Epcot....doomed from the beginning?

[ClemsonTigger]

Regroup and recover

I agree with much of what Tigsmom said about the NY Worlds Fair. I only went twice, but it struck me in the same way as many here describe their first remembered early age visit to WDW. Clearly that is the reason Epcot is my favorite park.

I can't imagine how it would have been at the NYWF with attendance 20% higher. Those inflated numbers were used to justify the construction budget, much as Walt probably would have done. Just think if they cut out 20% of the exhibits...it would be complaints about DCA for the 60's (then again, we had nothing of superior quality to compare it to at the time except Disneyland...but that was in a foreign country :lookaroun )

speck76 Don't get me wrong. I feel Epcot does do many things well. I LOVE both the Flower & Garden and the Food & Wine festivals. They are both very well done, and seem to be very popular. One idea, could more festivals be created? What about an International Art Festival, or a Music Festival, or Drama Festival? Would Epcot be better if it was always in Festival mode?

Speck, I wholeheartedly agree that that would be a great improvement as long as the quality could remain the same. (Don't think skateboard days or fashion parade would do it). Furthermore that should be reintroduced into Futureworld. I originally thought Communicore/Innoventions was supposed to be a technology showcase instead of bringing in a few robots and X-box's.
Bring in an audiovisual exhibit, computer possibilities show, automotive innovation. (Each major exhibit can take turns sponsoring)...Land, Sea, Energy, Space, Motion, (weather?), Communication, Imagination. These items can be sustained for a month or so and be very interesting.

My favorite park is EPCOT. That said, it often seems to me that once it was built, it was left pretty much to run itself, with a minimum of updating and rethinking. The future keeps turning into the present, making keeping ahead of the times difficult and expensive. Figmentmom

I think figmentmom hit on the other main flaw/weakness of the park. The initial vision was for a dynamic, ever changing, always updated park. As much as we would like that, to redo each exhibit every ten years or so would be cost prohibitive. But then again change at a certain level could have been sustained...but as she said, it was never budgeted or followed through on, the was left to run itself.

As I have said on other threads, my idea for an ideal Futureworld is a three part complex, one an informative ride/historical, like the original omnimover/animatronics) [history is timeless], then a possible thrill ride or dynamic experience of some kind, and finally a changing, interactive component. It is here that the site can reinvent itself. For one example, Test Track; That ride should be a component of the initial show that is World of Motion, followed by a automotive center that presents alternative engines, solar cars, a nice selection of concept cars from the auto shows, futures in controls and navigation and driving environments, not just the latest Cadillac and Hummer. Grizz described a similar treatment for Horizons/Mission Space. I think you get my drift.

I don't know why I've been so optimistic as of late, but I think that vision can still be achieved...now where did we put that visionary?

 

[speck76]

I originally thought Communicore/Innoventions was supposed to be a technology showcase instead of bringing in a few robots and X-box's.
Bring in an audiovisual exhibit, computer possibilities show, automotive innovation. (Each major exhibit can take turns sponsoring)...Land, Sea, Energy, Space, Motion, (weather?), Communication, Imagination. These items can be sustained for a month or so and be very interesting.

I thought the ASIMO exhibit was very well done, but why can't more things like this be done, and why was it done at the same time as the Flower and Garden festival?

 

[Nicole]

I love Epcot, and I think that part of it's problem is its reputation for being educational. Many of my friends who spend a week at WDW don't go to Epcot because "our kids are too young." I almost feel like it's my mission to convince these people that Epcot is not like going to a museum!

So while I agree that Epcot may not be a representation of its original goals, I think the realities of competing in a tight market have meant that Disney has had to waver from the original lofty goals in order to draw people in that first time. Once people go to Epcot they seem to start to "get it," but Epcot's reputation as being educational I think scares average theme-park (or should I say "amusement park") goers away.

 

[that_L_do_pig]

I love Epcot, and I think that part of it's problem is its reputation for being educational. Many of my friends who spend a week at WDW don't go to Epcot because "our kids are too young." I almost feel like it's my mission to convince these people that Epcot is not like going to a museum!

