epcot changing?

should they change epcot?

  • Total voters
    220
Otterhead

Otterhead

Well-Known Member
OvertheHorizon said:
when Nemo took over The Living Seas all we got was a re-telling of Nemo's story, rather than using the characters from the movie to tell the story of the seas that cover two-thirds of our planet.
Click to expand...
This, I completely agree with. I was hoping for something a little higher-minded than just a Reader's Digest version of the movie plot. Maybe Mr. Ray saying "Try to imagine.... just for a moment...."
 
No Name

No Name

Well-Known Member
Goofyernmost said:
Wow, did some relative of yours build that attraction or what. If it is 4 minutes it is still the shortest slow moving dark ride in WDW. If as you say the track was extended, I'll take your word for that, but, I know the aquarium is no bigger so where did they extend it too? It is a dark ride that relies entirely on projections and took away the original intent of it that was to see the underwater world from the perspective of the sea animals. I could sit in a dark room and watch cartoon projections. Lighten up, I don't believe I just insulted your grandmother or anything. It's a damn theme park short, short dark ride that could have been stretched out simply by slowing it up more, but, that would have required extra staff to wake guests up at the end so they could get off.
Click to expand...

Peter Pan's flight is shorter.

Regardless... your original comment was that the Nemo ride is "the shortest attraction in the history of theme parks." That statement is 100% incorrect. I wondered if you were joking, but you said no, and challenged me to find a shorter ride (for which I found many).

Why are you bringing opinion into this? It doesn't matter one bit how much you or I like or dislike it. That is completely irrelevant. Your original comment was solely about ride length. Ride length is a factual matter, and on that factual matter you were indisputably wrong.

Thank you for at least indirectly acknowledging that.

I hate arguing, but this is not an argument. It's simply a matter of your comment being incorrect. There's no need to dig yourself out of a hole, you can just admit that you were incorrect and we'll move on.
 
Last edited:
RobbinsDad

RobbinsDad

Well-Known Member
JohnD said:
Asking, "Should they change Epcot?" is like a woman asking, "Am I fat?" Your answer will be wrong no matter what. On the one hand, Epcot needs some serious love so change is needed. On the other hand, any change will provoke reactions of steering away from Walt's vision.
Click to expand...
Here's the thing - I'm not happy about it either, but if we have to lose the PCOT, at least keep the E. Throw in as many IPs as you like, but keep the spirit of experimentation alive.
 
Earl Sweatpants

Earl Sweatpants

Well-Known Member
OvertheHorizon said:
In my mind, the problem isn't adding more Disney IP to Epcot. It is ensuring that the IP serves the story of the pavilion rather than repeat the IP's story. If adding a cartoon character will make parents want to bring their children (i.e. make it more family friendly), then fine. But when Nemo took over The Living Seas all we got was a re-telling of Nemo's story, rather than using the characters from the movie to tell the story of the seas that cover two-thirds of our planet.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more. Movie-rides where you just get a condensed version of the film are NOT the solution. I'm for the inclusion of IP to the extent that it helps spur on further entertainment and (dare I say) education in the various respective FW pavilions and world showcases.

I happened to be at DLR yesterday and both Ariel's Adventure and Snow White's Scary Adventure are some of the most disappointing "story" rides ever. SWSA in particular...features it's titular character ONCE throughout the entire ride. How does that make any sense?
 
JohnD

JohnD

Well-Known Member
Earl Sweatpants said:
I couldn't agree more. Movie-rides where you just get a condensed version of the film are NOT the solution. I'm for the inclusion of IP to the extent that it helps spur on further entertainment and (dare I say) education in the various respective FW pavilions and world showcases.

I happened to be at DLR yesterday and both Ariel's Adventure and Snow White's Scary Adventure are some of the most disappointing "story" rides ever. SWSA in particular...features it's titular character ONCE throughout the entire ride. How does that make any sense?
Click to expand...

That's because Snow White was supposed to be from Snow White's point of view. Is "Ariel's Adventure" the same as Under the Sea? In the MK version she is featured more than once. Regardless, most don't like this ride because of its "Book Report" aspect. Frozen Ever After isn't a book report because I agree with your premise in using the IPs to entertain AND inform.
 
