Eddie Sotto's take on the current state of the parks

[Eddie Sotto]

Eddie....Any thoughts on SM?:wave:

Space Mountain? It's all left turns till the the end where you turn right and switchback once.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

Space Mountain? It's all left turns till the the end where you turn right and switchback once.

I meant ours, and the news on the refurb.:lookaroun:lol:

 

[HMF]

I meant ours, and the news on the refurb.:lookaroun:lol:

He is more familiar with Disneyland so he really can't say much about ours' I think.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

I meant ours, and the news on the refurb.:lookaroun:lol:

Oh. Sorry about that. I don't get out to WDW much and there has not been too much substantial to look at online unless you want to point something my way. Didn't they vacuum throughout?

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

Oh. Sorry about that. I don't get out to WDW much and there has not been too much substantial to look at online unless you want to point something my way. Didn't they vacuum throughout?

:lol: Essentially, which is really a shame about the whole matter.

The new queue and the post show is quite nice, though, some good ol' fashioned WDI Set building.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

:lol: Essentially, which is really a shame about the whole matter.

The new queue and the post show is quite nice, though, some good ol' fashioned WDI Set building.

Well good. An improvement. I was involved in taking the old sets and plussing them into being more of a Fedex inspired "teleportation of packages" type story when they came aboard to sponsor the show.

 

[HMF]

Well good. An improvement.

A very minor improvement.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

Well good. An improvement. I was involved in taking the old sets and plussing them into being more of a Fedex inspired "teleportation of packages" type story when they came aboard to sponsor the show.

:lol: Awesome. I think you'll like what they have done with your work, then.

 

[wishesjake]

Eddie, I have some observations about some of the thoughts behind the designs of certain areas. I realize you may not have worked on them, but maybe you can enlighten on the design principles on the west side of the Magic Kingdom, namely Adventureland and Frontierland. It seems to me that one of the intentions of design in the MK-style park is to make the locale seem to recede off into the infinite. For example, in Adventureland, there is a contrast between civilization (colonial huts, pirate forts, and tiki rooms both enchanted and not) and the wild. Therefore, it looks as if AL is a real place that could be explored deeper. The same principle applies to Frontierland. Civilization lives directly opposite the Rivers of America and surrounding woodlands that seem like they go on forever. In these examples, WDI has used nature to complete this illusion, but in World Showcase, they have designed the ever receding man-made structures like the Eiffel Tower in France or the Clock towers in the distance in Germany.

Is this the design principle at use or am I completely missing the point?

Also, it seems that the new Fantasyland will have this element of design. Because the forest element will seem to recede off forever.

In contrast, Tommorrowland and Future World do not have this type of stratificational design. It doesn't seem like this is an imagineering misstep, but that it is intentional. Maybe when we are in these clearly fantastic situations we are meant to be completely lost in the world we are in and be decieved that they go on forever. But, in the TL and FW type environments, we are supposed to link our experiences to the real world and how it can make our life better. Of course this brings up a completely different arguement about the intention of TL. It is my opinon that the TL in MK should be fantasy, but that FW should be real life future like you have described so many times. Do you think there should be a difference in TL and FW? And if so, What? Also, what are your thoughts on my thoughts about "receding off into the infinte"?

 

[_Scar]

Eddie, I have some observations about some of the thoughts behind the designs of certain areas. I realize you may not have worked on them, but maybe you can enlighten on the design principles on the west side of the Magic Kingdom, namely Adventureland and Frontierland. It seems to me that one of the intentions of design in the MK-style park is to make the locale seem to recede off into the infinite. For example, in Adventureland, there is a contrast between civilization (colonial huts, pirate forts, and tiki rooms both enchanted and not) and the wild. Therefore, it looks as if AL is a real place that could be explored deeper. The same principle applies to Frontierland. Civilization lives directly opposite the Rivers of America and surrounding woodlands that seem like they go on forever. In these examples, WDI has used nature to complete this illusion, but in World Showcase, they have designed the ever receding man-made structures like the Eiffel Tower in France or the Clock towers in the distance in Germany.

Is this the design principle at use or am I completely missing the point?

Also, it seems that the new Fantasyland will have this element of design. Because the forest element will seem to recede off forever.

In contrast, Tommorrowland and Future World do not have this type of stratificational design. It doesn't seem like this is an imagineering misstep, but that it is intentional. Maybe when we are in these clearly fantastic situations we are meant to be completely lost in the world we are in and be decieved that they go on forever. But, in the TL and FW type environments, we are supposed to link our experiences to the real world and how it can make our life better. Of course this brings up a completely different arguement about the intention of TL. It is my opinon that the TL in MK should be fantasy, but that FW should be real life future like you have described so many times. Do you think there should be a difference in TL and FW? And if so, What? Also, what are your thoughts on my thoughts about "receding off into the infinte"?

Not Eddie but the World Showcase highlights areas of a certain country. They can't fool guests/children into believing they just went from America to Germany in 1 minute and they each go on forever.

In the MK, you enter 4 distinct realms and each are much larger than WS country areas. Much more room to work with.

Another example of these "infinite" areas is Harambe and Anandarpur being their own village in their respective continents and making it appear as we, the park guests, are touring their area. Same can be said with CMM and Dinoland USA, but not to Asia and Africa's extent.

 

[wishesjake]

Not Eddie but the World Showcase highlights areas of a certain country. They can't fool guests/children into believing they just went from America to Germany in 1 minute and they each go on forever.

In the MK, you enter 4 distinct realms and each are much larger than WS country areas. Much more room to work with.

Another example of these "infinite" areas is Harambe and Anandarpur being their own village in their respective continents and making it appear as we, the park guests, are touring their area. Same can be said with CMM and Dinoland USA, but not to Asia and Africa's extent.

I must have worded my statement incorrectly. You are certainly right about WS, it doesn't have the complete immersive experience as being certain areas of MK, but I just meant to draw a correalation between the two because in WS there are manmade structures that exist to deepen the WS pavillion whereas in MK and AK the deepening effects are mostly landscaping and wilderness.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Eddie, I have some observations about some of the thoughts behind the designs of certain areas. I realize you may not have worked on them, but maybe you can enlighten on the design principles on the west side of the Magic Kingdom, namely Adventureland and Frontierland. It seems to me that one of the intentions of design in the MK-style park is to make the locale seem to recede off into the infinite. For example, in Adventureland, there is a contrast between civilization (colonial huts, pirate forts, and tiki rooms both enchanted and not) and the wild. Therefore, it looks as if AL is a real place that could be explored deeper. The same principle applies to Frontierland. Civilization lives directly opposite the Rivers of America and surrounding woodlands that seem like they go on forever. In these examples, WDI has used nature to complete this illusion, but in World Showcase, they have designed the ever receding man-made structures like the Eiffel Tower in France or the Clock towers in the distance in Germany.

Is this the design principle at use or am I completely missing the point?

Also, it seems that the new Fantasyland will have this element of design. Because the forest element will seem to recede off forever.

In contrast, Tommorrowland and Future World do not have this type of stratificational design. It doesn't seem like this is an imagineering misstep, but that it is intentional. Maybe when we are in these clearly fantastic situations we are meant to be completely lost in the world we are in and be decieved that they go on forever. But, in the TL and FW type environments, we are supposed to link our experiences to the real world and how it can make our life better. Of course this brings up a completely different arguement about the intention of TL. It is my opinon that the TL in MK should be fantasy, but that FW should be real life future like you have described so many times. Do you think there should be a difference in TL and FW? And if so, What? Also, what are your thoughts on my thoughts about "receding off into the infinte"?

Wow. What a question. I'll do my best..

The short answer is "yes" because the aesthetic of theme design began with the movies and backlots. Walt once said "trees have no scale", and therefore are good for transitions between lands and as a backdrop to an environment to create immersion. Movie lots used berming with trees and plants to separate their diverse settings from each other, so the same applies in theme parks. As Walt left the trees on the roof of IASW to give an infinite feel to the facade, so the same happens in other areas to add a sense of depth appropriate to the theme.

In DL's 1994 JC Boathouse we wanted nature to slowly "strangle" the structure. We did this by having trees grow right through the roof and by having the building structure angle down into the river to simulate listing and sinking into the bog. Guests see the shoring and propping up of the structure, evidence of fire, repair, snakes in the rafters, and other signs that man barely "exists" in the jungle. the building tells you that we only have a tiny foothold and are truly on the edge of civilization. So that is how nature was used in Adventureland where the jungle has a personality as you are there to explore it.

Frontierland is similar as the trees on the berm provide the lush expanse, but in the close up, Frontierland (BTMRR) can even be more arid and dry. The goals of a land like that are that they are vast enough to challenge you to want to explore them, either by a Canoe or on an TS Island Adventure. The nature there is as "aggressive" as it is in Adventureland.

