-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Extreme Park Center Of Tomorrow??
- Thread starter CTXRover
- Start date
Oh, I think that in the early 90's Epcot was quite dated. Ironically, now we would find that retro look oh-so-cool!
I guess my beggest problem with Epcot (and Epcot is still my favorite park) is that it lacks a bit of individuality that it had. I remeber back in the 80's and early 90's parents would actually convince their children's teachers that taking their kids out of school for a week to go to Disney was a good thing. Yeah, Epcot lacked a bit of excitement, but there was nothing else like it.
At the risk of sounding too sentimental, the dark rides that were lost (World of Motion, Horizons, Original Journey into Imagination) had a charm that the new rides are missing. I wouldn't mind more thrill rides If they also kept the dark rides. SSE is still my favorite, and I think the only things it really needs are better cars and make the star field at the end better.
I havn't been to any other Disney parks - have any of them built any new Dark Rides other than Winnie the Pooh? It seems to be a lost art.
I guess my beggest problem with Epcot (and Epcot is still my favorite park) is that it lacks a bit of individuality that it had. I remeber back in the 80's and early 90's parents would actually convince their children's teachers that taking their kids out of school for a week to go to Disney was a good thing. Yeah, Epcot lacked a bit of excitement, but there was nothing else like it.
At the risk of sounding too sentimental, the dark rides that were lost (World of Motion, Horizons, Original Journey into Imagination) had a charm that the new rides are missing. I wouldn't mind more thrill rides If they also kept the dark rides. SSE is still my favorite, and I think the only things it really needs are better cars and make the star field at the end better.
I havn't been to any other Disney parks - have any of them built any new Dark Rides other than Winnie the Pooh? It seems to be a lost art.
The Rainforest Roller Coaster rumor has been around for a while. I think it would be a great idea, and that area of the park, and especially that pavilion, need a draw. But I think it may have been passed over since Soaring is coming it. Maybe it was an idea that got dropped.
I hear about some coaster going into Imagination, but I also heard that they would never do that since it is considered a "kids" attraction. I wish they would just work on getting Journey into Imagination right.
I do think that that side of the park does need a good e-ticket ride, because it is kind of a dead area. As far as WoL, I think it's biggest problem is that it is too out of the way. A radical solution, I know, but I think they should remove a little bit of Communicore at the ends near Spaceship Earth so that you can walk right along the pavillions. I think it would bring more people to them. Oh, and I would kind of expand the focus of Wonders of Life to be more inclusive of Biology and maybe even chemistry. Maybe bring back the old atom ride they had in the original tomorrow land - what was that called?
I hear about some coaster going into Imagination, but I also heard that they would never do that since it is considered a "kids" attraction. I wish they would just work on getting Journey into Imagination right.
I do think that that side of the park does need a good e-ticket ride, because it is kind of a dead area. As far as WoL, I think it's biggest problem is that it is too out of the way. A radical solution, I know, but I think they should remove a little bit of Communicore at the ends near Spaceship Earth so that you can walk right along the pavillions. I think it would bring more people to them. Oh, and I would kind of expand the focus of Wonders of Life to be more inclusive of Biology and maybe even chemistry. Maybe bring back the old atom ride they had in the original tomorrow land - what was that called?
Brian_B
Member
This is what I thought for years, esp. when they took a wrecking ball to my favorite ride (ahem).
Please don't misunderstand - I'm a HUGE fan of Epcot Center too, the way it was before Disney started loving it the way OJ loved Nicole. HUGE. Horizons, WOM, they were all WONDERFUL attractions. The best, ever. Test Track is an inferior, unworthy replacement (that's just my opinion, I know a lot of you like it so quit emailing me). Mission: Space is great, but it's no Horizons.
The problem is, adding attractions in addition to the old ones would have meant the need to find new sponsors for all the old rides, plus getting more for the new rides as well. Additionally, there would have been no way that TT and WoM could have coexisted (for example). Both were too large to be housed in that one building, and how would it have made sense to have two pavilions dedicated to motion/cars/whatever? But I digress.
The main problem is $$. Maintanence and rehabs, replacing old parts, etc. If they were uber-popular, like the Cyclone at Coney Island for example, perhaps they would have been perserved. Look at Toad's Wild Ride - people actually went to the parks in protest and had toad-in's (god bless these people btw), but in the end Disney just wouldn't listen. I don't mean to be a defeatist here, but reality is reality: Horizons and WoM, WoL, JII, they're gone. They weren't drawing the same crowds, despite how amazing they were or how much people like you and I loved them. Why? Most people are stupid and don't appreciate great things. Most people want that quick-fix adrenaline rush nowadays.
Another obvious factor is the proximity of Universal's new park, which boasts decent atmosphere and huge thrills. Disney needs to compete, and it appears as though a re-thought Epcot is their answer. One could also blame Eisner's decisions: His sequel-mongering and obvious emphasis on $$ have had a significant impact on the way Disney and it's parks are perceived by the vast majority. When The Living Seas opened in 1986, there was a line to get in that stretched in front of and past the Land pavilion. Was there such a crowd when M:S opened? No. It's not because M:S was any less spectacular; it's because the public doesn't think about Disney the same way anymore (I offer SNL's parody/sketch, "Bambi 2000" as proof).
There isn't really anything we can do to fight the change. Change is all that is constant about life - it may be painful, but if we don't accept it, we'll all just go crazy thinking about it. The best we can do is (1) be happy with the good things that still exist, such as SSE and (to an extent) the Living Seas and the Land; (2) appreciate the quality of new additions and changes, however hard it may be, and (3) look forward to a time in which Eisner is gone or changed his ways, and Disney is strong once again - and have faith, because it will happen.
-Brian
(Sorry - I didn't mean to turn that into a short novel
)
DisneyFan 2000
Well-Known Member
^Coudn't have said it better myself^!!!
Although I haven't seen WOM or Horizons!!! Does anyone have a link for videos?
Although I haven't seen WOM or Horizons!!! Does anyone have a link for videos?
:hammer:
Zipadeedoodah
New Member
Originally posted by Brian_B
This is what I thought for years, esp. when they took a wrecking ball to my favorite ride (ahem).
Please don't misunderstand - I'm a HUGE fan of Epcot Center too, the way it was before Disney started loving it the way OJ loved Nicole. HUGE. Horizons, WOM, they were all WONDERFUL attractions. The best, ever. Test Track is an inferior, unworthy replacement (that's just my opinion, I know a lot of you like it so quit emailing me). Mission: Space is great, but it's no Horizons.
The problem is, adding attractions in addition to the old ones would have meant the need to find new sponsors for all the old rides, plus getting more for the new rides as well. Additionally, there would have been no way that TT and WoM could have coexisted (for example). Both were too large to be housed in that one building, and how would it have made sense to have two pavilions dedicated to motion/cars/whatever? But I digress.
The main problem is $$. Maintanence and rehabs, replacing old parts, etc. If they were uber-popular, like the Cyclone at Coney Island for example, perhaps they would have been perserved. Look at Toad's Wild Ride - people actually went to the parks in protest and had toad-in's (god bless these people btw), but in the end Disney just wouldn't listen. I don't mean to be a defeatist here, but reality is reality: Horizons and WoM, WoL, JII, they're gone. They weren't drawing the same crowds, despite how amazing they were or how much people like you and I loved them. Why? Most people are stupid and don't appreciate great things. Most people want that quick-fix adrenaline rush nowadays.
Another obvious factor is the proximity of Universal's new park, which boasts decent atmosphere and huge thrills. Disney needs to compete, and it appears as though a re-thought Epcot is their answer. One could also blame Eisner's decisions: His sequel-mongering and obvious emphasis on $$ have had a significant impact on the way Disney and it's parks are perceived by the vast majority. When The Living Seas opened in 1986, there was a line to get in that stretched in front of and past the Land pavilion. Was there such a crowd when M:S opened? No. It's not because M:S was any less spectacular; it's because the public doesn't think about Disney the same way anymore (I offer SNL's parody/sketch, "Bambi 2000" as proof).
There isn't really anything we can do to fight the change. Change is all that is constant about life - it may be painful, but if we don't accept it, we'll all just go crazy thinking about it. The best we can do is (1) be happy with the good things that still exist, such as SSE and (to an extent) the Living Seas and the Land; (2) appreciate the quality of new additions and changes, however hard it may be, and (3) look forward to a time in which Eisner is gone or changed his ways, and Disney is strong once again - and have faith, because it will happen.
-Brian
(Sorry - I didn't mean to turn that into a short novel
Very well said, Brian....you are in sync with my thoughts exactly!
But isn't the best way to compete is to offer something different? I get worried that Disney may be hurting themsleves by dropping down to their competition's level (in ride offerings, that is) because their competition can't touch them.
I agree that some excitement was needed in Epcot, what I don't like is how they went too far - the only decent dark ride left was Space Ship Earth, and they were even talking about taking that out. I think they could have found other ways (or other pavilioons, such as Imagination or Land, anyone?) to put a thrill ride in.
Zipadeedoodah
New Member
I know what you are saying....Thankfully the Spaceship Earth redo wasn't possible or they would have gotten rid of that too. You know, I wish Disney would ask the people what they want done with the parks, instead of trying to figure it all out themselves. They are not Disney GUESTS...they shouldn't pretend to know what we want! It's not too difficult....keep the guests happy, and they will return, and spend money! haha :animwink: I know they do their little survey things, but do they REALLY look closely and take consideration....if they are, then they are asking the wrong group of people! :lol:
epcot2004
Active Member
I agree. EPCOT should stay as close to the original design as possible. Maybe with proper marketing the could increase interest without making a wholesale change. There is a certain tranquility at EPCOT that is slowly being taken away by the addition of all of these "thrill rides". Don't get me wrong I love Test Track and will soon ride Mission:Space but these attractions are somewhat scientific and educational. I don't think the focus should change. (except for taking the hand down, it was only good for 2000).
Calamar
New Member
I agree with everything you've written here; yes, well said.
Having said that, I must also mention that I've seen the parody you're referring to, and I would be at a Bambi 2000 attraction in an instant. Hm, I'd probably spend the whole vacation riding it.
I want to help Bambi and Jared fight the terrorists.
Brian_B
Member
Zipadeedoodah hit the nail on the head with this one. The decision-makers and marketing people have the same problem as the people at MTV, and any marketing person who has ever pushed the "extreme" concept. They're so freakin' OUT OF TOUCH with reality. They try to relate to the current generation by changing their image to fit whatever they think we like, and of COURSE it comes across as being transparent. Extreme Park Center of Tomorrow...bah. If any of you read Maddox's articles, you know exactly what I'm talking about.
I liked it better when Disney existed on its own terms and created it's own ideas, and didn't try to relate to what the 12-18 demographic currently though was "cool". What happens in 2 years when "extreme" becomes cliche? Guess we'll just have to put up with even more stupid fake garbage that noone cares about.
Sorry for the rant, I'm just sick of the bs - it's sad that nowadays Disney isn't even above it.
-Brian
Dizknee_Phreek
Well-Known Member
I agree 100%! And I think that's Disney's problem these days. I think they're taking the easy way out. and i question if they're using their Imagineers to their full potential.
Disney definately needs to get back to their roots, and start thinking of attractions that will expand on the technology we have...not just copy it.
Dizknee_Phreek
Well-Known Member
Re: Ok here's what I think
i'm a little confused...how do you have to pay for every little thing at WDW? i mean, sure there's park admission, resort, food, etc...but that's like everywhere else in the world. if you want something, most likely, you'll have to pay for it.
there's advertisements all over the world, for everything. not sure what you mean by ads all over WDW...i mean, sure there's Coca Cola, McDonald's, Dasani, etc...but that's what partnerships are all about. if Disney didn't have partnerships or sponsors, there wouldn't be a Disney World. if that's what you mean by advertisements then, i hate to tell ya, but they're not going anywhere any time too soon.
and i'm not sure what you mean by Epcot has had a hard time convincing people of what it is, and what it stands for...it's a theme park...people get that. sure the Experiment Prototype Community of Tomorrow is hard for people to get first off, but it's not really relevent anyway, imo. that's what Walt wanted it to stand for, and he wanted to make an actual city. the theme park is obviously not a city, so therefore, to me, the full name is just a good bit of trivia, but not vital for someone to enjoy the park.
and could you clairfy what you meant by 'evaluation'
but i do agree with you...the board at Disney (not Disney itself, of course) needs to stop thinking they're untouchable. that way of thinking never did anyone any good...just look at what happened to the 'unsinkable' Titanic. but i do think they're starting to see that their reign won't be lasting much longer.
i'm a little confused...how do you have to pay for every little thing at WDW? i mean, sure there's park admission, resort, food, etc...but that's like everywhere else in the world. if you want something, most likely, you'll have to pay for it.
there's advertisements all over the world, for everything. not sure what you mean by ads all over WDW...i mean, sure there's Coca Cola, McDonald's, Dasani, etc...but that's what partnerships are all about. if Disney didn't have partnerships or sponsors, there wouldn't be a Disney World. if that's what you mean by advertisements then, i hate to tell ya, but they're not going anywhere any time too soon.
and i'm not sure what you mean by Epcot has had a hard time convincing people of what it is, and what it stands for...it's a theme park...people get that. sure the Experiment Prototype Community of Tomorrow is hard for people to get first off, but it's not really relevent anyway, imo. that's what Walt wanted it to stand for, and he wanted to make an actual city. the theme park is obviously not a city, so therefore, to me, the full name is just a good bit of trivia, but not vital for someone to enjoy the park.
and could you clairfy what you meant by 'evaluation'
but i do agree with you...the board at Disney (not Disney itself, of course) needs to stop thinking they're untouchable. that way of thinking never did anyone any good...just look at what happened to the 'unsinkable' Titanic. but i do think they're starting to see that their reign won't be lasting much longer.
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
Re: Ok here's what I think
Ok... that didn't really... make sence. What are you talking... about when Epcot has every... litle thing to... pay for... Sure... the souveniers cost some... money... but you don't have to pay for... everything. It's not like... you have to pay 50 dollars... to ride Mission Space... There are not thousands... of advertisements to at Epcot... like you said. Although, I have to admite this... Disney does partner with... McDonalds... but it's a bad decsision made by... Michael Eisner.
BTW... what's up with all of... those... pauses in you post...? ...
( j/k ):lol: :wave:
Ok... that didn't really... make sence. What are you talking... about when Epcot has every... litle thing to... pay for... Sure... the souveniers cost some... money... but you don't have to pay for... everything. It's not like... you have to pay 50 dollars... to ride Mission Space... There are not thousands... of advertisements to at Epcot... like you said. Although, I have to admite this... Disney does partner with... McDonalds... but it's a bad decsision made by... Michael Eisner.
BTW... what's up with all of... those... pauses in you post...?
...( j/k ):lol: :wave: