DAK 10th

[ChrisFL]

I'd rather save rhinos...

But have rhinos ever tried to save us? :lookaroun

 

[TTARider]

honestly.. you can't see a rhino anywhere. seeing how they're an endangered species. Snap!

I can see a rhino here in Waco....The only thing at EPCOT that I get to see regularly here in Waco is Mexico.

 

[jakeman]

Rude! You can see a rhino anywhere...just sayin. Tell me where you can see the world's larger geosphere! You'll only come up with one answer. Snap!

Wow. I am by no means an environmentalist, but that is a fairly cold, selfish, answer.

Epcot serves as much purpose as Magic Kingdom or DHS (with the exception of The Land and The Living Seas). Animal Kingdom is actually accomplishing something. To imply that their 10th anniversary is not worthy of celebrating because it is simply not Epcot seems narrowminded at best.

Also, I have the opportunity to see some animals as often as I get to a geosphere. I'm always much more impressed with the animals.

Perhaps all the Epcotphiles on the boards need to take a step back and reevaluate what is important when it comes to Theme Park Societal Impact.

 

[RedGear]

maybe they are just saying that epcot is orginal . . . and AK is like going to a zoo with rides, no offense I love both, I just love EPCOT a little more. . .

I'll be on the lookout for the 10th annvis, stuff when I am there.

 

[RiversideBunny]

....The only thing at EPCOT that I get to see regularly here in Waco is Mexico.

You can see Mexico from Waco?
:lol:

I saw the Dr. Pepper Museum in Waco.
At Club Cool in EPCOT they only have Coke products.

 

[dylan0511]

Wow. I am by no means an environmentalist, but that is a fairly cold, selfish, answer.

Epcot serves as much purpose as Magic Kingdom or DHS (with the exception of The Land and The Living Seas). Animal Kingdom is actually accomplishing something. To imply that their 10th anniversary is not worthy of celebrating because it is simply not Epcot seems narrowminded at best.

Also, I have the opportunity to see some animals as often as I get to a geosphere. I'm always much more impressed with the animals.

Perhaps all the Epcotphiles on the boards need to take a step back and reevaluate what is important when it comes to Theme Park Societal Impact.

Thank you. I agree 100%. While all parks have something great in them, this board gets a little anti-anything that is not epcot a little too much. There are 4 parks to enjoy, there is no reason to bash anyone who doesn't worship Epcot.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Big balls are dime a dozen. Rhinos are far more expensive.

 

[camithepirate]

Thank you. I agree 100%. While all parks have something great in them, this board gets a little anti-anything that is not epcot a little too much. There are 4 parks to enjoy, there is no reason to bash anyone who doesn't worship Epcot.

I agree. If anything, there is more Epcot worship on this site than anything. Personally, I cant stand being there for more than an hour. even the rides like TT and MS, and world showcase, arnt worth even a half day to me.
(bash away?)

But seriously, its to each his own, there is no need to critcise someone for thier opnion, just becuase its not the same as yours.

 

[jt04]

I agree. If anything, there is more Epcot worship on this site than anything. Personally, I cant stand being there for more than an hour. even the rides like TT and MS, and world showcase, arnt worth even a half day to me.
(bash away?)

But seriously, its to each his own, there is no need to critcise someone for thier opnion, just becuase its not the same as yours.

I think people understand that Epcot is a bit on the intellectual side for someone from New Jersey. You are excused.

 

[RiversideBunny]

I think people understand that Epcot is a bit on the intellectual side for someone from New Jersey. You are excused.

Wasn't it Pink Floyd who said, "We don't need no education"?

(One of the songs on my iPod, by the way. Part 2.)

:animwink:

 

[jakeman]

I think people understand that Epcot is a bit on the intellectual side for someone from New Jersey. You are excused.

I hope you forgot the :ROFLOL: behind that and weren't serious lol.

 

[KaliSplash]

Epcot is not the fracking be all end all of WDW. Just because a big minority of the board here wishes that the world be made of omnimovers, "inspiration", and bad 80's theme park music doesn't mean there are not better, if not more important parts to WDW.
Animal Kingdom has contributed to science and the global community more in the past 10 years through research and funding than Epcot can ever hope to.
You can keep your Horizons and Tomorrow's Child, I'd rather save rhinos...
/end rant

Let's stay civil here. Each of the theme parks offers unique entertainment. But there are many of us who do like omnimovers, "inspiratation" and GOOD 1980s theme park music.

