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

[Eddie Sotto]

Miceage has a somewhat interesting recount of the history of DL Adventureland, although there are lots of things left out. Worth checking out if you are unfamiliar.

http://micechat.com/blogs/samland/3190-exploring-more-wilds-adventureland-samland.html

 

[LuvtheGoof]

Miceage has a somewhat interesting recount of the history of DL Adventureland, although there are lots of things left out. Worth checking out if you are unfamiliar.

Eddie, thanks for the link. Good read! Since my wife and I will be making our first visit next May (already reserved our week at the Grand Californian!), I have been reading up on some of the backstories. I wish there was a book that detailed all of these.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Superstar Limo

In case you never got to go on it, here's an expose of the infamous "Superstar Limo" ride at DCA.

http://www.yesterland.com/superstarlimo.html

They thought major stars would want to be in the ride for free, and instead they all wanted lots of money, so they ended up doing ABC (Drew Carey, Regis) celebs to be in the ride that they could negotiate with. A poor execution didn't help. I will get reamed for this, but I liked the idea of it when it was first pitched. Doing a ride where you see funny satirical versions of celebes sounded great. I still think that the execution of the celebrities in caricature is so poor and the fact that nothing does anything, killed what could have been a fun idea. We met with a company called "Spitting Image" in England and they knew how to really go over the line and make something laugh out loud funny. Either you make the celebs look exactly perfect like a Wax Museum, or you make outrageous fun of them and make the ride insane, but you can't do something that is neither funny or compelling. Look at these guys work and imagine how funny this could have been.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDl-g2-u6-E&feature=related

 

[HMF]

In case you never got to go on it, here's an expose of the infamous "Superstar Limo" ride at DCA.

http://www.yesterland.com/superstarlimo.html

They thought major stars would want to be in the ride for free, and instead they all wanted lots of money, so they ended up doing ABC (Drew Carey, Regis) celebs to be in the ride that they could negotiate with. A poor execution didn't help. I will get reamed for this, but I liked the idea of it when it was first pitched. Doing a ride where you see funny satirical versions of celebes sounded great. I still think that the execution of the celebrities in caricature is so poor and the fact that nothing does anything, killed what could have been a fun idea. We met with a company called "Spitting Image" in England and they knew how to really go over the line and make something laugh out loud funny. Either you make the celebs look exactly perfect like a Wax Museum, or you make outrageous fun of them and make the ride insane, but you can't do something that is neither funny or compelling. Look at these guys work and imagine how funny this could have been.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDl-g2-u6-E&feature=related

The only problem is that you would have to revise it every 10 years or so to keep it relevant . Most of the Disney Parks are designed to transport you to other places, Having celebrities in the Attractions tends to tear you out of that and ground you back in the real world. I understand that the idea (or lack thereof) for DCA was "California Today"
but we can see how that failed spectacularly. I have seen one video of a panel with Kevin Rafferty talking about SSL as though it was a painful memory. Not to mention my understanding that the original concept for SSL was you were a celebrity trying to flee from the press which was changed in the Summer of 1997 for obvious reasons.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

The only problem is that you would have to revise it every 10 years or so to keep it relevant . Most of the Disney Parks are designed to transport you to other places, Having celebrities in the Attractions tends to tear you out of that and ground you back in the real world. I understand that the idea (or lack thereof) for DCA was "California Today"
but we can see how that failed spectacularly. I have seen one video of a panel with Kevin Rafferty talking about SSL as though it was a painful memory. Not to mention my understanding that the original concept for SSL was you were a celebrity trying to flee from the press which was changed in the Summer of 1997 for obvious reasons.

Depending on how legendary the stars were you'd probably want to update them. Tom Cruise and MJ could last along time, Drew Carey can't. Taking the thrill out of the ride was a huge loss. Splash Mountain without the drops would be pretty dull too. DCA was trying to chart new creative territory and in it's having more of an "edge", this seemed like a good idea, but it didn't go far enough to be entertaining on any level. It could have been Disney's Universal toned park. But why have one? One reason is that the company overall has moved into a direction that produces entertainment that is further and further from it's core and there are less places to put those properties. Marvel as an example. You'd hate to shoehorn heartless characters into a Magic Kingdom. I bring this up as we have been discussing failures, taking risks, and how execution of an idea can kill or make something. There are lessons in SSL for sure, and beyond it in the whole tone and assumptions of the DCA park itself.

