Eddie Sotto's take on the current state of the parks (Part II)

[Eddie Sotto]

Somewhere in the cosmos, the old school Imagineers are looking down on the whole big bloated stinky synergistic One Disney marketing mess and quietly throwing up.

Could this be what it really looks like? Is that a prophetic statement?

This is a sketch left on my desk by the late, great Herb Ryman. I told him I had to go to a high level meeting and he told me to BYOB..."bring your barf bag". This was there upon my return. I love how he depicts his friends with feedbags to puke in as they hear the execs pontificate. To your point, Herb hated that corporate stuff.

 

[flynnibus]

Gurr's impression of it is very clear in his recent book too He obviously had no patience for endless discussion and non-doers..

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Perhaps it's simply the camera angle and position of the photographer relative to the location of the exterior entrance, but something doesn't feel right about this place.

Is it me, or does the Manor seem too small for the billionaire tycoon world traveler who supposedly inhabited the place?

Obviously the various HM fronts are smaller versions of what real world mansions would entail. Yadda yadda forced perspective and all that jazz. I get it. But those other fronts are proportional to the environments which surround them, like DL's HM in New Orleans Square and DLP's Phantom Manor, which I find to be the most eerie of the bunch.

This building seems to sit too close to the walkway and too low to the ground, especially compared to PM. It's as if someone stole the hill it originally sat on and plopped it down at street level. While the architecture is a colorful, fanciful Victorian, the location combined with the size doesn't really work for me. Mystic Point feels very cramped and too small for the Manor to rise above it.

(ThemeParkGuy has a good shot of the Mystic Manor gates and the mansion behind them at his web site: http://www.thethemeparkguy.com/park/hong-kong-disneyland/)

It's too hard for me to tell from the images posted. You may be right, but I can't get a good sense to make a call. It looks better than I expected it to. My real concern was the overall scale of it all as it looks pretty full-sized. Staircase looks pretty big compared to the rest of it. I wonder how it relates height wise to the Castle? Phantom Manor in DLP is grossly out of scale, even for a full size house. They did spend some cash.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

OK, that's a bit unnerving, seeing as how he made that 60th Anniversary video spot not too long ago.

Was this before or after the noontime cocktail?


Not to quibble, for you are absolutely correct about Marty's contributions to WED/WDI over the decades, but... whom do you feel had the bigger influence in Imagineering?

Marty Sklar... or John Hench?

Not necessarily the bigger impact, but the bigger influence. And if you wouldn't mind, I'd love some reasons why one had more influence than the other.

Wow. What a question.

There is a bit of "Apples and Oranges" when you decide to compare the two. Hench was a designer and we were all very much influenced by his approach to design and his color theory. Marty is a writer and creatively ran the place and he coached us one on one privately, like a School Principal or a guidance counselor. Marty wrote the Disneyland books that made me and others decide to do whatever it took to be Imagineers. His book was my inspiration, for example. I've read it 50 times at least. He wrote Walt's scripts and some of the quotes. He has the mentality, like Yoda.I don;t know how you value or measure that. Marty Sklar was the last word of approval on our work and saw pretty much everything, and so in that way he was a "filter", and a casting director (as he paired and assigned us our portfolios of work). He put us together and broke us apart. For instance, most of my career I was a "script doctor" or fixer of derailed projects and Marty would call me and assign me to get into a particular project, knowing that it needed to be re-cast or re-thought. DL Indiana Jones, TDL (when I was there) and Space are all results of that re "casting". He knew what we all did and moved us around across portfolios to make things happen. Marty was like Louis B. Mayer, he kept all of us "contract players" and our egos from growing too far beyond our own ears. He knew what Disney was and was not, and like Mayer knew the kinds of pictures we should be making. He also wrote tons of encouraging notes to us personally as he knew artists needed that. That is very much hidden from the outside and so it's really tough to say who had the bigger influence. If it's literally the design, then in a way Hench, as in many ways his approach became the ethic for the WED studio and that was supported by Marty. But other artists lent to that look too, like Ryman or Davis. I knew John, but did not have the day to day contact. There were two Henches, one early in the WED days and the other in the final years. Up until the other 1G guys left, Hench had the most political power post Walt and later Marty assumed that partnership with him. Later on as he aged, he mellowed and became a wonderful supporter. I knew him then and he was great to talk with and present to. So you see that it's hard to say unless you look at it by era. If it's the organization, Marty had his fingers on all of it, good or bad and also molded our careers. Many of us still see Marty socially as he created a personal bond with each of us. I'd say long term overall Marty, but I worked with him more, but if you asked him, he'd probably say Hench.

BTW- I enjoyed the article you posted on the "Disney Fellows". Danny Hillis, one of those "fellows" became a close friend during that Disney gig. Incredible minds! All of those guys were great to chat with and Bran Ferren, the then head of R&D, had the office next door to me. We (concept studio) worked with his group to productize the inventions they were hatching. Always something insane going on too.