Which is not to say I don't like DAK, but it's probably my least favorite of the four parks, even though it has one of my favorite, if far too short rides at Kali!

 

[jakeman]

Let's stay civil here. Each of the theme parks offers unique entertainment. But there are many of us who do like omnimovers, "inspiratation" and GOOD 1980s theme park music.

Which is not to say I don't like DAK, but it's probably my least favorite of the four parks, even though it has one of my favorite, if far too short rides at Kali!

I was responding to the dismissal of DAK because it was not Epcot.

Many people like Epcot more than the other parks, but that does not make them the majority and it also does not make it acceptable to dismiss an anniversary simply because it is not Epcot.

To belittle another park and by proxy all those who enjoy that park is close minded, especially when every other thread about Epcot contains a wall of text proclaiming Epcot as some sort of theme park utopia with deep societal impact.

 

[Mr.EPCOT]

Epcot serves as much purpose as Magic Kingdom or DHS (with the exception of The Land and The Living Seas). Animal Kingdom is actually accomplishing something. To imply that their 10th anniversary is not worthy of celebrating because it is simply not Epcot seems narrowminded at best.

EPCOT does have much more potential than Animal Kingdom to have a positive, changing influence on the world. That potential is not being fulfilled at EPCOT, so in that respect, you are correct in saying that Animal Kingdom has accomplished a lot more over the past ten years.

Without a doubt, Animal Kingdom is my least favorite of the four parks. I still love it, though, and I'll be there April 22nd celebrating and having just as much fun as anyone.

 

[jakeman]

EPCOT does have much more potential than Animal Kingdom to have a positive, changing influence on the world than Animal Kingdom. That potential is not being fulfilled at EPCOT, so in that respect, you are correct in saying that Animal Kingdom has accomplished a lot more over the past ten years.

Without a doubt, Animal Kingdom is my least favorite of the four parks. I still love it, though, and I'll be there April 22nd celebrating and having just as much fun as anyone.

We are getting into opinion here, but exactly how are they supposed to do that?

I don't believe that potential is there at Epcot, as it is a theme park with a floundering theme. They took a stab at it with the original concept and it earn them the reputation as a boring theme park among the masses.

I think it wasn't because the masses didn't get it. They got it and didn't want it on their vacation. Animal Kingdom tried a serious tone the first few years it was open and realized in 3 years what it took Epcot 15, guest don't want to learn on vacation.

If you are speaking of quanitfiable contributions and not intangibles, then Animal Kingdom with always have Epcot beat hands down. Since intangibles (inspiration, imagination, wonder) are just that, can this ever be measure?

 

[ChrisFL]

If you are speaking of quanitfiable contributions and not intangibles, then Animal Kingdom with always have Epcot beat hands down. Since intangibles (inspiration, imagination, wonder) are just that, can this ever be measure?

I don't think AK has ever had attendance to beat Epcot, that's quantifiable!

 

[Mr.EPCOT]

We are getting into opinion here, but exactly how are they supposed to do that?

I don't believe that potential is there at Epcot, as it is a theme park with a floundering theme. They took a stab at it with the original concept and it earn them the reputation as a boring theme park among the masses.

I think it wasn't because the masses didn't get it. They got it and didn't want it on their vacation. Animal Kingdom tried a serious tone the first few years it was open and realized in 3 years what it took Epcot 15, guest don't want to learn on vacation.

If you are speaking of quanitfiable contributions and not intangibles, then Animal Kingdom with always have Epcot beat hands down. Since intangibles (inspiration, imagination, wonder) are just that, can this ever be measure?

The theme is only floundering because Disney is not currently willing to put in the effort to keep everything relevant and interesting. EPCOT Center was seen as exciting for the first few years, but after those first few years the Eisner regime was firmly in place and did not seem to get or care what was needed to keep the park vital. The boring reputation only came about as a result of Future World becoming stale due to lack of investment.

To simply say that that Guests don't want to learn on vacation doesn't ring true to me. There are degrees of learning. Even the most staunch bookworm wouldn't want a textbook thrown at them on their trip, but I think people would enjoy something higher up the intellectual scale than drivel like Test Track. I think people would love to go to the Universe of Energy, for example, and come out of an entertaining, engaging presentation that's not merely just a lot of fun, but spurs them to actively pursue alternative energy choices at home, and maybe ease a little of the burden of worrying about ever-increasing, depressing gas prices, that it won't be that way forever. Corporations also have a unique opportunity for solid research at EPCOT that they wouldn't anywhere else. What if a major food manufacturer and Disney developed an experience for Guests to taste test genetically engineered foods, and gain relevant, useful data that that company could use to make better-tasting, healthier foods? What if Test Track became not just a thrill ride that doesn't share with you anything you don't already know from the standard car commercial, but double as a hub for an experimental trasnsporation system being developed, say something like the P.R.T. at West Virginia? What if someone like M.I.T. took up shop at CommuniCore/Innoventions to test, maybe even fully develop some of their advanced technologies, all with the resources at their disposal to see how these new products work with average Joe? The challenge is just to find that precise balance between entertainment and education. The Discovery Channel seems to have almost nailed this balance, even having entire mini-series devoted to the same topics as some of the original EPCOT Center pavilions, such as FutureCar and 2057.

Some of what EPCOT could and should do for the average Guest will always be intangible, yes, such as feelings of hope, maybe an eagerness to contribute to a better future, but there are plenty of solid results that can come out of the park. And I believe that it could even be extremely lucrative and extremely profitable, if done right!

I also believe that Animal Kingdom (and Hollywood Studios to an extent, almost literally, having grown out of an Entertainment pavilion concept that would go between Journey Into Imagination and The Land) is essentially an overgrown Future World pavilion, a pavilion that goes above and beyond for its topic. You could really build an entire theme park based around each of the Future World topics, hard it may be to imagine. But fifteen years ago I never would have imagined that you could base an entire theme park on just the topic of animals and conservation. Yet here it is, highly successful and popular, and doing wonders for its field. So on that basis, there is plenty of potential for all of Future World, every single pavilion.

 

[jakeman]

The theme is only floundering because Disney is not currently willing to put in the effort to keep everything relevant and interesting. EPCOT Center was seen as exciting for the first few years, but after those first few years the Eisner regime was firmly in place and did not seem to get or care what was needed to keep the park vital. The boring reputation only came about as a result of Future World becoming stale due to lack of investment.

To simply say that that Guests don't want to learn on vacation doesn't ring true to me. There are degrees of learning. Even the most staunch bookworm wouldn't want a textbook thrown at them on their trip, but I think people would enjoy something higher up the intellectual scale than drivel like Test Track. I think people would love to go to the Universe of Energy, for example, and come out of an entertaining, engaging presentation that's not merely just a lot of fun, but spurs them to actively pursue alternative energy choices at home, and maybe ease a little of the burden of worrying about ever-increasing, depressing gas prices, that it won't be that way forever. Corporations also have a unique opportunity for solid research at EPCOT that they wouldn't anywhere else. What if a major food manufacturer and Disney developed an experience for Guests to taste test genetically engineered foods, and gain relevant, useful data that that company could use to make better-tasting, healthier foods? What if Test Track became not just a thrill ride that doesn't share with you anything you don't already know from the standard car commercial, but double as a hub for an experimental trasnsporation system being developed, say something like the P.R.T. at West Virginia? What if someone like M.I.T. took up shop at CommuniCore/Innoventions to test, maybe even fully develop some of their advanced technologies, all with the resources at their disposal to see how these new products work with average Joe? The challenge is just to find that precise balance between entertainment and education. The Discovery Channel seems to have almost nailed this balance, even having entire mini-series devoted to the same topics as some of the original EPCOT Center pavilions, such as FutureCar and 2057.

Some of what EPCOT could and should do for the average Guest will always be intangible, yes, such as feelings of hope, maybe an eagerness to contribute to a better future, but there are plenty of solid results that can come out of the park. And I believe that it could even be extremely lucrative and extremely profitable, if done right!

I also believe that Animal Kingdom (and Hollywood Studios to an extent, almost literally, having grown out of an Entertainment pavilion concept that would go between Journey Into Imagination and The Land) is essentially an overgrown Future World pavilion, a pavilion that goes above and beyond for its topic. You could really build an entire theme park based around each of the Future World topics, hard it may be to imagine. But fifteen years ago I never would have imagined that you could base an entire theme park on just the topic of animals and conservation. Yet here it is, highly successful and popular, and doing wonders for its field. So on that basis, there is plenty of potential for all of Future World, every single pavilion.

^Wall of text:ROFLOL:^

I kid...I don't think this can be blamed on Eisner or his regime. Another problem that is prevalent is to blame everything that went the least bit wrong from 1984 to 2002ish(?) on Eisner. Look what was built and created during his time. The end of his tenure was lackluster, but he also ushered in and presided over some of the best times of the company.

Also, while some of your ideas have merit, you can't involve the park going public in your research without consent. Part of consent is proving that they are not influenced or a captive audience to your research.

Also by your logic, Magic Kingdom is an overgrown Imagination pavilion. I am only singling you out because you responded, so please don't take it personal.

This brings me back to my original point about the overblown sense of importance placed on Epcot. All other theme parks did not originate from Epcot (I do know that DHS was supposed to be an Epcot pavilion. Why that would be an odd choice, in my opinion, is a topic for another thread). Nor are they inferior to Epcot, simply because they are not Epcot.

I don't think AK has ever had attendance to beat Epcot, that's quantifiable!

While your point is valid, I don't believe the topic of discussion is related to park attendance as much as societal impact.

I also believe that Animal Kingdom's developement and attendance figures will always lag due to the downturn in tourism in 2001 and 2002. The difference in working at Disney in 2000 and in 2002 was night and day. The place became a ghost town (relatively)

Well crap, I have become what I hate by contributing my own wall of text...:ROFLOL:

 

[Mr.EPCOT]

^Wall of text:ROFLOL:^

I kid...I don't think this can be blamed on Eisner or his regime. Another problem that is prevalent is to blame everything that went the least bit wrong from 1984 to 2002ish(?) on Eisner. Look what was built and created during his time. The end of his tenure was lackluster, but he also ushered in and presided over some of the best times of the company.

I'm not sure blame is the exact right word, but Eisner and Wells certainly had very different priorities than the executives who built EPCOT Center. That certainly accomplished nothing short of saving the Company.

Also, while some of your ideas have merit, you can't involve the park going public in your research without consent. Part of consent is proving that they are not influenced or a captive audience to your research.

I am no legal expert, but I think that could probably be worked with. For example, you are providing consent for Disney to use your image merely by entering the park.

Also by your logic, Magic Kingdom is an overgrown Imagination pavilion.

You have a point there.

I am only singling you out because you responded, so please don't take it personal.

Not at all! :wave:

This brings me back to my original point about the overblown sense of importance placed on Epcot. All other theme parks did not originate from Epcot (I do know that DHS was supposed to be an Epcot pavilion. Why that would be an odd choice, in my opinion, is a topic for another thread). Nor are they inferior to Epcot, simply because they are not Epcot.

Not inferior, just different.

 

[wannab@dis]

The theme is only floundering because Disney is not currently willing to put in the effort to keep everything relevant and interesting. EPCOT Center was seen as exciting for the first few years, but after those first few years the Eisner regime was firmly in place and did not seem to get or care what was needed to keep the park vital. The boring reputation only came about as a result of Future World becoming stale due to lack of investment.

This is not quite true. EPCOT was seen as boring and it was immediately clear something had to be done. New concepts and attractions were put on a fast track for completion to overcome the "boring" aspect. An over-population of epic length dark rides full of "education" was the primary cause.

I believe a Travel Channel show actually stated it as being much worse... an imminent failure of EPCOT was foreseen if they didn't make changes and additions to bring entertainment and fun, and yes, thrills to the vacationing consumers.

As far as the attendance comparisons to DAK... I wonder if they had built DAK instead of EPCOT, it may have seen the same levels of attendance in the early years simply because there was only MK competing for guests' time. I have a feeling DAK will catch up to Epcot in the near future, especially with further investment.