Spaced Out Dude
New Member
But still a dark ride would be a good idea. Like the one at Madame Tussuards London. 
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Epcot / Germany River Ride
- Thread starter Pluto_is_my_fav
- Start date
forbidden donut
Well-Known Member
ctwhalerman
New Member
Poor World Showcase has been stuck in a rut since 1988. I'm sure Disney knows they need more there, but it's all about money.
Remember that most of the countries involved in World Showcase are sponsored by corporations and not by the countries themselves. The Japanese pavillion is pretty much owned by the Mitsukoshi Department Store, the American Adventure had two sponsors, etc. This is why most of the countries are wealthy western countries, as they were the only countries in 1980 that had powerful corporations to foot the bill for the pavillions. Only China (that communist state) and Morocco (pretty much an autocratic kingdom) are sponsored by the home country, though Norway also may have national sponsorship.
With the changes in geopolitics since 1980, one would think Disney must be trying to shop plots in World Showcase to new corporations in developing and second-world countries. South Africa, whose apartheid stopped any inclusion in 1982, should now be a prime candidate and its multicultural and now largely peaceful society would make for a very interesting pavillion. Also, some Eastern European countries that are trying to emerge as players on the world stage (I'm thinking Poland, the Czech Republic, and Russia), also would probably love to show the best their country has to offer to the affluent American traveler. Some South American countries also would probably like to get in on World Showcase, and I'm surprised Brazil or Argentina did not have pavillions in 1982, as both countries are far wealthier (and more stable) than Mexico. Politics aside, Venezuela is full of rich oil companies, but Disney's contract with whatever oil company WDW has now would probably kill that. Southeast Asian countries, particularly Malaysia, the Philippines, and Indonesia also seem like credible additions because of relative wealth, corporate presence, and new standing on the world stage.
We'd all love to see more countries in World Showcase, with a wider variety of cultures past the western Euro-centric place we have now, but I'm all for anything new, whether it be a Spanish, Dutch, Irish, Greek, or Turkish pavillion. There's a lot of global money out there, and tourism is fierce, so sooner or later new countries may pop up.
As for the German ride, I'm sure it will probably never happen, as the added expense may not be worth it for the German corporations footing the bill. I'd much rather vote for expansion of the Italian pavillion, because there is literally nothing there but a restaurant. More representation of Southern Italy was supposed to be included in 1982, but was never built. (I shouldn't hold my breath for Southern Italian inclusion in the pavillion, as Southern Italy is consistenly mistreated by what can be described as the Northern Italian elitist government in Italy, and the fact that probably more descendants of Southern Italians live in Uruguay, Argentina, and the Philadelphia-New York-New Haven-Boston corrider here in the U.S than actually live in southern Italy.)
Remember that most of the countries involved in World Showcase are sponsored by corporations and not by the countries themselves. The Japanese pavillion is pretty much owned by the Mitsukoshi Department Store, the American Adventure had two sponsors, etc. This is why most of the countries are wealthy western countries, as they were the only countries in 1980 that had powerful corporations to foot the bill for the pavillions. Only China (that communist state) and Morocco (pretty much an autocratic kingdom) are sponsored by the home country, though Norway also may have national sponsorship.
With the changes in geopolitics since 1980, one would think Disney must be trying to shop plots in World Showcase to new corporations in developing and second-world countries. South Africa, whose apartheid stopped any inclusion in 1982, should now be a prime candidate and its multicultural and now largely peaceful society would make for a very interesting pavillion. Also, some Eastern European countries that are trying to emerge as players on the world stage (I'm thinking Poland, the Czech Republic, and Russia), also would probably love to show the best their country has to offer to the affluent American traveler. Some South American countries also would probably like to get in on World Showcase, and I'm surprised Brazil or Argentina did not have pavillions in 1982, as both countries are far wealthier (and more stable) than Mexico. Politics aside, Venezuela is full of rich oil companies, but Disney's contract with whatever oil company WDW has now would probably kill that. Southeast Asian countries, particularly Malaysia, the Philippines, and Indonesia also seem like credible additions because of relative wealth, corporate presence, and new standing on the world stage.
We'd all love to see more countries in World Showcase, with a wider variety of cultures past the western Euro-centric place we have now, but I'm all for anything new, whether it be a Spanish, Dutch, Irish, Greek, or Turkish pavillion. There's a lot of global money out there, and tourism is fierce, so sooner or later new countries may pop up.