In a more urban context, the Eiffel Tower in France is a great touch, and so are the reefed masts of docked ships in DL's NOS. They each make their city more magical as you believe there is more out there. In Vegas the "Paris" hotel puts a huge Eiffel Tower right out front and that IMHO works against the magic. I don't think there is any less desire to have fantasy in Tomorrowland, in that is not dependent on trees and distant icons to achieve it's story point. Trees are used in Disneyland to great effect (Autopia) to set off the white ribbons of Peoplemover, but in the case of an other worldy icon like Space Mountain (like the castle has it's own forced perspective to appear mountainous), it needs the sky as a silhouette to make the spires sing.

 

[kcnole]

While speaking on the concept of thematic design you mentioned autopia. I'm curious about the version in WDW. It seems so clearly out of place. We're in the world of tomorrow but are driving gas guzzling cars that don't look futuristic in any shape or form. I'm curious if there was ever discussion when you were with imagineering on how to make this attraction fit into Tomorrowland and if you were tasked with that role, what suggestions would you make?

 

[Buried20KLeague]

Tokyo is not close, but it's not exactly on the moon either. Japan Air Lines, All Nippon Air, Delta, American, United, US Airways, Continental, Korean Air, Singapore, and Air Canada all offer non-stop direct service to Tokyo from many major North American cities. You can find Economy round trip fares around $600, and Premium Economy on Japan Air Lines (which is like domestic First Class seats and service really) for around $1100.

Tokyo is wonderful, and no more expensive to visit than any big American city. If you need to, you can do a week in Tokyo for very cheap and still be very safe and secure and well fed. Tickets to Tokyo Disneyland actually run cheaper than the American parks, surprisingly.

If you want to go to Tokyo, pass up on a visit to WDW or Disneyland and go to Tokyo instead. It's not hard to do really.

Tell that to my 1 year old that would have to deal with the flight. :lol: We made the trip to Tokyo when my wife was pregnant, thinking it'd be difficult to make for quite some time after that. We got gutsy after she was bored... Decided we'd take her to DLP at 5 months. Even THAT flight was wayyyyy too much for her.

But the main point that I wanted to make was that TDL's Pooh's Hunny Hunt could literally be down the street from me and it would be too far! :lol:

 

[wishesjake]

Wow. What a question. I'll do my best..

The short answer is "yes" because the aesthetic of theme design began with the movies and backlots. Walt once said "trees have no scale", and therefore are good for transitions between lands and as a backdrop to an environment to create immersion. Movie lots used berming with trees and plants to separate their diverse settings from each other, so the same applies in theme parks. As Walt left the trees on the roof of IASW to give an infinite feel to the facade, so the same happens in other areas to add a sense of depth appropriate to the theme.

In DL's 1994 JC Boathouse we wanted nature to slowly "strangle" the structure. We did this by having trees grow right through the roof and by having the building structure angle down into the river to simulate listing and sinking into the bog. Guests see the shoring and propping up of the structure, evidence of fire, repair, snakes in the rafters, and other signs that man barely "exists" in the jungle. the building tells you that we only have a tiny foothold and are truly on the edge of civilization. So that is how nature was used in Adventureland where the jungle has a personality as you are there to explore it.

Frontierland is similar as the trees on the berm provide the lush expanse, but in the close up, Frontierland (BTMRR) can even be more arid and dry. The goals of a land like that are that they are vast enough to challenge you to want to explore them, either by a Canoe or on an TS Island Adventure. The nature there is as "aggressive" as it is in Adventureland.

In a more urban context, the Eiffel Tower in France is a great touch, and so are the reefed masts of docked ships in DL's NOS. They each make their city more magical as you believe there is more out there. In Vegas the "Paris" hotel puts a huge Eiffel Tower right out front and that IMHO works against the magic. I don't think there is any less desire to have fantasy in Tomorrowland, in that is not dependent on trees and distant icons to achieve it's story point. Trees are used in Disneyland to great effect (Autopia) to set off the white ribbons of Peoplemover, but in the case of an other worldy icon like Space Mountain (like the castle has it's own forced perspective to appear mountainous), it needs the sky as a silhouette to make the spires sing.

Wow, thanks for the response. It makes some of the principles a lot clearer now. The "stratificational" effect seems to be as valuable a principle in themed design as mise en scene in the cinema.

