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

[KevinYee]

Eddie, do you have a feeling for how designers and Imagineers feel about "co-creating" a theme with the fans? I'm thinking here of the new Haunted Mansion queue (MK), where the ghost names (Ezra, Phineas, Gus) are on display as tombstones, despite the fact that for decades the ghosts had no official names - it was kind of fan created.


And even more subtly, the new queue includes a "wedding ring" buried in the cement, an intentional tribute to an unintentional "wedding ring" at the exit corridor (the original was just an old queue pole remnant, but fans created a storyline for it). [note: for those seeking it, it's on the other side of the wall behind the Dread family]. The new tribute to the fan mythology implies a kind of co-creation with the fans. Do you think most designers would welcome that these days? Or even consciously aim at that? Are "these days" different from, say, 25 years ago in the industry? (I'm guessing the Internet has helped flatten the curve so that designers have a direct line to what the customers want and think)

 

[jt04]

I don't speak JT-ese. What is DES? What are you talking about?





I don't ignore anyone here, let alone when they spout misinformation or play fast and loose with reality!

Well except to when it comes to talking about props from the AC and Hong Kong. :lol:

DES = Disney Entitlement Syndrome

 

[jt04]

Eddie, do you have a feeling for how designers and Imagineers feel about "co-creating" a theme with the fans? I'm thinking here of the new Haunted Mansion queue (MK), where the ghost names (Ezra, Phineas, Gus) are on display as tombstones, despite the fact that for decades the ghosts had no official names - it was kind of fan created.


And even more subtly, the new queue includes a "wedding ring" buried in the cement, an intentional tribute to an unintentional "wedding ring" at the exit corridor (the original was just an old queue pole remnant, but fans created a storyline for it). [note: for those seeking it, it's on the other side of the wall behind the Dread family]. The new tribute to the fan mythology implies a kind of co-creation with the fans. Do you think most designers would welcome that these days? Or even consciously aim at that? Are "these days" different from, say, 25 years ago in the industry? (I'm guessing the Internet has helped flatten the curve so that designers have a direct line to what the customers want and think)

Excellent find! First I have heard of this. Thanks for the information.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Eddie, do you have a feeling for how designers and Imagineers feel about "co-creating" a theme with the fans? I'm thinking here of the new Haunted Mansion queue (MK), where the ghost names (Ezra, Phineas, Gus) are on display as tombstones, despite the fact that for decades the ghosts had no official names - it was kind of fan created.


And even more subtly, the new queue includes a "wedding ring" buried in the cement, an intentional tribute to an unintentional "wedding ring" at the exit corridor (the original was just an old queue pole remnant, but fans created a storyline for it). [note: for those seeking it, it's on the other side of the wall behind the Dread family]. The new tribute to the fan mythology implies a kind of co-creation with the fans. Do you think most designers would welcome that these days? Or even consciously aim at that? Are "these days" different from, say, 25 years ago in the industry? (I'm guessing the Internet has helped flatten the curve so that designers have a direct line to what the customers want and think)

I think it's fine, as it rewards your close inspection, but I bet the "corporation" may not realize that this is happening. "Co-creation" even in the most innocent sense is dangerous from a legal perspective. Copyright law is murky these days and especially on the internet. Paranoid? yeah.

I think it's ok if it does not go beyond what was created in the ride. In my day, you could not adopt fan created properties (anything from an unsolicited source) as "they" (the co-creators) can come back and lay financial claim to those things later based on how much the fans have embellished and if the company used those embellishments from the fans in redefining the character. Let's say someone on a website created Ezra unique from what is in the ride and it becomes a merch phenom later based on the fan story ("Got Ezra?") and then they come back for some money from Disney. They'd rather pay you off and avoid any later claim, so usually they avoid anything that comes in organically from a place they cannot quantify. The Laffite megatheme thing which is now in the park came from me more or less while I was there and based on existing elements. They own that. If someone names the ghost and publishes a story that was not in the ride, then they can lay claim to that aspect if Disney uses it, like they did with Pirates. (www.disneylawsuit.com)

It is murky at best and even if they don't really have the rights, it becomes something I'd imagine they'd avoid.

 

[redshoesrock]

Eddie, any chance you could share your thoughts with us on a particular topic? There's a bit of a brouhaha going on in the General Discussion forum (I know, can you believe it? On the Internet of all places!) regarding Michael Eisner and his legacy with Disney:

General Discussion - Disney not following their Ten Commandments?
General Discussion - Is the reign of Michael Eisner under appreciated?

To paraphrase the discussion should you not want to read the threads, there are some who feel that Eisner's positives far outweigh anything negative he did and that he should be considered as the man who single-handedly saved the company through ideas like releasing the film library onto video and purchasing ABC, leaving Disney far better than when he found it.

Others feel that Eisner is directly responsible for instituting the corporate culture of banking on the Disney name forgoing quality to chase short-term profits, ultimately tarnishing the company over the long-term and moving the company away from its core values instituted by the founder while alienating many creative types through his attitude and personality.

As someone who worked under Eisner, I would love to hear your thoughts.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think it's fine, as it rewards your close inspection, but I bet the "corporation" may not realize that this is happening. "Co-creation" even in the most innocent sense is dangerous from a legal perspective. Copyright law is murky these days and especially on the internet. Paranoid? yeah.

I think it's ok if it does not go beyond what was created in the ride. In my day, you could not adopt fan created properties (anything from an unsolicited source) as "they" (the co-creators) can come back and lay financial claim to those things later based on how much the fans have embellished and if the company used those embellishments from the fans in redefining the character. Let's say someone on a website created Ezra unique from what is in the ride and it becomes a merch phenom later based on the fan story ("Got Ezra?") and then they come back for some money from Disney. They'd rather pay you off and avoid any later claim, so usually they avoid anything that comes in organically from a place they cannot quantify. The Laffite megatheme thing which is now in the park came from me more or less while I was there and based on existing elements. They own that. If someone names the ghost and publishes a story that was not in the ride, then they can lay claim to that aspect if Disney uses it, like they did with Pirates. (www.disneylawsuit.com)

It is murky at best and even if they don't really have the rights, it becomes something I'd imagine they'd avoid.

This is why I kind of dislike "Armchair Imagineering". Some great ideas do get posted by people, but if somebody inside Disney was having similar thoughts that post also pretty much kills any chances of the idea becoming reality.

 

[flavious27]

This is why I kind of dislike "Armchair Imagineering". Some great ideas do get posted by people, but if somebody inside Disney was having similar thoughts that post also pretty much kills any chances of the idea becoming reality.

I guess this would be a better question for Eddie.

How would disney and disney legal approach using an idea that someone posted on the public domain so that they do not have another pirates lawsuit. It is speculated that disney uses fan forums to gauge reactions to what is happening in the parks, would they use the forums for ride ideas?

 

[jt04]

This is why I kind of dislike "Armchair Imagineering". Some great ideas do get posted by people, but if somebody inside Disney was having similar thoughts that post also pretty much kills any chances of the idea becoming reality.

I don't think this is accurate or nothing would ever get built. I think it only applies to ideas actually submitted to TWDC or any other creative firm.

 

[jt04]

Hey Eddie, have you seen this video?

http://www.youtube.com/spacexchannel#p/c/F0D3A9748DC5E42D/8/DxjJgGn-7EU

I feel like I have been in that spacecraft. :animwink:

I wonder how many future space travelers have been or will be inspired by your creation at Epcot?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

I guess this would be a better question for Eddie.

How would disney and disney legal approach using an idea that someone posted on the public domain so that they do not have another pirates lawsuit. It is speculated that disney uses fan forums to gauge reactions to what is happening in the parks, would they use the forums for ride ideas?

Tricky. It used to be if you posting an unprotected idea, you are basically releasing it to the world. It's open season. Like blabbing it in a cafe or something. IP law today is not so cut and dry, and so that's why I don't want to read or hear any ideas as it can put me in a situation as a creative I don't want to be in. Usually the Disney things I read have been suggested internally, so you'd have written backup to show that you did something earlier. But ownership of ideas without copyright is being redefined.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Eddie, any chance you could share your thoughts with us on a particular topic? There's a bit of a brouhaha going on in the General Discussion forum (I know, can you believe it? On the Internet of all places!) regarding Michael Eisner and his legacy with Disney:

General Discussion - Disney not following their Ten Commandments?
General Discussion - Is the reign of Michael Eisner under appreciated?

To paraphrase the discussion should you not want to read the threads, there are some who feel that Eisner's positives far outweigh anything negative he did and that he should be considered as the man who single-handedly saved the company through ideas like releasing the film library onto video and purchasing ABC, leaving Disney far better than when he found it.

Others feel that Eisner is directly responsible for instituting the corporate culture of banking on the Disney name forgoing quality to chase short-term profits, ultimately tarnishing the company over the long-term and moving the company away from its core values instituted by the founder while alienating many creative types through his attitude and personality.

As someone who worked under Eisner, I would love to hear your thoughts.

I'll start by saying I know Michael Eisner, like him and respect him. He is one of the few CEO types that is creative and has a good story instinct. Having said that, all creatives including me have dumb ideas from time to time. So did Michael. Frank was the opposing voice to balance his impulsive nature. I agree with both sides of the argument as the evidence bears out both sides.

There was a rise and fall, but don't forget Katsenberg. Jeffrey helped bring back Animation from the brink with movies that are now part of a renaissance. They were a threesome. I think the rise was bigger than the fall and DLP was the beginning of the end. The bullish attitude pretty much died with the failure of the park to meet expectations and the bearish culture began to make them circle the fiscal wagons. Maximize the brand. They got cautious and exploitive and with Frank gone, Michael had to take things on pretty much alone. He really wanted to sit in Walt's chair on sunday nights and did a good job of never trying to compete with Walt, but to be a friendly relative, a fan of sorts.

He was brought in to grow Disney, not replicate it, and he did. the VHS revolution was perfect timing for that. Some of what he did was juicing the low hanging fruit, other efforts like DAK or DLP and MGM were bolder risks. The alternative to him coming in was dismemberment and Roy saved the company by tapping him and Frank. Eventually Michael felt threatened by Roy and tried to remove him, but you all know the politics.

BTW- I'm prejudiced. I loved working for Michael and Frank. They wrote many personal thank yous to the Imagineers, or would call at home to say they like something! Or cross a dining room to come over to say hello to your family. Michael wanted to be one of the first to come to Rivera. We were not big shots, but were treated better than expected and always felt appreciated. Not to say that when they hated an idea you knew it. But they loved a great show.

Funny story. You never knew exactly what he thought. He once introduced me to Harvey Weinstein as the "Francis Ford Coppola of design". I never knew just what he meant by that as Coppola was somewhat of an eccentric "rogue" director who was known to go WAY over budget. Oh well.. DLP will always haunt me!

 

[kcnole]

I've always felt that Eisner has a much undeserved rap. There were definitely two sides to him. The first half of his career was amazing, the second half not so much. However there were a number of reasons for the fall. The death of Frank, the issues with Katzenberg, his paranoia which began to arise after his heart attack, etc... I think he did enough great things to be remembered as an above average leader. His fall should just prove that no man is an island unto themselves and without the proper team, and with too much ego, anyone can fall no matter how great they were.

 

[flavious27]

Tricky. It used to be if you posting an unprotected idea, you are basically releasing it to the world. It's open season. Like blabbing it in a cafe or something. IP law today is not so cut and dry, and so that's why I don't want to read or hear any ideas as it can put me in a situation as a creative I don't want to be in. Usually the Disney things I read have been suggested internally, so you'd have written backup to show that you did something earlier. But ownership of ideas without copyright is being redefined.

Which is part of the problem I think exists for WDI today. Even if an imagineer lives in a bubble at wdi, someone can come up with an idea before you, and the jury will conclude that somehow that imagineer stole the idea. Then there would be the problems for sites like wdwmagic in who really owns the content on the forums and if the webmaster can let disney use those ideas without any consequences.

I understand that anything that I mention here is in the public domain and anyone can use it as they see fit. It is also that I do not have the financial means to ever build or produce what I listen as ideas, Disney building it is satisfaction enough for me. I really hope that the guests that post ideas here have the same view that I do, disney will make money off an idea posted here but none of us could make it happen on our own.

 

[flavious27]

I've always felt that Eisner has a much undeserved rap. There were definitely two sides to him. The first half of his career was amazing, the second half not so much. However there were a number of reasons for the fall. The death of Frank, the issues with Katzenberg, his paranoia which began to arise after his heart attack, etc... I think he did enough great things to be remembered as an above average leader. His fall should just prove that no man is an island unto themselves and without the proper team, and with too much ego, anyone can fall no matter how great they were.

We should not forget why Roy Jr pushed for Eisner to be installed as CEO and what he was about to accomplish. I don't think we can forget the positives that he brought to the company. Unfortunately the reasons why Roy Jr removed him are always going to overshadow his tenure at disney co. His tenure does serve to show what will have the shareholders and guests revolt. I look at his time the same that we look at George HW Bush's term in office, he did some good but ultimately his faults doomed him and the view generations have of him.

 

[ptaylor]

I'll start by saying I know Michael Eisner, like him and respect him. He is one of the few CEO types that is creative and has a good story instinct. Having said that, all creatives including me have dumb ideas from time to time. So did Michael. Frank was the opposing voice to balance his impulsive nature. I agree with both sides of the argument as the evidence bears out both sides.

There was a rise and fall, but don't forget Katsenberg. Jeffrey helped bring back Animation from the brink with movies that are now part of a renaissance. They were a threesome. I think the rise was bigger than the fall and DLP was the beginning of the end. The bullish attitude pretty much died with the failure of the park to meet expectations and the bearish culture began to make them circle the fiscal wagons. Maximize the brand. They got cautious and exploitive and with Frank gone, Michael had to take things on pretty much alone. He really wanted to sit in Walt's chair on sunday nights and did a good job of never trying to compete with Walt, but to be a friendly relative, a fan of sorts.

He was brought in to grow Disney, not replicate it, and he did. the VHS revolution was perfect timing for that. Some of what he did was juicing the low hanging fruit, other efforts like DAK or DLP and MGM were bolder risks. The alternative to him coming in was dismemberment and Roy saved the company by tapping him and Frank. Eventually Michael felt threatened by Roy and tried to remove him, but you all know the politics.

BTW- I'm prejudiced. I loved working for Michael and Frank. They wrote many personal thank yous to the Imagineers, or would call at home to say they like something! Or cross a dining room to come over to say hello to your family. Michael wanted to be one of the first to come to Rivera. We were not big shots, but were treated better than expected and always felt appreciated. Not to say that when they hated an idea you knew it. But they loved a great show.

Funny story. You never knew exactly what he thought. He once introduced me to Harvey Weinstein as the "Francis Ford Coppola of design". I never knew just what he meant by that as Coppola was somewhat of an eccentric "rogue" director who was known to go WAY over budget. Oh well.. DLP will always haunt me!

Great story, thanks Eddie - very interesting read.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Pass the Salt...

Sometimes we tend to associate Walt with our own unattainable level of perfection when it comes to theme and design. Any deviation of theme is something Walt would have never allowed or thrown a fit over. "WDI is slipping and Walt's standards are being betrayed", etc. I'm sure there are instances where this is true, but on another site I saw this image of him and it made me smile.

http://forums.wdwmagic.com/album.php?albumid=1388

Notice him in his 1890 extremely detailed Plaza Inn Restaurant with modern 1960's chrome salt and pepper shakers. They do make fake crystal ones that are cheap, so this is no excuse, but to me this is an obvious cheese moment. I know this is a HUGE knit pick, but given the size of the pedestal he's on was worth pointing out.

Here's a recent image and you can see how Show Quality and the Foods group work together to have period neutral looking salt and pepper, fancy looking silverware, detailed china, and the vase on the table. Great job!
http://www.dottedroute.com/wp-content/gallery/disneyland/028.jpg

In designing restaurants, the tabletop and flatware are a big part of the design as you interact with those pieces and they are referenced against the space. I know PI is a buffeteria, but in Walt's day he was reinventing that idea too. When you spend millions on tassles, leaded glass and drapes, why would you blow off the table? Stumbling at the finish line. I learned this by working with our Chef on Rivera who insisted on countless mockups of the tabletop, china and anything you look at or touch. The color and feel of the tabletop had to work with the food and plate color. Just an observation. Great image just the same.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

SHDL Castle revealed, kind of..

Here's an article showing the art of the new SHDL Castle.

http://progresscityusa.com/

Pretty darn impressive in scope and similar in some ways to WDW MK. You really can't judge it in these abstract concept pieces because you cannot see the detail and the scale in relation to anything else. So it's a glimpse. I thought it was interesting that they chose the same artistic angle as Herb Ryman. That makes it hard for any artist, as at least in technique it will invite comparison to his masterpiece. That aside, I have high hopes for the new Castle as it could be really amazing, especially if something is inside.

The painting makes me curious, although Herb Ryman by far is the Jedi master of "specifically vague".

 

[lazyboy97o]

Here's an article showing the art of the new SHDL Castle.

http://progresscityusa.com/

Pretty darn impressive in scope and similar in some ways to WDW MK. You really can't judge it in these abstract concept pieces because you cannot see the detail and the scale in relation to anything else. So it's a glimpse. I thought it was interesting that they chose the same artistic angle as Herb Ryman. That makes it hard for any artist, as at least in technique it will invite comparison to his masterpiece. That aside, I have high hopes for the new Castle as it could be really amazing, especially if something is inside.

The painting makes me curious, although Herb Ryman by far is the Jedi master of "specifically vague".

I am starting to think the references to past Imagineers and works is getting a little out of hand. Instead of trying to mimic people like Herb Ryman, why not just let the talents of another artist shine? To me the intent seems to be to invoke feelings and associations with Walt Disney World, but that sort of betrays the notion that this is something big, new and different.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

I am starting to think the references to past Imagineers and works is getting a little out of hand. Instead of trying to mimic people like Herb Ryman, why not just let the talents of another artist shine? To me the intent seems to be to invoke feelings and associations with Walt Disney World, but that sort of betrays the notion that this is something big, new and different.

I agree. That's what confused me.

"You can't top Pigs with Pigs". -Walt Disney

 

[HBG2]

Sometimes we tend to associate Walt with our own unattainable level of perfection when it comes to theme and design. Any deviation of theme is something Walt would have never allowed or thrown a fit over. "WDI is slipping and Walt's standards are being betrayed", etc. I'm sure there are instances where this is true, but on another site I saw this image of him and it made me smile.

http://forums.wdwmagic.com/album.php?albumid=1388

Notice him in his 1890 extremely detailed Plaza Inn Restaurant with modern 1960's chrome salt and pepper shakers. They do make fake crystal ones that are cheap, so this is no excuse, but to me this is an obvious cheese moment. I know this is a HUGE knit pick, but given the size of the pedestal he's on was worth pointing out.

Here's a recent image and you can see how Show Quality and the Foods group work together to have period neutral looking salt and pepper, fancy looking silverware, detailed china, and the vase on the table. Great job!
http://www.dottedroute.com/wp-content/gallery/disneyland/028.jpg

In designing restaurants, the tabletop and flatware are a big part of the design as you interact with those pieces and they are referenced against the space. I know PI is a buffeteria, but in Walt's day he was reinventing that idea too. When you spend millions on tassles, leaded glass and drapes, why would you blow off the table? Stumbling at the finish line. I learned this by working with our Chef on Rivera who insisted on countless mockups of the tabletop, china and anything you look at or touch. The color and feel of the tabletop had to work with the food and plate color. Just an observation. Great image just the same.

Heh. It wasn't always something as small as salt and pepper shakers, either. I've seen more than one pic from the 50's with a modern metal rowboat, complete with outboard motor, parked insouciantly in Fowler's Harbor. That's good old unpredictable reality for you. Seems like Walt was both fussier and less fussy about seamless theming than we are today.

EDIT. Yeah, here they are. Actually, early 60's for some of them.