding to—it's alive. It will be a live, breathing thing that will need changes.

"I wanted something live, something that could grow, something I could keep plussing with ideas, you see? The park is that. Not only can I add things but even the trees will keep growing; the thing will get more beautiful every year. And as I find what the public likes—and when a picture's finished and I put it out—I find out what they like, or they don't like, and I have to apply that to some other thing; I can't change that picture, so that's why I wanted that park."

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

all came over from that same world's fair, and are actually 2 years older than Disneyland, itself.

The worlds fair was in 64-65.

From your list - the only one I would say was a notable closure was the stage coach and wagon rides. Viewliner train was replaced with the monorail - so it was a major upgrade of the train of the future theme.

I’m very familiar with Walt’s quotes on the parks - I just interpret them differently. Plussing and evolving the parks vs. rebuilding them.

 

[Brer Oswald]

Disneyland was only open for 11 years when Walt died in 1966, and yet Pirates of the Caribbean wasn't even open until 4 months after he passed... However, a quick search for the Disneyland rides that closed before his death in December of 1966 include: the Main Street Shooting Gallery, Stage Coach ride, Mickey Mouse Club Circus, Flying Saucers, Phantom Boats, the original Astro-Jets (ground-level), 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea walk-through exhibit, Monsanto House of the Future, the Monsanto Hall of Chemistry, and the Viewliner Train of Tomorrow. All of those officially closed in that 11 years, and other attractions (or features) were built in their place. Some weren't torn down, but upgraded or expanded in that time, like Rainbow Caverns Mine Train (expanded, and then finally closed in 1977) and Rocket to the Moon (closed in 1966 and became Flight to the Moon in 1967)

You may not consider any of these attractions to be particularly notable, but I'm sure that some people had fond memories of some of these early attractions... I do enjoy watching historical videos about these lost attractions, as well as Walt's one NY World's Fair attraction that did not make it to Disneyland: that being Ford's Magic Skyway. (featuring the dinosaurs from the DL train tunnel diorama) It's noteworthy that It's a Small World, Carousel of Progress (later moved to MK), and Great Moments With Mr Lincoln all came over from that same world's fair, and are actually 2 years older than Disneyland, itself.

I'm Walt's own words:
"The park means a lot to me in that it's something that will never be finished. Something that I can keep developing, keep plussing and adding to—it's alive. It will be a live, breathing thing that will need changes.

"I wanted something live, something that could grow, something I could keep plussing with ideas, you see? The park is that. Not only can I add things but even the trees will keep growing; the thing will get more beautiful every year. And as I find what the public likes—and when a picture's finished and I put it out—I find out what they like, or they don't like, and I have to apply that to some other thing; I can't change that picture, so that's why I wanted that park."

So many of these were temporary filler attractions or attractions that just didn’t work as they were intended to.

 

[Incomudro]

Would you buy a ticket the same if the whole thing was a walkthrough you didn’t actually grt to do anything there but look at it?

Disney parks are functional forms of a consumer product. Built for the explicit purpose of running an entertainment business.

They are not an exposition. They are not something marked for saving as part of a public trust.

Not my point at all.
The structures, layout, derails etc., were all designed to be taken in.
And before recent years where the parks are unfortunately often a rushed and tense experience, guests were encouraged in places to sit back and take it in.

 

[GordoInTheParks]

The worlds fair was in 64-65.

Yes, that was admittedly a very incorrect statement. It was late, and I was tired. Those rides were definitely not opening attractions, but were two years older than their debut at Disneyland, not Disneyland itself.

I’m very familiar with Walt’s quotes on the parks - I just interpret them differently. Plussing and evolving the parks vs. rebuilding them.

While I would love to see as many attractions preserved, at some point, you're going to either end up with something completely different that when it started, or you're going to end up with a museum. If there's to be one that's more preserved, I think that Disneyland makes more sense than MK, since that is the one that was build under Walt's supervision.

 

[GordoInTheParks]

So many of these were temporary filler attractions or attractions that just didn’t work as they were intended to.

That's your opinion, but obviously others seemed to be very fond of some of those attractions, so every change or closure should be considered.

 

[Brer Oswald]

That's your opinion, but others seemed to be very fond of some of those, so everything should be considered.

Stagecoach was removed because the horses would get spooked by the trains.

Flying saucers were removed because they just didn’t work reliably.

Viewliner was replaced with the same thing but better.

Mickey Mouse Club Circus was low quality. Walt wasn’t happy with it.

20K Leagues exhibit was a temporary attraction that installed to give Tomorrowland something other than Autopia.

Monsanto Hall of Chemistry was a temporary filler exhibit meant to serve the same purpose.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Yes, that was admittedly a very incorrect statement. It was late, and I was tired. Those rides were definitely not opening attractions, but were two years older than their debut at Disneyland, not Disneyland itself.

Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln was not actually moved to Disneyland. It opened in Disneyland in 1965 while continuing to play in New York for the second season of the fair.

While I would love to see as many attractions preserved, at some point, you're going to either end up with something completely different that when it started, or you're going to end up with a museum. If there's to be one that's more preserved, I think that Disneyland makes more sense than MK, since that is the one that was build under Walt's supervision.

Good museums don’t actually remain static and unchanging.

 

[GordoInTheParks]

Stagecoach was removed because the horses would get spooked by the trains.

Flying saucers were removed because they just didn’t work reliably.

Viewliner was replaced with the same thing but better.

Mickey Mouse Club Circus was low quality. Walt wasn’t happy with it.

20K Leagues exhibit was a temporary attraction that installed to give Tomorrowland something other than Autopia.

Monsanto Hall of Chemistry was a temporary filler exhibit meant to serve the same purpose.

Your insistence that things that didn't last 11 years were "temporary" is duly noted!