Ferren once told Eisner on a tour of the R&D facility that he was planning to develop a laser that could project a giant Mickey silhouette on the Moon, visible from Earth. Eisner looked around the executive group and said excitedly "Can we do that?". Ferren was joking, at least I think he was joking. Another time Disney President Mike Ovitz was hearing an audio demonstration and asked Ferren "just how expensive are these speakers?". Ferren cooly replied "oh I'd say....somewhere between astronomical and obscene". Love his wit.

After Disney, Ferren and Hillis opened their own R&D business across the street from WDI called Applied Minds. Amazing place and doing 22nd Century stuff all day long. Danny Hillis recently hired me to consult with him on his 10,000 Year Clock, so I'm fortunate to get to work with him. Maybe I can be one of their fellows?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

OK, that's a bit unnerving, seeing as how he made that 60th Anniversary video spot not too long ago.

Was this before or after the noontime cocktail? !

No Cocktails, mineral water. So there is no excuse. I didn't think of it either.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Actually, Tony edges her out, but not by much. He started the day after New Year's in 1970; Kim started later that year..

Your insider knowledge, especially with dates and stuff like this never ceases to amaze me.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

To me it would be like producing a movie and then after it is completed have someone come along and add several scenes to its beginning.

Not to derail the thread, but . . . Star Wars.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

I'd buy you a gin and tonic (my favorite), Eddie, and we can discuss Soap Box Racers, which I loved; Mission: Space, which I don't but do understand what was intended, and DLP's gorgeous Main Street- which I'll see again in two weeks or so.

Have a Kir Royale for me instead. I miss Paris.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

I can't say that this is what occurred in the LM example, but there are great perceived economies in building the same thing twice. No one wants to open the "Pandora's Box" of rethinking the show as it will erode any cookie cutter economies that may have reaped on the first one. Usually molds and figures are the easiest savings to realize, the building less so. Once the budget and schedule is based on a replica (you're not waiting for drawings, just building another round of sets), it's hard to wiggle out of that. I say perceived economies in that most of the time, things get changed for practical reasons despite the drawings and the replica is only an indicator of scope. I'm sure the designers would have loved to rethink the show to a degree and make improvements, but the ship had likely already sailed.

I think that Beauty and the Beast and Mermaid should have been "switched" in that I think B&tB would make a fantastic fantasyland ride, whereas I think that Mermaid is a story mostly told through song, as opposed to dramatic action and visuals in B&tB.

Guests keep talking about how they want "more time" with Ursula, to watch her sing I guess. I think a Mermaid version of Country Bears would have been a big hit, especially if they mixed in an Ariel face character and served dinner. They'd have to build some more animatronics, but I think they could have made as beautiful a dining room as BoG for Mermaid if they themed it to be like Eric's Castle. The story could be that Eric and Ariel invite Sebastian and friends to perform for dinner guests. A fancy dinning room could face a series of caves, and various sea animals pop up from tidal pools to sing, and uninvited guest could be Ursula who shows up to regale guests with some songs.

BoG is great, and they could have still done dinner service at BoG with a Prince Eric's/King Triton's restaurant with a Mermaid animatronic show nearby . . . but BoG doesn't have entertainment! A big surprise given the availability of animatronics and that they built the place from scratch.

I can't help but think that a B&tB dark ride would be great if WDI could figure out how to build a ride vehicle which is like a horse and cart, such that guests get the sensation that the cart is about to tip over any second as you race along a bumpy forest road at night towards the Beast's castle. The snow scene in BoG is nice, but I think guests want to explore that world outside the castle, and if they could figure out how to put snow inside of a ride, that would be a show stopper.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

They probably explored those kinds of options with each property, dark or thrill ride, dining, etc. before landing where they did. Lots of ways you could have gone. We used to do that on TDL when looking at a new F'land. We proposed redoing the Tea Cup Ride as a "Be My Guest" type theme with a B&B Dark Ride. I'd agree with you that the restaurant may beg for live entertainment.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Eddie, you just gave me an idea for a thread.
http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/mission-space-2-0-wishlist.857311/

Fun idea. I responded on it, thanks.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

They probably explored those kinds of options with each property, dark or thrill ride, dining, etc. before landing where they did. Lots of ways you could have gone. We used to do that on TDL when looking at a new F'land. We proposed redoing the Tea Cup Ride as a "Be My Guest" type theme with a B&B Dark Ride. I'd agree with you that the restaurant may beg for live entertainment.

Yes, I remember you described a "Be My Guest" tea cup ride with animatronics singing the "Be My Guest" song in the middle while the tea cups whirl around. Would have been a great way to plus the tea cups.

I can't help but think that Disneyland will get its own Fantasyland expansion at some point given how crowded the land gets. I think they could demolish the Fantasyland theatre and put in a mini-land with a B&B dark ride, a Gaston's Tavern, and a Ratatouille dark ride clone, since they are all French they sort of fit. Plus, La Patisserie in Epcot always does blockbuster business, can't help but think that such a food offering would also be successful in Disneyland.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Perhaps it's simply the camera angle and position of the photographer relative to the location of the exterior entrance, but something doesn't feel right about this place.

Is it me, or does the Manor seem too small for the billionaire tycoon world traveler who supposedly inhabited the place?

Obviously the various HM fronts are smaller versions of what real world mansions would entail. Yadda yadda forced perspective and all that jazz. I get it. But those other fronts are proportional to the environments which surround them, like DL's HM in New Orleans Square and DLP's Phantom Manor, which I find to be the most eerie of the bunch.

This building seems to sit too close to the walkway and too low to the ground, especially compared to PM. It's as if someone stole the hill it originally sat on and plopped it down at street level. While the architecture is a colorful, fanciful Victorian, the location combined with the size doesn't really work for me. Mystic Point feels very cramped and too small for the Manor to rise above it.

(ThemeParkGuy has a good shot of the Mystic Manor gates and the mansion behind them at his web site: http://www.thethemeparkguy.com/park/hong-kong-disneyland/)

There are definitely some small manors out there, typically owing to the need to control the interior climate without mechanical systems. To me what throws off Mystic Manor is the business of the design (in typical Disney fashion where mere ornament has been equated to thematic detail) combined with the materials. It looks like a giant, overdone, plastic toy. But what does that matter? it's all fake! And in the case of Mystic Manor it has been made even more fake with the toonization of Henry Mystic himself. With Cars Land being more the exception, it seems Disney is still not interested in building worlds which view themselves as real. It's still entering elaborate stages, not truly breaking the fourth wall and entering a world.

Both versions of The Haunted Mansion manor and the Phantom Manor were about creating places that felt real. They played on the notion of the haunted house by building something that fits the imagery as we would experience it outside of a Disney® theme park. That is no longer the case. It is now about building something deliberately as a theme park, as a fake that knows it is a fake.

 

[Omnispace]

It is now about building something deliberately as a theme park, as a fake that knows it is a fake.

It's not fake, it's real!! They wrote an elaborate back story to support that notion...!

I have to admit that I agree. While they did a wonderful job creating a truly whimsical mansion, the craziness of such a concoction goes a bit too far. It's the same thing that happened to Tower of Terror -- the shape of the building, (being extra wide at the top), destroys its credibility. I think there is a lot of more subtle architectural cues they could have used for Mystic Manor. Even a fairy "normal" building such as the Winchester House has a wonderful creepy character to it simply because it was expanded in a chaotic fashion. Consider the house they used for Amityville Horror -- just a simple barn roof, central chimney, and the two quarter-round windows were enough to give the building a chilling demonic face!

Perhaps considering the differences in culture in China they had to make their visual cues more elaborate?

 

[Calvin Coolidge]

Both versions of The Haunted Mansion manor and the Phantom Manor were about creating places that felt real. They played on the notion of the haunted house by building something that fits the imagery as we would experience it outside of a Disney® theme park. That is no longer the case. It is now about building something deliberately as a theme park, as a fake that knows it is a fake.

Surely the local sensibilities were considered when they decided to build "Mystic Manor" in Hong Kong in lieu of the Haunted Mansion?

 

[Donald96]

I don't know about you guys but to me it looks a little like:

 

[lazyboy97o]

Surely the local sensibilities were considered when they decided to build "Mystic Manor" in Hong Kong in lieu of the Haunted Mansion?

My criticism is not limited to Hong Kong Disneyland, so I do not think it falls under cultural differences.

 

[MarkTwain]

Surely the local sensibilities were considered when they decided to build "Mystic Manor" in Hong Kong in lieu of the Haunted Mansion?

They were, in fact. From what I've heard the idea of the dead coming back to life (re:ghosts) was considered disrespectful in a society that prizes heritage and ancestry, so they chose instead to use cursed artifacts and magic as the source for the house's supernatural activity.

 

[lazyboy97o]

They were, in fact. From what I've heard the idea of the dead coming back to life (re:ghosts) was considered disrespectful in a society that prizes heritage and ancestry, so they chose instead to use cursed artifacts and magic as the source for the house's supernatural activity.

Hong Kong Disneyland also has a good number of visitors from the Mainland, which has raised its own set of issues of culture clash. The People's Republic is a strictly atheist state and changes to the story also likely reflected a desire not to get The Walt Disney Company, which is wholly paying for Mystic Manor, into the poor graces of the Central Government while trying to move forward with Shanghai Disneyland.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

This is spooky cool. (Trying to create a decent segway to a "Tomorrowland's technology" post.) This prototype phone has a transparent double sided touch screen!