I do want to see Disney grow beyond it's own boundaries as to a degree it is trapped in it's own cliches. Having said that, you can't sacrifice the core values of the brand and why people love it in the process of trying new things. A tough game at best.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Required reading.

This article by Marty Sklar on the design and planning of WDW should give you all an insight to why things are the way they are. Even the "goofs" as Marty puts it that created the problems we still endure today. the history of Space Mountain is also included. Lots of insider stuff from the ultimate insider, Marty. He also tells us about how he had to get Imagineer Herb Ryman to finish the Castle painting.

http://www.iaapa.org/industry/funworld/2011/oct/features/MagicKingdom/index.asp

Let me know your thoughts...I learned a lot from the article too!

 

[HMF]

Depending on how legendary the stars were you'd probably want to update them. Tom Cruise and MJ could last along time, Drew Carey can't. Taking the thrill out of the ride was a huge loss. Splash Mountain without the drops would be pretty dull too. DCA was trying to chart new creative territory and in it's having more of an "edge", this seemed like a good idea, but it didn't go far enough to be entertaining on any level. It could have been Disney's Universal toned park. But why have one? One reason is that the company overall has moved into a direction that produces entertainment that is further and further from it's core and there are less places to put those properties. Marvel as an example. You'd hate to shoehorn heartless characters into a Magic Kingdom. I bring this up as we have been discussing failures, taking risks, and how execution of an idea can kill or make something. There are lessons in SSL for sure, and beyond it in the whole tone and assumptions of the DCA park itself.

I do want to see Disney grow beyond it's own boundaries as to a degree it is trapped in it's own cliches. Having said that, you can't sacrifice the core values of the brand and why people love it in the process of trying new things. A tough game at best.

I strongly agree with your view of brand cliches. For example most Disney shows and parades are basically a combination of the following

"Random Disney Show or Parade Name generator"

1st word
*Celebrate
*Parade
*Tapestry
*Dream

2nd word
*of
*with

3rd word
*Dreams
*Magic
*Wonder
*Fantasy
*Dreams come true
or some other variation thereof

 

[HMF]

This article by Marty Sklar on the design and planning of WDW should give you all an insight to why things are the way they are. Even the "goofs" as Marty puts it that created the problems we still endure today. the history of Space Mountain is also included. Lots of insider stuff from the ultimate insider, Marty. He also tells us about how he had to get Imagineer Herb Ryman to finish the Castle painting.

http://www.iaapa.org/industry/funworld/2011/oct/features/MagicKingdom/index.asp

Let me know your thoughts...I learned a lot from the article too!

His re-telling of the Space Mountain/RCA story is almost word-for-word identical to his foreword to the book "The Disney Mountains".

 

[ChrisFL]

I strongly agree with your view of brand cliches. For example most Disney shows and parades are basically a combination of the following

"Random Disney Show or Parade Name generator"

1st word
*Celebrate
*Parade
*Tapestry
*Dream

2nd word
*of
*with

3rd word
*Dreams
*Magic
*Wonder
*Fantasy
*Dreams come true
or some other variation thereof

Yep, I was casually considering making a little "slot machine" of Disney Parade names...to help their decision making process easier

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Yep, I was casually considering making a little "slot machine" of Disney Parade names...to help their decision making process easier

I dreamed this announcement last night...

Ladies and Gentlemen boys and girls..to honor 40 happy years of Main Street's 35 foot tall Sound-tacularistically Street-a-docious "Sound and Light" poles....Eveready, Anacin, Mattel, Ban Roll-on, Nutrasweet and Colgate whitening formula present....

Tinker Bell's "Glamtazmic!", the most pixie dusted, glitz encrusted, Dwarf rappin', Yeti snappin', lip syncin', budget shrinkin', span-dex'n, glostick flexin', synergistic-fragilgistic, Prin-cess-sational, confetti spewin', no clue n', magical musical memories of your name on a brick Parade"!

 

[Daannzzz]

That reminds me of readin a William S. Burroughs novel.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

That reminds me of readin a William S. Burroughs novel.

I'll take that as a compliment.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

City of Robots.

Here's a link to a critical essay that questions our cultural motives as to theme parks and how we may prefer the "artificial" worlds of Disneyland to the "real world" of nature itself. "The City of Robots" raises interesting questions and something this thread may enjoy discussing. Your thoughts are always welcomed!

http://books.google.com/books?id=bM...page&q=umberto eco the city of robots&f=false

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Another book.

This one is about the story of TDL and how American themes work (or not) in Japan. Free to read on Google books.

http://books.google.com/books?id=7J...&resnum=6&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

[RandySavage]

Here's a link to a critical essay that questions our cultural motives as to theme parks and how we may prefer the "artificial" worlds of Disneyland to the "real world" of nature itself. "The City of Robots" raises interesting questions and something this thread may enjoy discussing. Your thoughts are always welcomed!

This essay reminded me of two unmentioned "fake" places that were recreated with Rockefeller money. The Cloisters near Manhattan and Colonial Williamsburg:

While fake, both were very artfully rendered and are valuable cultural & educational assets.

Disney has counterparts to these two places:

When done at the highest level of execution, any representational reproduction has great value, particularly if the real thing upon which it is based no longer exists or has been compromised by the march of time & money.

A couple years ago, I was at the North Rim of the Grand Canyon for the first time and the atmosphere (the families, the Frontierland-like wooden signage & railing) made me think of Disney. The view was a little wider:

If done right, I think theme parks can have serious artistic, cultural & educational value. I think they lose tremendous value if they are turned into marketing malls, intended to primarily sell toys & movies.

 

[EPCOTCenterLover]

^^ Agree! THat's why I have always preferred Walt's original vision for Disneyland, keeping toons out of other lands but in Fantasyland.

 

[ChrisFL]

Here's a link to a critical essay that questions our cultural motives as to theme parks and how we may prefer the "artificial" worlds of Disneyland to the "real world" of nature itself. "The City of Robots" raises interesting questions and something this thread may enjoy discussing. Your thoughts are always welcomed!

http://books.google.com/books?id=bM...page&q=umberto eco the city of robots&f=false

That discussion of the audio-animatronics reminds me of the Uncanny Valley....surprisingly I don't recall ever hearing people creeped out as much by Disney figures as other recent human-like figures...where the question of uncanny valley comes into play.

Was there even such a phrase back when the first Lincoln or Pirates figures were being created?

 

[ScoutN]

The Cloisters near Manhattan and Colonial Williamsburg:

A very ground up recreation at that.

Although I would relate The Governor's Palace to resemble The America Pavilion in WS. I have the luxury of visiting Colonial Williamsburg once every few weeks as it is pretty much my home. Right out of High School I ventured to Florida for a while to clear my head before beginning engineering school. Whenever I was homesick I always knew I could head over to EPCOT to The American Pavilion and feel like I was right back home and in Williamsburg.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

A very ground up recreation at that.

Although I would relate The Governor's Palace to resemble The America Pavilion in WS. I have the luxury of visiting Colonial Williamsburg once every few weeks as it is pretty much my home. Right out of High School I ventured to Florida for a while to clear my head before beginning engineering school. Whenever I was homesick I always knew I could head over to EPCOT to The American Pavilion and feel like I was right back home and in Williamsburg.

Very interesting. Do you know of Halsey Minor?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

This essay reminded me of two unmentioned "fake" places that were recreated with Rockefeller money. The Cloisters near Manhattan and Colonial Williamsburg:

While fake, both were very artfully rendered and are valuable cultural & educational assets.

Disney has counterparts to these two places:

When done at the highest level of execution, any representational reproduction has great value, particularly if the real thing upon which it is based no longer exists or has been compromised by the march of time & money.

A couple years ago, I was at the North Rim of the Grand Canyon for the first time and the atmosphere (the families, the Frontierland-like wooden signage & railing) made me think of Disney. The view was a little wider:

If done right, I think theme parks can have serious artistic, cultural & educational value. I think they lose tremendous value if they are turned into marketing malls, intended to primarily sell toys & movies.

I find this discussion of these heavily "restored" places very interesting. What is authentic? It comes down to why we visit them and how they make us feel. Is it to learn or literally "touch" the past? Does it matter if it's real or not?

I had a heated scission with another Imagineer about just this topic. My friend felt strongly that it did not matter if you lied about the artifacts we were going to display (Statue of Liberty MSUSA) as it does not really matter. The guest will never know and the result to the guest will be the same as if it were real. I had to label things as replicas because I just could bring myself to do that. There is a truth in that most do not know that these historic places have little left of their original materials and most has been replaced. They resonate with them as if they are all original. To me, so much of the credibility is that something actually did happen in that historic location and it was restored as it has been shown. Most people assume to a greater or lesser degree that these places are not pristine for 200 years without upkeep. Truth is far more appealing than lying about the artifacts.