As for the German ride, I'm sure it will probably never happen, as the added expense may not be worth it for the German corporations footing the bill. I'd much rather vote for expansion of the Italian pavillion, because there is literally nothing there but a restaurant. More representation of Southern Italy was supposed to be included in 1982, but was never built. (I shouldn't hold my breath for Southern Italian inclusion in the pavillion, as Southern Italy is consistenly mistreated by what can be described as the Northern Italian elitist government in Italy, and the fact that probably more descendants of Southern Italians live in Uruguay, Argentina, and the Philadelphia-New York-New Haven-Boston corrider here in the U.S than actually live in southern Italy.)
I don't complain about the Swan and Dolphin..because they are Disney hotels for one. The second thing is for the most part they loom over the International Gateway.
Hopes for the best.
The Swan and Dolphin does have the Disney name attached to them but that is about it. They are privately owned.
DisneyRoxMySox
Well-Known Member
That's good. What about the Studios? That seems further away though, but when walking down Hollywood Blvd. you might be able to see it? :veryconfu
Yes, but the contract ends in 2089, I think. So who knows they might be full Disney hotels by then.
Speaking of which, why hasn't Disney tried to take over the Bonnet Creek Resort? :veryconfu
EDIT: It also looks like they could build some hills to block the view from other parts of the property. I'll supply some dirt.
slappy magoo
Well-Known Member
I freely admitted to enjoying World Showcase. It's a nice respite from the faster pace of Future World-heck, the rest of WDW. And I suspect one of the reasons why we don't see many rides is for that very reason. This is all my suspicions, mind you, but...well...
Maybe it's just my own sense of arrested development, but it seemed to me grownups were more grown up when I was a kid. More serious. More mature. Not necessarily erudite or sophisticated, but with much less tolerance for adults being silly. And World Showcase was supposed to be a place for serious mature grownups to get away from thrill rides, for kids to wind down. It was supposed to give you at least the illusion that you were getting your "culture-on" during your stay at WDW. A consolation prize for moms or dads who would've rather gone anywhere else ("but they have art & treasures from all over the world at Epcot! It's like you're going all over the world in 4 hours!"). And to me, it still has that vibe. It's a place for shopping and dining (though the irony-that people are paying upwards of 70 dollars for admission to a place where they can spend EVEN MORE money on food & international products-is not lost on me). Some fun aspects for the kids, some minor rides and attractions, but mostly, a place for grownups. If you trust your kids and/or Disney security, you can let your little ones run around Future World until they drop from exhaustion while you sit in air conditioned splendor looking at Mayan artifacts before taking a relaxing little boat ride, etc. etc. A chance to consider what your next vacation, a non-Disney vacation, might be, by sampling the "culture" from different lands, no matter hoe much the kids scream that they wanna go back to Disney...
The problem is, subsequent generations aren't taking themselves as seriously. The kids who screamed they'd rather be at Disney are now adults, and they're going back to Disney. Just like the kids who go off to college for the first time and go a little nuts without parental supervision-I'm wearing my pajamas to class! And I'm having Super Sugar Crisp for breakfast lunch AND dinner all week long!-so too are they going to WDW and having the vacation THEY always wanted as kids. Grownups are now just as eager to do the thrill rides-with or without children of our own-as the kids are themselves. And while World Showcase is still the same lovely respite it always has been, to have one or two bona fide thrill rides within this large mass of theme park property wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, or The World, for that matter, would it?
Another problem is the nature of the thrill ride, and the relation WDW has with the countries themselves. True, Disney wants/needs the country or a corporation sponsor the construction and upkeep of any attraction, but I'm sure the countries want the attraction to be indicative AND respectful of the culture. What would a thrill ride be in France? A free-fall from the Eiffel Tower? You think that's what the French government really want people to think of when they of France? Norway gets away with their stories of trolls, because trolls are cute, and they're talking about mythology, not actual, violent, bloody Viking history. Likewise, if they ever did a Spain pavilion, I'm sure Escape The Inquisition won't be their E-ticket ride. The countries would be frightened a thrill ride would reflect neagatively on the country, as if the whole nation were as wild and dangerous as the attraction. Even something as innocuous as a roller coaster like RNRC, but designed to look like, say, zipping through the Autobahn, would have government officials crying "but this is not how it really is! Disney is making us look silly!" So the trick becomes to find something that's thrilling, without even running the risk of insulting the host country. Not to mention finding the space and money to make it a reality.
I would bet a shiny nickel that's why we're not seeing the thrill rides in WS some people so desperately want. And maybe, it's not such a bad thing that we're not getting 'em.
Maybe it's just my own sense of arrested development, but it seemed to me grownups were more grown up when I was a kid. More serious. More mature. Not necessarily erudite or sophisticated, but with much less tolerance for adults being silly. And World Showcase was supposed to be a place for serious mature grownups to get away from thrill rides, for kids to wind down. It was supposed to give you at least the illusion that you were getting your "culture-on" during your stay at WDW. A consolation prize for moms or dads who would've rather gone anywhere else ("but they have art & treasures from all over the world at Epcot! It's like you're going all over the world in 4 hours!"). And to me, it still has that vibe. It's a place for shopping and dining (though the irony-that people are paying upwards of 70 dollars for admission to a place where they can spend EVEN MORE money on food & international products-is not lost on me). Some fun aspects for the kids, some minor rides and attractions, but mostly, a place for grownups. If you trust your kids and/or Disney security, you can let your little ones run around Future World until they drop from exhaustion while you sit in air conditioned splendor looking at Mayan artifacts before taking a relaxing little boat ride, etc. etc. A chance to consider what your next vacation, a non-Disney vacation, might be, by sampling the "culture" from different lands, no matter hoe much the kids scream that they wanna go back to Disney...
The problem is, subsequent generations aren't taking themselves as seriously. The kids who screamed they'd rather be at Disney are now adults, and they're going back to Disney. Just like the kids who go off to college for the first time and go a little nuts without parental supervision-I'm wearing my pajamas to class! And I'm having Super Sugar Crisp for breakfast lunch AND dinner all week long!-so too are they going to WDW and having the vacation THEY always wanted as kids. Grownups are now just as eager to do the thrill rides-with or without children of our own-as the kids are themselves. And while World Showcase is still the same lovely respite it always has been, to have one or two bona fide thrill rides within this large mass of theme park property wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, or The World, for that matter, would it?
Another problem is the nature of the thrill ride, and the relation WDW has with the countries themselves. True, Disney wants/needs the country or a corporation sponsor the construction and upkeep of any attraction, but I'm sure the countries want the attraction to be indicative AND respectful of the culture. What would a thrill ride be in France? A free-fall from the Eiffel Tower? You think that's what the French government really want people to think of when they of France? Norway gets away with their stories of trolls, because trolls are cute, and they're talking about mythology, not actual, violent, bloody Viking history. Likewise, if they ever did a Spain pavilion, I'm sure Escape The Inquisition won't be their E-ticket ride. The countries would be frightened a thrill ride would reflect neagatively on the country, as if the whole nation were as wild and dangerous as the attraction. Even something as innocuous as a roller coaster like RNRC, but designed to look like, say, zipping through the Autobahn, would have government officials crying "but this is not how it really is! Disney is making us look silly!" So the trick becomes to find something that's thrilling, without even running the risk of insulting the host country. Not to mention finding the space and money to make it a reality.
I would bet a shiny nickel that's why we're not seeing the thrill rides in WS some people so desperately want. And maybe, it's not such a bad thing that we're not getting 'em.
Does anyone know if Disney still pitches country ideas to corporations and governments to try and get them to come up with the cash to fund a new pavilion or is the whole idea now dead and no new countries have been designed and offered to the people with the cash? I remember reading that in the 70's when they came up with the idea they created concepts for many countries then imaginers went and visited government and leading company officials to show them concepts. It would be great if they revised the plans for all the ones they did and went back and actively tried to sign up new country sponsors.
They may already do this but I wonder how often it is looked at.
They may already do this but I wonder how often it is looked at.
Lee
Adventurer
They do look for new countries, but not as agressively as they did in the early 80s.
They used to have an office in New York full of attraction concepts where they would invite potential sponsors to come in and view them and decide if they wanted to participate and sponsor an attraction. That's long gone, too.
They used to have an office in New York full of attraction concepts where they would invite potential sponsors to come in and view them and decide if they wanted to participate and sponsor an attraction. That's long gone, too.
