News EPCOT's Harmonious to be replaced with new nighttime spectacular Luminous

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Definitely some truth to this. But its highly dependent on the person. High level executives tend to have massive egos, and those that do are simply not affected by what any of us are saying online. If you think otherwise, you simply not not met or worked with many people at that level.

For the true artists, yeah, it can be tough to hear criticism. But if you are going to put your work out to the public, that's all part of the deal. Sometimes you get praise, sometimes not. The better you are, the more you get the former but nobody dodges criticism forever. Further, a true artist does their work for themselves. I once heard it put this way: Many say "tell me what you want and I will give it to you". A true artist says "This is who I am, I hope you like it". At the end of the day though, if you can't stand the heat....


Oh how naive, at least when we are talking about C level execs in large corporations. Of course they are real people and most do work hard, and you are right they are definitely not all uber-gifted. But there are a disproportionate number of people in those positions who are just not very good people. Part of what it often takes to get to those levels is a type of ruthlessness that most of us assume only lives in movies. Its quite eye-opening once you realize the truth.

As for the influence high level execs like Chapek have over the 100's of thousands below them, you undersell that as well. The execs set the tone, define the culture. They define the company's values. Even more importantly, they hire other execs who share those philosophies, and it flows on down. Yeah, there are inevitably many good, well-intentioned people in the rank and file. But if they want to move into the true decision making roles, they have to play ball. A choice has to be made, and if you are willing to make that choice, sure, the barriers are not so severe. It just all depends on what lets you sleep at night.

Yes, there are always exceptions. But by and large, this is how it works.

The reason why criticism really doesn’t matter at TWDC is this:

The entire message is given to them from the floor at NYSE and it’s to pump the stock.

You heard it here first (circa 2004)…
That “quality wins out” is just something they screen print on construction walls now.

All their moves are “agenda for revenue” and only altered if they get massive backlash AND stock dip now.

Simple formula…really

 

[bhg469]

You mean the “Pittsburgh” line??

…steel workers are spit roasting in their graves after having “two use hammers” named after yinz

Pittsburgh was their low tier i think.. The last couple years they have added a garbage,better,best line to just about everything they make. like pittsburgh, pittsburgh pro, and then icon... "Icon" is their attempt at a reliable tool.. Not necessarily snap on quality but better than other store brands and for a lot less money.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Oh…icon…right…

 

[bcoachable]

Any massive organization is too complex for people to grasp.

Disney is not one entity, Disney employs hundreds of thousands of people. The United States federal executive government is not one entity (even though it's much more specific than saying United States government).

We like to simplify things down to what we can understand. We understand Chapek and Josh are in charge. We understand the president is in charge. But in reality, figures like Chapek, Josh, and the President, are just that, figures. They may impact "big-picture" things, but they're hardly involved in the nitty-gritty.

My point is that the people who actually do the heavy lifting of Disney are just normal people like you and me. My second point is that there are a LOT of them. No, the bus driver at Animal Kingdom doesn't know anything special or have any input, and nor does the individual filling your mailbox have a direct line with the President.

This thread has over 50,000 views. There are probably several people who will read this post today that clocked in at one of the parks for work today. Obviously, as we go up the decision-making ladder, there's an inverted funnel, so there are far fewer people near the top, but they're still plentiful. A few high-level Disney decision-makers definitely stumble on here every so often, but that's honestly not very significant.

It really is A Small World. We really aren't that far removed from the people we revere and admire, we just construct artificial barriers.

This really boils down to significance in three major areas:

• People behind screens, in newspapers, or on a tv really are real people. What we say about them online or to their face really does affect time. Whether it's Bob Chapek, Richard Jewell, or a VFX artist eagerly awaiting the movie they worked on for months to release, only for it to get panned.
• Positions you dream about, whether it's a doctor, Imagineer, or CEO, aren't out of reach because those positions are held by the uber-gifted. They're held by normal people who had a combination of getting lucky, working really hard, and going for it, there's nothing inherently out of reach by these dream positions.
• In those positions being within reach, we need to remember our ability to change them, and I don't mean by complaining on Twitter or an internet forum. Obviously, this is a very bold statement that should be nuanced and quantified, but the significance remains, the seemingly impenetrable barriers separating us and certain institutions or aspirations are far more fragile than they first seem.

Man, I really like this. Thanks for the reminder that we all put our pants on one leg at a time- and need to be good to one another!

 

[HauntedPirate]

Any massive organization is too complex for people to grasp.

Disney is not one entity, Disney employs hundreds of thousands of people. The United States federal executive government is not one entity (even though it's much more specific than saying United States government).

We like to simplify things down to what we can understand. We understand Chapek and Josh are in charge. We understand the president is in charge. But in reality, figures like Chapek, Josh, and the President, are just that, figures. They may impact "big-picture" things, but they're hardly involved in the nitty-gritty.

My point is that the people who actually do the heavy lifting of Disney are just normal people like you and me. My second point is that there are a LOT of them. No, the bus driver at Animal Kingdom doesn't know anything special or have any input, and nor does the individual filling your mailbox have a direct line with the President.

This thread has over 50,000 views. There are probably several people who will read this post today that clocked in at one of the parks for work today. Obviously, as we go up the decision-making ladder, there's an inverted funnel, so there are far fewer people near the top, but they're still plentiful. A few high-level Disney decision-makers definitely stumble on here every so often, but that's honestly not very significant.

It really is A Small World. We really aren't that far removed from the people we revere and admire, we just construct artificial barriers.

This really boils down to significance in three major areas:

• People behind screens, in newspapers, or on a tv really are real people. What we say about them online or to their face really does affect them. Whether it's Bob Chapek, Richard Jewell, or a VFX artist eagerly awaiting the movie they worked on for months to release, only for it to get panned.
• Positions you dream about, whether it's a doctor, Imagineer, or CEO, aren't out of reach because those positions are held by the uber-gifted. They're held by normal people who had a combination of getting lucky, working really hard, and going for it, there's nothing inherently out of reach by these dream positions.
• In those positions being within reach, we need to remember our ability to change them, and I don't mean by complaining on Twitter or an internet forum. Obviously, this is a very bold statement that should be nuanced and quantified, but the significance remains, the seemingly impenetrable barriers separating us and certain institutions or aspirations are far more fragile than they first seem.

If you can show us where posters have stated animosity towards the boots-on-the-ground CM's, please do. Otherwise, I have no idea what in the blue hell you're talking about. Those with complaints hammer those in charge - The Bob's, the Josh's, the others that green-light the crap they insist on shoehorning into the wrong places, or bad ideas that get marketed as the greatest and most magical things in the world. I doubt Bob would give you the time of day if you were to meet him on the street. He's not "just like anyone else". There's no ill-will towards those CM's in the parks doing their job day in and day out, often having to deal with some of the biggest, most entitled idiots in the world, and receiving little thanks for it.

Many of us are well aware of just what goes on within large global companies. I'm not sure what "artificial barriers" you're referring to, but most here want no part of being a boot-licking toady just to advance up the corporate ladder and rise to the level of someone's incompetence. I earn what I have, and I fail to see exactly what someone like $lappie did to earn being the head of Parks and Resorts. He never worked a day in a theme park, so how was he qualified to run the entire division? Because someone thought, "Hey, Bob's made a lot of money schlepping merchandise and videos, I bet he'd make a lot of money as P&R leader!". The corporate culture within Disney has been broken, possibly irretrievably, to reward those who earn the most revenue. A creative company is now heading towards being creatively bankrupt (see the current fetish of "reimagining" things), with only moments of original ideas and creativity allowed to make the next new thing to market and milk. Why people would defend that, I have no clue. I don't. For every Rise of the Resistance, there's a bunch of misguided stuff like TSL, DE, Harmonious, Frozen Ever After, et al. Guardians - good ride, wrong park. Tron - Probably the same thing. I may be harsh, and I'm certainly willing to admit if I'm wrong if shown otherwise, but the past decade-plus has led me to believe the company I fell in love with 40 years ago is dead and buried, and is now rapacious and soulless, focused solely on pleasing Wall Street. It's a beast I have little desire to continue feeding, because it will never change unless it's cut off.

 

[Dranth]

But there are a disproportionate number of people in those positions who are just not very good people.

Obviously anecdotal but this matches my experience as well.

I have worked with and around a lot of owners and top-level execs over the years and proportionally, I run into a much higher number of less-than-ideal people in those ranks’ vs any other group. I've seen plenty of good ones as well but there are a whole lot of them that truly only care about their power and/or self-image.

 

[fgmnt]

If you can show us where posters have stated animosity towards the boots-on-the-ground CM's, please do. Otherwise, I have no idea what in the blue hell you're talking about. Those with complaints hammer those in charge - The Bob's, the Josh's, the others that green-light the crap they insist on shoehorning into the wrong places, or bad ideas that get marketed as the greatest and most magical things in the world. I doubt Bob would give you the time of day if you were to meet him on the street. He's not "just like anyone else". There's no ill-will towards those CM's in the parks doing their job day in and day out, often having to deal with some of the biggest, most entitled idiots in the world, and receiving little thanks for it.

Many of us are well aware of just what goes on within large global companies. I'm not sure what "artificial barriers" you're referring to, but most here want no part of being a boot-licking toady just to advance up the corporate ladder and rise to the level of someone's incompetence. I earn what I have, and I fail to see exactly what someone like $lappie did to earn being the head of Parks and Resorts. He never worked a day in a theme park, so how was he qualified to run the entire division? Because someone thought, "Hey, Bob's made a lot of money schlepping merchandise and videos, I bet he'd make a lot of money as P&R leader!". The corporate culture within Disney has been broken, possibly irretrievably, to reward those who earn the most revenue. A creative company is now heading towards being creatively bankrupt (see the current fetish of "reimagining" things), with only moments of original ideas and creativity allowed to make the next new thing to market and milk. Why people would defend that, I have no clue. I don't. For every Rise of the Resistance, there's a bunch of misguided stuff like TSL, DE, Harmonious, Frozen Ever After, et al. Guardians - good ride, wrong park. Tron - Probably the same thing. I may be harsh, and I'm certainly willing to admit if I'm wrong if shown otherwise, but the past decade-plus has led me to believe the company I fell in love with 40 years ago is dead and buried, and is now rapacious and soulless, focused solely on pleasing Wall Street. It's a beast I have little desire to continue feeding, because it will never change unless it's cut off.

I know so many kinds of frontline CMs — former CPers, GR, tours, operations, transportation— and they mostly share the same opinions I do about leadership in the company. Of course, there are a couple pixie dusters who work in the CM ranks, but by virtue of being frontline CMs they have a much easier time at understanding the product they work to deliver than anyone currently in Burbank. I'm not saying they are qualified to command the largest entertainment enterprise to ever exist on Earth, but let's not pretend even D'Amaro could get through a shift at the GR window in DHS.

The profession of Imagineering was created over 60 years by a bunch of people who had no idea what they were doing, and fostered by a diverse group of creative thinkers, some of whom got their start as frontline CMs. That profession was then allowed to rot under Iger and essentially neutered by the time we are in now, by people who have less creativity than me, a public auditor.

 

[SplashJacket]

If you can show us where posters have stated animosity towards the boots-on-the-ground CM's, please do.

Completely misses the point of my post.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Everybody knows the show has to look good from around the lagoon

The fact that they didn't understand this previously, further cements the complete lack of confidence I have in park decisions.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I understand why the mandate exists from a business standpoint (i.e. why they think it's a good idea/important) but it's such a misreading of what made the parks so popular in the first place -- many (if not most) of Disney World's best attractions wouldn't exist if the mandate had always been in place, among other things.

It also lowers overall quality. Not because using IP inherently makes for worse attractions, restaurants, etc., but because it hamstrings creativity. There's a significant loss of freedom to make the best possible product when designers are put into a box and only allowed to do certain things. There's certainly nothing wrong with using IP when it makes sense (and IP has always been part of Disney World), but forcing it leads to some mediocre designs.