This brings up another question that I have about the Adventureland redo of '94. It seems that the original AL had more of a colonial feel to it which reflects the attitudes of the times (1955 tiki craze). But, the new DL AL seems to be cut in the same vein as Animal Kingdom (the principle that nature is taking over the area). Basically it's the difference between the idea that we are masters of the jungle and the more modern ideal that we are subservient to nature. My question is, was the move away from colonialism a concious decision or was it just due to the modern sensibilities that modern Imagineers have? Also, why the move away from colonialistic we-are-masters-of-this-domain aesthetic? Because one way to look at it is that a colonialistic ideal of old AL may be more comforting than the new nature-is-dangerous design principle. Of course, the new aesthetic probably seems more dangerous and therefore more "Adventurous."

 

[Eddie Sotto]

While speaking on the concept of thematic design you mentioned autopia. I'm curious about the version in WDW. It seems so clearly out of place. We're in the world of tomorrow but are driving gas guzzling cars that don't look futuristic in any shape or form. I'm curious if there was ever discussion when you were with imagineering on how to make this attraction fit into Tomorrowland and if you were tasked with that role, what suggestions would you make?

There has been electric car talk for years on this with many attempts to change the concept, but I think the sponsor issue of oil companies being involved and the cost of changing over made it too hard. I think the cars in HKDL are electric?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Wow, thanks for the response. It makes some of the principles a lot clearer now. The "stratificational" effect seems to be as valuable a principle in themed design as mise en scene in the cinema.

This brings up another question that I have about the Adventureland redo of '94. It seems that the original AL had more of a colonial feel to it which reflects the attitudes of the times (1955 tiki craze). But, the new DL AL seems to be cut in the same vein as Animal Kingdom (the principle that nature is taking over the area). Basically it's the difference between the idea that we are masters of the jungle and the more modern ideal that we are subservient to nature. My question is, was the move away from colonialism a concious decision or was it just due to the modern sensibilities that modern Imagineers have? Also, why the move away from colonialistic we-are-masters-of-this-domain aesthetic? Because one way to look at it is that a colonialistic ideal of old AL may be more comforting than the new nature-is-dangerous design principle. Of course, the new aesthetic probably seems more dangerous and therefore more "Adventurous."

I kind of disagree with the notion that we left the colonialism. The old victorian Boathouse structure was intended to bring that aspect back as a starting point. The previous queue was a thatched roof structure with a very simple dock. Prior to that it was a boathouse that was British Colonial. We went back to that but time has passed and we are in the 30's so the jungle had taken over to a degree. We use french and english languages on the boathouse ticketing office as well. Our story was that the troops started a postwar tourist business using the old outpost as a base of operations.

 

[Buried20KLeague]

There has been electric car talk for years on this with many attempts to change the concept, but I think the sponsor issue of oil companies being involved and the cost of changing over made it too hard. I think the cars in HKDL are electric?

Yep, they are. I loved their autopia. It was a little funny to hear a speaker make a "futuristic car noise" when you press on the accelorator. :lol:

And it's been a little while, but I'm pretty sure the cars also have sensors on them so that if you get too close to the car in front of you, it shuts itself off for a few seconds. I seem to remember that because the kid in front of me had a tendancy to randomly STOP... Causing me to run up on him. :lookaroun

Unbelievable topiary and gardening work there in the Autopia, too.

 

[Exprcoofto]

I've only gotten to experience DL's and MK's, but from video I can tell HKDL's is really nice. In my College Planning magazine I got from school it has a section about "Cool Job: Imagineering" and it shows Imagineers working on HKDL's Autopia.

Question to Eddie Sotto-

This was brought up in another thread (somewhere lost in a SM thread I think), but anyways, does Imagineering look at your drawing ability? I'm good at rough sketching but nothing to be claimed as "art". I've got the good concept design and I'm good on the computer, but my physical drawing skills are lacking. I eventually want to land a job in Imagineer, but would this create a "Do Not Hire" stamp on me?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

I've only gotten to experience DL's and MK's, but from video I can tell HKDL's is really nice. In my College Planning magazine I got from school it has a section about "Cool Job: Imagineering" and it shows Imagineers working on HKDL's Autopia.

Question to Eddie Sotto-

This was brought up in another thread (somewhere lost in a SM thread I think), but anyways, does Imagineering look at your drawing ability? I'm good at rough sketching but nothing to be claimed as "art". I've got the good concept design and I'm good on the computer, but my physical drawing skills are lacking. I eventually want to land a job in Imagineer, but would this create a "Do Not Hire" stamp on me?

If you are passing yourself off as an artist or designer, yes. Today you may see some who build their art in 3D, so the lines are blurry. Writers and producers are not chosen for their art ability.