Yes, I grew up in the 'MK for the kids, Epcot for the adults' attitude. I still don't understand it, but it hurts children's perception when going to the park.

 

[PeterAlt]

Please keep an open mind when reading this.

I know that many of you are huge fans of Epcot, I am too. As many of you have realized, I am a very logical and rational person, I realize Epcot is not for everyone, and I am convinced that the general public no longer “gets” Epcot, or at least the original EPCOT Center…what is left of it.
I would ask that this not become a discussion of how the Epcot of today varies from Walt’s original vision, a vision that will never come to fruition, the closest we will get will be Celebration.

(In preparing this, I have taken quotes from the book Walt Disney’s Epcot Center, published in 1982, as well as other sources)

Let’s first take a look at how Walt’s EPCOT became EPCOT Center, we will start in 1975.

In 1975, Walt Disney Productions announced they were moving forward with plans for Epcot. Prior to WDW being built, the area on which the resort is located was swampland and scrub forest. It was far removed from any public services, and was pretty much “the middle of nowhere” (keep in mind, Orlando was a small town back then). A lot had changed since then. With the building of the Magic Kingdom and the original resorts, WDW had built a state of the art public service system, with high-tech systems seen nowhere else at that time. David Brinkley of NBC news referred to WDW as “ the most imaginative and effective piece of urban planning in America”. Along with that, WDW had issued the Epcot Building Code (which is available at the Orlando Library) and had formed the Reedy Creek Improvement District, which is the governing arm of the WDW resort land. At this time, The WDW resort was seeing 13 million visitors per year, with hotels running at 99% year around.

At this point, the planners, designers, engineers, and operators of WDW thought that they were already providing all of the services (public, government, sanitation…) that Walt’s Epcot would have provided for the near 16,000 people staying on property every day. By doing this, they were under the belief that the WDW resort ALREADY embodied Walt’s vision and philosophy of Epcot, but what was lacking was a “public focus” for new ideas and concepts, a “center” for the communication of new possibilities for the future – directly to the public.

To answer this need, they chose to develop Epcot Center, a permanent world’s fair of imagination, discovery, education, and exploration that combines the Disney entertainment and communication skills with the knowledge and predictions of authorities from industry, the academic world, and the professions. The goal of the park would be to inspire people, using and optimistic approach, to be turned on to the positive potential of the future, and will want to participate in making the choices that will shape the future.

At this time, an advisory board was formed with experts from various fields to help shape the park.

Next stop, 1976, where then CEO Card Walker made a speech to the Urban Land Institute. In the speech, he stated 4 main objectives of Epcot Center.
First, Epcot Center was to be a demonstration and proving ground for prototype concepts.
Second, it was to be a forum of the future, where ideas would be exchanged to meet the real needs of mankind.
Third, it was to be a communicator to the world, bringing new knowledge in the most effective ways to the world community.
Last, it was to be a permanent international people-to-people exchange, advancing the cause of world understanding among its citizens.

That being said, lets move on to 11/20/1981, when Martin Skalar wrote the forward to this book: (taken directly from the book)

“What we’re doing here is inventing a ‘Schweitzer Centrifuge’…that’s the way I look at the Epcot Project. If we build this correctly, if we build this beautifully, if we set an example for the world, we can change the whole damn country.

Now…my thoughts.

Starting at the 1981 point, is it too much to expect something built as a for-profit theme park, built by a for-profit company, to CHANGE THE WORLD?

Now, looking at the 1976 speech, did Epcot ever fulfill these goals, even upon opening?

Ok, more from the book.

Now, onto the main part of the book.

“The emphasis is on possibilities, since Walt Disney had an abiding faith in the ability of people the appreciate imagination and ingenuity, to recognize what was good. It was his contention, shared by his successors, that if people got the right information they would inevitably take the right action. The trick, of course, is to get people to sit still long enough for the information.”

I think this had become a major problem. I don’t believe that the general public of today has the patience or the attention span for this. It is my opinion that the vast majority of people want the 2 minute thrill, not the 20 minute experience. I feel this is very sad.


“At Epcot Center, the future is ever-evolving and fluid. While some pavilions leap forward fifty or 100 years, others emphasize that the technology available to us today will create the world of tomorrow – indeed, that the world of tomorrow is already upon us.”

While some pavilions were very forward thinking, it was the vision of the future that was changed, and made Epcot seem very dated. On the second point, it is my feeling that Innoventions nails this point very well, much better than most people give it credit for doing.

“Nor will Epcot remain static. Several displays are designed to incorporate advances as they come of age, and additional pavilions are planned into Future World’s future. Horizons, a look into the twenty-first century, is scheduled to open in 1983, and a year later The Living Seas will join the ring of pavilions. Not yet in the building stage are Life and Health, which will conduct guests on a journey through the human body, and a space pavilion, to be realized with cooperation from NASA, which will feature a simulated space station.”

Changes in the pavilions were planned from before day 1, as were the additions that have been made to date.

“While entertainment will continue to be a highly visible attraction of Epcot Center, it is the underlying educational value of Future World that is its most important contribution.”

While the show remained the same, the audience has changed. The attitudes and views of the general public has changed since 1982, but until recently, the park did not. It is my view that the park now has to over-compensate for being “behind the times”, not so much in the message, but in the delivery of the message.

I am going to wrap up now....I have more to write, but my fingers are tired.

I guess my main point is this. Epcot was a radical concept, based on a concept that had not really been that successful in America. (The 1964-65 World's Fair in NYC was supposed to attract 70 million visitors over 2 years, but only attracted 51 million). Epcot was supposed to education people and change views and actions...but is that too much to expect from a theme park?

I am interested in all of your views.

Personally, I am ed that Card Walker let Walt Disney's last and greatest dream die the way it did. Walt spent his final years planning and designing his EPCOT city, working out every little detail, as if he knew he would pass soon, and that he could leave his successors a road map on how to move forward without him.

At first I falted Roy Disney for not moving forward with Walt's EPCOT, but Roy advanced Walt's ideas more than anyone. Roy actually got the resort part of the plan built and the infrastructure needed to support EPCOT's residents, as your book quotation mentions. As if Roy knew that he too was going to pass soon, he laid the groundwork needed to get his little brother's last dream built... the resort that would finance it and the infrastructure to support it.

Then, when Card Walker would say that he wanted to build Walt's EPCOT but had no idea how to do so, I would love to ask him... "what about the models and thousands of maps and drawings Walt finished before his death?"

The truth is that Walker and the rest of the company had no real estate experience but tons of theme park experience, and conservative-minded as Walker was, prefered to stick to the business he knew best, thus the death of Walt's EPCOT and the birth of Walker's EPCOT Center.

At least Ron Miller, Walt's son-in-law, who was made CEO less then a year right before Eisner, tried to ressurect Walt's EPCOT. No real estate experience? Miller answered this by buying a huge real estate company, Arvida. Hoping to use that company's real estate experience, he directed that company to explore the possibility of building Walt's EPCOT.

One of the first things Eisner did as CEO was to sell Arvida so that he could focus the company back to the entertainment business. But, he kept one of Arvida's executives, Ray Watson, and made him part of Disney's Board. Watson was given the responsibility to continue exploring the possibility of building Walt's EPCOT.

Watson reported to Eisner that Walt's EPCOT was not possible, since the Disney company would be like a dictator government to EPCOT's residents. If voting rights were given to the residents, then the company would loose its rights to build anything they wanted to wherever and whenever they wanted. Eisner actually watched Walt's EPCOT film over and over again, and got the idea for Celebration.

Watson remained at the company. Eisner used his real estate expertise to help with the build-out of WDW, including hotel resorts and the Cross Roads Shopping Center.

 

[cherrynegra]

Brad, thank you for posting an incredible thread. You've really taken the time to plot out your ideas and offer supporting facts and background. This thread has obviously gotten people to think and discuss Epcot and its pros and cons in a very intelligent and well thought out manner. I really enjoyed reading everyone's opinions on this particular thread. I get tired of the usual "I hate/love Epcot" threads. This was a really good one.

 

[foxfire]

I think this paragraph is key to both future success and past/current issues.

Ellen's Energy Adventure I think this attraction accomplishes this goal better than the original. The goal states that the attractions will use Disney Entertainmant and communication skills. The original attraction was very dry and academic, the new attraction is allows people to learn and discover, but does so in a more entertaining way.

Journey into Imagination with Figment While I don't enjoy this attraction as much as the original, it still allows people to discover how their senses work...although I don't think that was ever the intended purpose of the pavilion.

Test Track While I think Test Track gets written off by many fans, I think it still manages to accomplish this goal. It educates and lets people discover the testing that goes into today's autos. It does so using Disney entertainment and communication skills (a ride system). It does so using the knowledge of General Motors.

Mission Space This is all about using your imagination and discovering a new sensation, and it does so in a very entertaining way.

2. The goal of the park would be to inspire people, using and optimistic approach, to be turned on to the positive potential of the future, and will want to participate in making the choices that will shape the future.

I agree with you on 3 of the 4 rides; I still like the original JII the best. But so as to avoid a "missed rides" theme, I feel as if Epcot's intentions have become to entertain more so than educate. While walking around the park yesterday, I started thinking that they pulled off both quite well until around 1996 , but when Disney felt the pressure to compete w/ other parks offering "thrill rides", Epcot felt most of the pressure.

Mission Space certainly accomplishes both, however I feel that with all the time spent developing it, they could have made the ride either longer or more interactive. As far as TT...when it works...it's okay but the inside is rather drab...and again, with the time spent...

EEE is, in my opinion, a very effective rehab. The ride carries on in the original Epcot tradition and is more entertaining than the first version.

I think that if Disney finds a way to stay ahead of (or at least equal to the competition) without sacrificing quality (and Magic), then they can turn the park around.

 

[figmentmom]

I love Epcot, and I think that part of it's problem is its reputation for being educational. Many of my friends who spend a week at WDW don't go to Epcot because "our kids are too young." I almost feel like it's my mission to convince these people that Epcot is not like going to a museum!

Well said!!! I'm a teacher, and I woman I teach with took her husband and two school-age children to WDW for ten days recently. Granted, it was their first trip, but when I talked to her upon their return, I asked her about the trip highlights. Sure enough, she raved about MK, AK and MGM - and finally admitted that they had not even set foot in EPCOT!!! When I asked her why they hadn't gone, she said, "Oh, we just thought we'd concentrate on the fun stuff for once and skip the eucational stuff." I was appalled.


And, I agree, Brad - great thread!

 

[WDWScottieBoy]

This past trip of mine, I took my girlfriend to the WS of Epcot because her family had never been there as they didn't think it would be fun or worth anything. I think they might have walked in Germany and skipped everything else, but that's it. She had no idea there were so many shows and that Norway and Mexico had the rides. Her father, sister and her sister's boyfriend left after we hit FW thinking it was pointless to do the rest because "there's nothing there." Melissa (my girlfriend) loved WS and everything that's there. It was a perfect evening (besides the rain for the first half of it) for the two of us, ended with Illuminations:RoE. When we got back to the resort, she told the other three what they missed out on, and all I could say was "I told you not to leave!"

Some people just get a thought in their mind and refuse to let it change. Sure, Epcot is educational in some parts, but always fun and something you don't want to miss out on. I always make Epcot a full day if not more. We only got 1/2 of WS done on the trip, so she's looking forward to seeing the rest on our next trip. :sohappy:

 

[Little Mermaid]

I too grew up in the "EPCOT is educational, not fun" era. In fact, when I was a child, a WDW vacation merited an officially excused absence at school if you visited EPCOT. As a result of that attitude, I was never fond of EPCOT growing up. I always preferred MK, with all its rides, and, once it was built, MGM, with its shows. EPCOT was a half-day park, or a full but short day at most.

In spite of that, I can remember spending HOURS in the Wonders of Life pavillion, fascinated by the "movie" in Body Wars, laughing at Buzzy's antics in Cranium Command, and dragging my parents to the "Wonder Cycles" so I could try all the different screens. (Sidenote--this probably explains why I'm pre-med now ) I loved The Land's Kitchen Kabaret and Living with the Land. My all-time favorite was Journey Into Imagination, partly because my father worked for Kodak and it was "our ride," and partly because Figment, with his infectious laugh and bright colors, appealed to me. And we always had to ride Spaceship Earth.

I guess what I'm saying is that what made the EPCOT of the 1980's so special WAS the pavillions. Visitors became so immersed in all rides, shows, and activities that each pavillion offered that they were learning without realizing it. It seems that in order to keep up with the other theme parks, both Disney and non-Disney, the focus has switched toward thrill rides and away from the total immersion of the pavillions.

As for fulfilling its original purpose, I'm not sure any park could ever completely maintain an updated area dedicated to the future. In the 50's and 60's, science fiction created a prevalent concept of what the future would be like; I'm not sure that we have such a clear picture any more. It would cost way too much money to completely re-create parts of EPCOT every time a new advancement occurs.

As an adult, I think that EPCOT's focus was/should be on educating while creating a fun environment. And I really enjoy the park now.

Awesome topic. I'm really enjoying reading everyone's thoughts. :sohappy:

 

[Lauriebar]

2. The goal of the park would be to inspire people, using and optimistic approach, to be turned on to the positive potential of the future, and will want to participate in making the choices that will shape the future.

I think part 2 is the problem. I think it is too much to expect this goal from a theme park. Even if they do a great job at trying to acheive this goal, I don't think the audience is so receptive.

True, this is a very lofty goal...but maybe if we look at it in a different way. My take on EPCOT is through the eyes of a parent since I never got the chance to see it as a child. That being said, I see the inspiration of EPCOT as the subtle ways in which it does educate my childen. They do not realize that EPCOT's attractions and pavilions are introducing them to new ideas and concepts. They further do not see that these ideas and concepts can and will shape their future in so many ways. Their minds are opened to world travel, different cultures, the excitement of space travel, the need to protect the earth and it's resources...I could go on and on. In this way the goal of shaping the future is met.

The fact is that EPCOT is an educational park, but not necessarily in the traditional sense. My son and daughter have benefitted from our trips to EPCOT without even knowing it. People with closed minds about educational things being boring are doing themselves and their children a disservice. However, it is my hope that even those who are not receptive to what EPCOT has to offer, walk away from a day at the park thinking differently even if they don't quite know why.

 

[Lynx04]

I beleive this to be 100% true. What crowds were interested in 20 years ago are not the same. As I have said before we currently live in a majority society that looks for more thrills then education. Disney has to change to what the current demands are in what guest expect, not just us. At least Disney has been successful with creating innovative thrill attraction with a storyline and moving to just 100% thrill (Sixflags). Who knows in 20 years we might be back full circle.

Also, EPCOT was suppose to be this convention for new technology. The general public does not come to disney and say, ya I want to go and see what new things my dishwasher could be able to do in 10 years. Most come to see Space Mountain, Splash Mountain, or what ever cool new attraction is opening. The dishwasher stuff is just the demonstrates Disney's panaramic portfolio of products to entertain guest. But in order to get it to work, you have to updated constantly, due to the rapidly developing technologies. Which is a task I don't think anybody can keep up with in earnest, that is probably one of the reason we don't see a world fair like we did. That is why there are individual trade show done by each industry. Also, predicting what will be the future culture is not easy, just look at tomorrowland. Unfortunitly, all of these themes on the future have had the same out come in fate. It becomes to costly to continuosly update attractions.

 

[ampersand2001]

Don't say anything bad about the sprit of Norvay!

I was so moved by that film that I'm moving there!

 

[WDWScottieBoy]

Don't say anything bad about the sprit of Norvay!

I was so moved by that film that I'm moving there!

If you're serious about moving there because of the movie, that would be an excellent story to email or handwrite and send to Disney. That sounds like something really magically that Disney knows how to capture. That's amazing that you were that inspired by it. I am so inspired by FL and WDW that I'm moving there next year! :sohappy:

 

[yse325]

Other thoughts

I actually have always enjoyed Epcot. Yes some of it was dated and with young kids it is not the best park. However I am taking my kids in may and we are planning to spend parts of two days in the park. Why? Because the kids are now old enough to really enjoy the park.

I agree with others that the new attractions are awesome improvements. Mission: Space and Test Track are not only fun and entertaining, but do give guests a feel for car development and space travel. I also like the new energy attraction. I think the addition of Soarin (california film not withstanding) will be an excellent improvement. All these attractions entertain, while simulating technologies that influence our daily lives.

I also love the new activities for kids at the World Showcase. I think these crafts are a great opportunity for kids to learn about other countries and their people in a fun environment. I also think the evening parade, laser show and fireworks are the best at Disney.

My only regrets with Epcot is the lack of an efficent mass transit method to move people through the park. I would love to see a "ride" like the TTA in Tomorrowland to rapidly move people around the World Showcase. Think a trip around the world in five minutes. I also would like to see more pavillions from countries like Eygpt, Brazil (with a true Jungle Cruise), Thailand/Cambodia, Zimbabwe etcc; thus truely reflecting the world.

Maybe it does not reflect Walt's vision for Utopia, but I think, it does it's job of making the world a little smaller and gives us insight into the technologies that influence our life today with a thought to how these technologies may evolve in the future. I tend to think of Epcot (and especially Spaceship Earth) as the continuation of the Carosel of Progress.

 

[longfamily]

2. The goal of the park would be to inspire people, using and optimistic approach, to be turned on to the positive potential of the future, and will want to participate in making the choices that will shape the future.

I think part 2 is the problem. I think it is too much to expect this goal from a theme park. Even if they do a great job at trying to acheive this goal, I don't think the audience is so receptive.[/QUOTE]
The epcot of old focused on introducing larger than life ideas to the public. A person could go into intoventions and be awed by what types of things (cars, homes, appliences, ect.) would be possible in the future. I'm talking about flying cars and such in 1985. It was there on the showroom floor scaled to size. People were inspired. That epcot assured people that we were indeed moving forward. Even the park itself is so perfect (landscape, buildings, the fact that there is no trash ever on the ground) it feels as though you were in this sacred place and it was worthy of your attention and love. It was (and is) a perfect model for what we all wish our everyday environment could be like. The audience was receptive to that epcot of yesterday. That epcot is no longer with us though. Today, that mystery of future possibilities has been replaced with advertisments and t-shirt shops. And while many of the early concepts of epcot still exist, such as education and discovery and inspiration, they have lost thier luster (or awe factor) because they haven't been upgraded but down graded. The audience was never the issue. They were there and loving it. These attractions were technologically advanced when they were opened. They were never changed when new technology was available to keep them in the stratospere of our imaginations. Kind of like watching old star wars or star trek movies and seeing 1970's version of high tech as opposed to what we consider high tech today. That is what has made people lose interest. How can something that is so dated inspire? It seems at times the powers that be come back to that original idea. SEGWAY tours are available in the early mornings now. That's a tiny bit futuristic. That is all that EPCOT needs...a little more imagination and upgrade. Case in point, if you are familiar with the store "sharper image" you will know that this store is always packed! It's a neat futuristic gadget shop. It stays busy from open to close in every city that it's available in. People love ideas and love to be inspired and want to know more (about anything). Give me that epcot.
By the way, world showcase is perfect and I don't think anyone ever really complains about that area. We actually eat dinner there almost every night on each of our trips, we pick a different country.

 

[Communicore]

1. Spaceship Earth should be converted to Monstropolis Central complete with Mike Wazowski-ization of the structure itself. The ride is going to be just like Monsters Inc. ride in DCA. After the ride, in the former AT&T area is going to be the main lobby or something like that of the scare factory. The camera center will be retained as a relic to the past, selling real cameras, films, photo albums, and picture frames.

2. Innoventions in its entirety should just be converted to an expanded character spot.

3. World Showcase countries will be renamed to the characters that "live" there.

4. The Land will be called The Air because of Soarin' and then the boat ride will shut down.

 

[marni1971]

Why?

 

[wdisney9000]

What?

 

[Brickcity Pauly]

no.