I don't understand it. What benefit is there to have IP everywhere? Is it anything more than a 6-12 month marketing push? I'm not sure there's been a definitive reason given by Bob either other than, "if our competition had these IPs, they'd do it too." I really think current Disney leadership was content in minimal updates to the parks until Potter came along, and then their takeaway was "MOVIES IN THE PARK IS GOOD". That's it.

 

[MisterPenguin]

What benefit is there to have IP everywhere?

One example:

​

The use of the Sanderson Sisters for the Halloween Party. Wound up being very well received.​

​

Which has led to Hocus Pocus 2 and who knows what other spin-offs.​

The synergy is there. How often, I don't know, but Disney has the data.

Would any of us care about Alice anymore if it weren't for the decades-long presence of her rides?

People forget about the excitement parents drummed up in their kids to ride Dumbo or Pan or Alice. Parents with kids today are drumming up excitement to ride FEA or be part of the Frozen sing-along, since the Frozen movies are on a perpetual loop in their homes.

Newly installed IP may look out of place to us. But thirty years from now, it will be regarded as a classic, and during that time, it will move merch and inspire spin-off content on D+.

What's important is that they choose good IPs and make a good ride that's good in and of itself. A popular IP can't save a bad ride (looking at you, F&F). IP will get them to ride it once. But the ride has to be the reason to ride it again and again.


Also...

Disney Park Fans: Oh, no! IP is being shoehorned everywhere!

Also Disney Park Fans: There's space beyond Kali for a new land? Here, let me suggest these IPs I want to see....

 

[RSoxNo1]

One example:

​

The use of the Sanderson Sisters for the Halloween Party. Wound up being very well received.​

​

Which has led to Hocus Pocus 2 and who knows what other spin-offs.​

The synergy is there. How often, I don't know, but Disney has the data.

Would any of us care about Alice anymore if it weren't for the decades-long presence of her rides?

People forget about the excitement parents drummed up in their kids to ride Dumbo or Pan or Alice. Parents with kids today are drumming up excitement to ride FEA or be part of the Frozen sing-along, since the Frozen movies are on a perpetual loop in their homes.

Newly installed IP may look out of place to us. But thirty years from now, it will be regarded as a classic, and during that time, it will move merch and inspire spin-off content on D+.

What's important is that they choose good IPs and make a good ride that's good in and of itself. A popular IP can't save a bad ride (looking at you, F&F). IP will get them to ride it once. But the ride has to be the reason to ride it again and again.


Also...

Disney Park Fans: Oh, no! IP is being shoehorned everywhere!

Also Disney Park Fans: There's space beyond Kali for a new land? Here, let me suggest these IPs I want to see....

You're probably right about Hocus Pocus. Personally I wasn't a fan of the original movie, but people certain love it and love the stage show. That being said, there are plenty of reboots or live action remakes that happened without a castle stage show to gauge it's popularity.

But as for the role in the parks itself, is the addition of characters what's fueling attendance increases or is it the addition of quality? Look at DAK as an example, it saw a significant attendance boost after Everest and another after Pandora. AVATAR is the highest grossing movie of all time, but it simply doesn't have the fan base as something like Potter, Lord of the Rings or Star Wars. Pandora's success was a function of the execution and source material that lends itself to a highly themed environment.

It seems that Disney regards thematic fit and whether or not an IP lends itself to a themed environment as secondary to the familiarity of that IP. The leader of this nonsense is certainly Bob, but the mentality has permeated Imagineering where now there are people that have been there for over a decade that don't know anything different. That's a HUGE problem for the future of creativity in the parks. They've been told that this is no longer a creative medium that's valued and you will be forced to collaborate with movie makers who the top brass hold in higher regard.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

I don't understand it. What benefit is there to have IP everywhere? Is it anything more than a 6-12 month marketing push? I'm not sure there's been a definitive reason given by Bob either other than, "if our competition had these IPs, they'd do it too." I really think current Disney leadership was content in minimal updates to the parks until Potter came along, and then their takeaway was "MOVIES IN THE PARK IS GOOD". That's it.

I feel like they have been pretty clear they feel the IP they have makes their offerings unique - so one can go anywhere to see a more generically themed attraction, but you have to go to a Disney park to experience a Frozen themed attraction or whatever. And people do react big time when an IP they want shows up in one of the evening spectacular, etc. So I get it.

I do think things can go both ways (create a new IP for an attraction and then build merch, movies, etc. around it) and there are also plenty of Disney parks fans that appreciate unique offerings (so ok if 1 our 100 things aren't IP driven) but I do get whey they see an advantage in putting IP only they have into things

 

[TheMaxRebo]

The fact that they didn't understand this previously, further cements the complete lack of confidence I have in park decisions.

I think the design was so the Stargate provided proper view to those watching from the proposed multi-story Festival Center that wound up not getting built - which also would have been where they sold corporate/private event space at, etc.

not saying I think that is a great idea - obviously something 360 degree would also provide a good view from there, but I think that was the idea to promote the value of booking an event or dessert party or whatever from that building

 

[MisterPenguin]

Well, consider that Epic Universe is doubling down on IP, too.

Even Six Flags feels the need to paint a coaster red and blue and call it a Superman ride.

Don't think anything will change for a long time. You'd need an IP-less theme park like Evermore to become more popular than Disney to change the current trajectory.

 

[Vinnie Mac]

I don't understand it. What benefit is there to have IP everywhere? Is it anything more than a 6-12 month marketing push? I'm not sure there's been a definitive reason given by Bob either other than, "if our competition had these IPs, they'd do it too." I really think current Disney leadership was content in minimal updates to the parks until Potter came along, and then their takeaway was "MOVIES IN THE PARK IS GOOD". That's it.

I hate to say it, I genuinely do, but I actually do see where Chapek is coming from as well. When the average person goes to Disney World, they expect to see characters that they are familiar with or have grown up with. Think about how popular meet and greets are. Ofc I'd love to see more attractions and shows with original storylines and concepts, but I have come to accept that IP will be a huge part of the parks from now on (or at least during this Chapek era).

IP also doesn't eliminate the chances for classic attractions or shows. Think Happily Ever After. A show full of current IP but one I would consider a modern-day Disney parks classic. I've always said before that it to me is like the Illuminations of Magic Kingdom (sorry Wishes!).

And there's always the possibility of original concepts being mixed in with IP. If balanced correctly it could turn out well. That's why I am curious about how this new show will turn out

 

[marni1971]

It would be cool to reuse just the Tacos
I presume they are not designed to be towed on a daily basis, but if they could be towed out for the show and then towed backstage during the day that could work.

That won’t work.

 

[Vinnie Mac]

I don't understand it. What benefit is there to have IP everywhere? Is it anything more than a 6-12 month marketing push? I'm not sure there's been a definitive reason given by Bob either other than, "if our competition had these IPs, they'd do it too." I really think current Disney leadership was content in minimal updates to the parks until Potter came along, and then their takeaway was "MOVIES IN THE PARK IS GOOD". That's it.

I'd also like to add that the idea of IP-free projects isn't entirely dead in the parks. Space 220 does well without IP and feels like something that should actually be at EPCOT. If you exclude the song at the finale, the new Christmas firework show at MK is also IP-free.

 

[marni1971]

I'd also like to add that the idea of IP-free projects isn't entirely dead in the parks.

It isn’t. But consensus is it’s not worth presenting any new attraction to Chapek without a tie in since it has a slim chance of being approved.

Did I ever say how plain ugly this thing actually is in daylight? Maybe I did. Thank god its going.

 

[Vinnie Mac]

It would be cool to reuse just the Tacos
I presume they are not designed to be towed on a daily basis, but if they could be towed out for the show and then towed backstage during the day that could work.

On one hand I'm slightly dissapointed by the removal of the tacos cause the effects were stunning and visually addicting in a weird way and they made the holiday shows look GOLD. It's the best they've looked in years, decades even.

On the other hand, the disruption of the lagoon views, the 2D viewing format for the central barge (which I don't think was AS huge of a problem as everyone made it out to be but still bad), and the lack of mobility are issues that could not be ignored with the new barges.