HeritageBoy
New Member
I agree with slappy magoo on all points. WS plays to a much different audience than the rest of WDW - one skewed specifically towards adults looking for "culture" and shopping while on vacation. I really love that part of the park, and wouldn't want to lose that "vibe" with unneeded expansion. The Rhine river attraction's concept art looks to have the great feel of El Rio Del Tiempo - its a shame that it never came about.
I agree that placing an attraction (read: thrill attraction) in WS simply because it currently lacking one would be a big mistake. For my money, the real question in any expansion of WS is what happens to the World Showplace building if Disney can part with the Conference/Event/meeting function it already serves for EPCOT. As someone who spent a fair amount of time there during Candlelight Processional rehearsal, I'd say it's the best candidate for expansion (if money, sponsorship falls in place as has been mentioned), and could really take the idea of the indoor (Mexico type) pavilion to a higher level.
Anyway, love reading these boards for the truly informed/thoughtful postings. Keep it up everyone.
I agree that placing an attraction (read: thrill attraction) in WS simply because it currently lacking one would be a big mistake. For my money, the real question in any expansion of WS is what happens to the World Showplace building if Disney can part with the Conference/Event/meeting function it already serves for EPCOT. As someone who spent a fair amount of time there during Candlelight Processional rehearsal, I'd say it's the best candidate for expansion (if money, sponsorship falls in place as has been mentioned), and could really take the idea of the indoor (Mexico type) pavilion to a higher level.
Anyway, love reading these boards for the truly informed/thoughtful postings. Keep it up everyone.
JML42691
Active Member
World Sowcase Rides
Despite many people's pleas for more rides at the World Showcase, I believe that the point of the World Showcase is the unification of nations and that all of the nations are equal. Making an E-ticket attraction (or even a "D-ticket" attraction) would bring larger crowds to that nation and make it seem more superior. This can be seen with Maelstrom at Norway. If they were to make a near-to E-ticket or E-ticket attractions than they would have to open one at every pavilion at almost the same time just to keep the equality between the nations the same. This would be VERY difficult and would be VERY budget concerning to create 9 (or even 10 to update/ create a new one for Mexico) new rides/shows. The movies might have to be "bagged" or even incorperated into the rides (like Norway) and this would almost involve the shutting down the World Showcase for at least a month or even up to a year. A BIG LOSS for Disney.
Despite this point, I do believe that Germany, Italy, Japan, Morrocco and England are in desparate need for a movie (not another 360 screen though) or small ride. But Italy and England are in the most desparate need.
Despite many people's pleas for more rides at the World Showcase, I believe that the point of the World Showcase is the unification of nations and that all of the nations are equal. Making an E-ticket attraction (or even a "D-ticket" attraction) would bring larger crowds to that nation and make it seem more superior. This can be seen with Maelstrom at Norway. If they were to make a near-to E-ticket or E-ticket attractions than they would have to open one at every pavilion at almost the same time just to keep the equality between the nations the same. This would be VERY difficult and would be VERY budget concerning to create 9 (or even 10 to update/ create a new one for Mexico) new rides/shows. The movies might have to be "bagged" or even incorperated into the rides (like Norway) and this would almost involve the shutting down the World Showcase for at least a month or even up to a year. A BIG LOSS for Disney.
Despite this point, I do believe that Germany, Italy, Japan, Morrocco and England are in desparate need for a movie (not another 360 screen though) or small ride. But Italy and England are in the most desparate need.
Lord Pheonix
Active Member
"Poor World Showcase has been stuck in a rut since 1988. I'm sure Disney knows they need more there, but it's all about money."
i dont think its about money, more like lack of space. ws is restricted of space for new countries due to its half circle layout. see this posted pic : http://forums.wdwmagic.com/showpost.php?p=1809294&postcount=82
idk how theyed get more then one new country unless they knocked down a few existing ones and redid the layout
i dont think its about money, more like lack of space. ws is restricted of space for new countries due to its half circle layout. see this posted pic : http://forums.wdwmagic.com/showpost.php?p=1809294&postcount=82
idk how theyed get more then one new country unless they knocked down a few existing ones and redid the layout
unkadug
Follower of "Saget"The Cult
So my question is , if they knew they weren't going to put in the ride why did they bother to build the queue. And if they didn't know the ride wasn't going in why didn't they finish the building?
OK, since this thread was bumped anyway....my question never got answered!
KevinPage
Well-Known Member
NOT AT ALL. If the government of the respective country is going to fork out the $$$$ to build an attraction & the "upkeep" you can bet your a$$ that Disney is going to start building it YESTERDAY.
Disney isn't going to spend it's own $$$ to make a specific country look good, when those pavilions are big-time promotional tools for each country. Germany would have a river boat ride if whatever department that decides what to spend what had not bailed out on it after the initial planning.
Yeah I'll buy into the philosophy that TWDC is not going to let them do whatever they want (ie - allow the Netherlands to open up shop & build a "red light district") but you get the point.
Disney isn't going to spend it's own $$$ to make a specific country look good, when those pavilions are big-time promotional tools for each country. Germany would have a river boat ride if whatever department that decides what to spend what had not bailed out on it after the initial planning.
Yeah I'll buy into the philosophy that TWDC is not going to let them do whatever they want (ie - allow the Netherlands to open up shop & build a "red light district") but you get the point.
unkadug
Follower of "Saget"The Cult
(^with HTML edited out)
Sorry, but just a few posts back, at post 63, it was shown that there is actually plenty of room for expansion.:wave:
(all buildings in red highlighted areas do not necessarily have to be where they are, they CAN be moved or demolished.)
If I had to take a guess at what's earmarked for expansion:
scottnj1966
Well-Known Member
Norway having a ride does not make them an busier. It should, but it does not. Small boat rides going into the countries past, present , and future is what all the countries need.
Mexico and Norway are good examples of how they can show off a country without having to spend alot of money.
Right now if anything takes people away from the countries is my country with its nice concert area and England having the beatles look a likes.
Germany can easily get a boat ride by finally adding the res tof the building.
Italy would be great to have canals like in their country, Vegas did it up well.
Paris...well I think a half replica effle tower like Vegas has would be the great attraction along with an elevator. ok so thats not a boat ride.
Well thats my two sense.
Mexico and Norway are good examples of how they can show off a country without having to spend alot of money.
Right now if anything takes people away from the countries is my country with its nice concert area and England having the beatles look a likes.
Germany can easily get a boat ride by finally adding the res tof the building.
Italy would be great to have canals like in their country, Vegas did it up well.
Paris...well I think a half replica effle tower like Vegas has would be the great attraction along with an elevator. ok so thats not a boat ride.
Well thats my two sense.
CThaddeus
New Member
Actually, if any of these countries ponied up the money tomorrow morning and said, "We want an E-Ticket for our country," you can bet they would get it. Unfortunately, that's the real reality. If the country won't pay for it, Disney probably ain't going to bother. And that's the real shame of it. Each country deserves an attraction of some kind to give people an insight into their history and traditions in a way that endless numbers of stores and restaurants can't. Disney should, as mentioned, at least invest some money in smaller attractions for each of the countries, and then if the the country wants to put in money for a second, more elaborate attraction, Disney can Imagineer that, too. As for inequality, Disney can simply state they've made a commitment to updating all of the pavilions, starting either with Mexico or Canada, and working their way around the "World." Besides, is it any more unequal to give one country an attraction before another than it is to put Canada and Mexico as the first countries you'd come across? Somebody has to be first, and as long as Disney promises to spend an almost equal amount of money to create an attraction, and makes sure they're all of a similar high quality, I don't think anyone will mind. Just my $.20, though.
the-reason14
Well-Known Member
Norway having a ride does not make them an busier. It should, but it does not. Small boat rides going into the countries past, present , and future is what all the countries need.
Mexico and Norway are good examples of how they can show off a country without having to spend alot of money.
Right now if anything takes people away from the countries is my country with its nice concert area and England having the beatles look a likes.
Germany can easily get a boat ride by finally adding the res tof the building.
Italy would be great to have canals like in their country, Vegas did it up well.
Paris...well I think a half replica effle tower like Vegas has would be the great attraction along with an elevator. ok so thats not a boat ride.
Well thats my two sense.
I agree.
Scar Junior
Active Member
Best 3D show on property!!!
And they'd have a bakery that would sell brownies!
:lookaroun
Since it`s bumped and we`re talking about it again, look at unkadug`s picture. There are 6 full size plots on there for countries. That`d be half as big again as WS is now (remember the plot between China/Marina and Germany is actually 2 plots - Equitorial Africa was to have taken up just one.