Earl Sweatpants

Earl Sweatpants

Well-Known Member
JohnD said:
That's because Snow White was supposed to be from Snow White's point of view. Is "Ariel's Adventure" the same as Under the Sea? In the MK version she is featured more than once. Regardless, most don't like this ride because of its "Book Report" aspect. Frozen Ever After isn't a book report because I agree with your premise in using the IPs to entertain AND inform.
Click to expand...
An actual ride from SW's POV would have to include a period of darkness before the prince comes ;)

I would imagine Ariel's rides are the same across the parks. It just doesn't make sense unless you've already seen the movie. In a backwards way, the rides are like the "movie version" of the books (the actual movies).

Since I haven't actually ridden FEA, I can't comment on it, but from seeing POV videos, it appears to not really tell any story...just little vignettes with familiar characters and some familiar music.
 
Rhinocerous

Rhinocerous

Premium Member
egg said:
Peter Pan's flight is shorter.

Regardless... your original comment was that the Nemo ride is "the shortest attraction in the history of theme parks." That statement is 100% incorrect. I wondered if you were joking, but you said no, and challenged me to find a shorter ride (for which I found many).

Why are you bringing opinion into this? It doesn't matter one bit how much you or I like or dislike it. That is completely irrelevant. Your original comment was solely about ride length. Ride length is a factual matter, and on that factual matter you were indisputably wrong.

Thank you for at least indirectly acknowledging that.

I hate arguing, but this is not an argument. It's simply a matter of your comment being incorrect. There's no need to dig yourself out of a hole, you can just admit that you were incorrect and we'll move on.
Click to expand...
 
Pi on my Cake

Pi on my Cake

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
Yes
Earl Sweatpants said:
An actual ride from SW's POV would have to include a period of darkness before the prince comes ;)

I would imagine Ariel's rides are the same across the parks. It just doesn't make sense unless you've already seen the movie. In a backwards way, the rides are like the "movie version" of the books (the actual movies).

Since I haven't actually ridden FEA, I can't comment on it, but from seeing POV videos, it appears to not really tell any story...just little vignettes with familiar characters and some familiar music.
Click to expand...
Frozen has a story. A simple one, but it does have one. after the events of the film, Arendale decides to throw an annual Summer Snowday Celebration. As part of the festivities, you get to go on a tour of Elsa's I've Castle. So you start in the forest with Olaf and the Trolls setting the scene and the plot, you go up the lift hill to the palace, and see Elsa. Then you leave and see "fire works" above the regular castle. It's simple, but it works. They do just kinda use that plot as an excuse to string together reprises of all their songs.

The only real problems with Frozen are very simple, unexciting environments (the ice palace itself is particularly underwhelming). That makes it feel way more empty than it is and, I believe, where most of the complaints about it being short come from. It's not really short, there's just a lot of empty or underutilized space. The other big problem is its location, but that's been discussed to death.
 
JohnD

JohnD

Well-Known Member
Pionmycake said:
Frozen has a story. A simple one, but it does have one. after the events of the film, Arendale decides to throw an annual Summer Snowday Celebration. As part of the festivities, you get to go on a tour of Elsa's I've Castle. So you start in the forest with Olaf and the Trolls setting the scene and the plot, you go up the lift hill to the palace, and see Elsa. Then you leave and see "fire works" above the regular castle. It's simple, but it works. They do just kinda use that plot as an excuse to string together reprises of all their songs.

The only real problems with Frozen are very simple, unexciting environments (the ice palace itself is particularly underwhelming). That makes it feel way more empty than it is and, I believe, where most of the complaints about it being short come from. It's not really short, there's just a lot of empty or underutilized space. The other big problem is its location, but that's been discussed to death.
Click to expand...

There's only so much you can do with a re-purposed Maelstrom ride.
 
W

willtravel

Well-Known Member
flyerjab said:
I assumed from @marni1971 's subtle hints concerning this transformation that it meant more trees, gardens, etc., as opposed to the overbearing concrete feel of the main entrance and the entire space inbetween Innoventions.
Click to expand...
After being at WDW and all 4 parks last week for a week, personally, I enjoyed all the wide open spaces in Epcot (future world) compared to closed in feel of the other 3 parks. JMO..
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom