GM Out, Cars In?

[muteki]

If I could chime in for my 2 cents, I don't think it is the characters themselves that fans take issue with, but rather their place in the park and how they fit in. Figment is an exception as he complements the concept of imagination well, and that has always been his home. He fits well with what all consider Imagination to be.

Nemo, on the other hand, does not fit well with what all consider The Living Seas to be (note the title). This is, IMHO, an indisputable fact.

However, the conflict exists because the fans look at the attraction regardless of it's current state and see The Living Seas, not The Seas w/ Nemo & Friends. For those, this will probably always be the case, and for them, they will most likely never be able to reconcile Nemo with The Seas.

The issue at hand is how well a given character fits in with the perception of the attraction. This perception will vary widely from person to person, and the problem is getting people to see something as you want them to see it, instead of looking at it in a way they want to see it.

Back to topic though:

Test Track fits in well with Epcot's current state (whatever that is). Adding Cars as a primary focus of the attraction would require significant retheming of the attraction, much more so than that which Nemo needed. The retheming necessary would horribly clash with the surroundings, as well as Epcot as a whole, and for that reason I don't see Cars happening.

 

[jakeman]

Nemo, on the other hand, does not fit well with what all consider The Living Seas to be (note the title). This is, IMHO, an indisputable fact.

Nemo is a fish. There are fish in the sea. These are facts. Throwing IMHO infront of "indisputable fact" does not make an opinion a fact.

However, the conflict exists because the fans look at the attraction regardless of it's current state and see The Living Seas, not The Seas w/ Nemo & Friends. For those, this will probably always be the case, and for them, they will most likely never be able to reconcile Nemo with The Seas.

That is unfortunate that they are so resistant to change they refuse to see the good the overlay has done the pavilion.

The issue at hand is how well a given character fits in with the perception of the attraction. This perception will vary widely from person to person, and the problem is getting people to see something as you want them to see it, instead of looking at it in a way they want to see it.

Yes, but when a perception is so flawed that it slips into pessimism and irrationality, then there needs to be a counterbalance to that. It's not a matter of changing opinions. It's a matter of keeping the negative perceptions in check when there is no problem except for what is in the posters mind.

Test Track fits in well with Epcot's current state (whatever that is). Adding Cars as a primary focus of the attraction would require significant retheming of the attraction, much more so than that which Nemo needed. The retheming necessary would horribly clash with the surroundings, as well as Epcot as a whole, and for that reason I don't see Cars happening.

I was trying to find a good way to state that. Well said.

 

[GothMickey]

Nemo, on the other hand, does not fit well with what all consider The Living Seas to be (note the title). This is, IMHO, an indisputable fact.

You do know that if something is your opinion, it is not a fact right?

Like I said, Future World is no longer about the future of anything. Discoveryland or Discovery World is a better suited name.

 

[jt04]

Back to topic though:

Test Track fits in well with Epcot's current state (whatever that is). Adding Cars as a primary focus of the attraction would require significant retheming of the attraction, much more so than that which Nemo needed. The retheming necessary would horribly clash with the surroundings, as well as Epcot as a whole, and for that reason I don't see Cars happening.

Yep, and we will never see Monsters Inc., Toy Story or Sitch all over Tomorrowland either. Oh wait.

 

[muteki]

Nemo is a fish. There are fish in the sea. These are facts. Throwing IMHO infront of "indisputable fact" does not make an opinion a fact.

My main intention here was to highlight not how much Nemo as a character clashes with the pavilion in its current state, (it's quite nice), but rather how he clashes with what it was, The Living Seas.

I am not trying to argue that one version is "right" or "correct" or "better", simply that no matter what changes are made to the pavilion, better or worse, they will always be compared to the original version.

Yep, and we will never see Monsters Inc., Toy Story or Sitch all over Tomorrowland either. Oh wait.

Well, they were able to add them with little impact to the exterior of the attraction. From the outside, other than the signs, you couldn't tell that any of those buildings housed Pixar material.

I don't think you could reformat TT to Cars without significantly changing the entrance area on the outside.

Of course, you are right, they put Stitch on the castle, nevermind

 

[WDW1974]

First off, as some other 'wise' posters have stated ... repeatedly ... Cars is NOT an option for TT ... as in it isn't happening.

It also isn't a foregone conclusion that GM will be pulling out ... although I peronally think the company should cease to exist because of the money it is losing and taking from taxpayers.

And since the thread has drifted, I'll weigh in on the characters in the parks yet again. Nemo may be a nice 'overlay' on the Seas ... but it in no way compares to the scope, concept and ideals that created the original Living Seas. I was there the day they dedicated the place ... and it was amazing and awe-inspiring. It may needed an overhaul ... but there were many concepts that were proposed that were much grander in scope and didn't include cartoon fish, dudes.

The sad thing is a whole generation has been conditioned to think that Disney Parks are largely about cartoon characters and the hottest franchise (HSM anyone?)

I hate to break it to those fanbois, but what made Disney parks so wonderful for over four decades had a lot more to do with the total experience ... and not toons and having THE DISNEY MAGIC shoved down your throat at every chance.

I'm sorry if that hurts anyone's feelings, but WDW was a lot better place when you weren't tripping over characters all over.

~RIP: River Country~

 

[TestTFan1993]

I think Honda or one of these non American car makers might takeover. Although maybe Pixar or Dreamworks may take over. It would be a good start for Dreamworks. Also with Wonders of Life closed, and Test Track not having a sponsor and may close to be refurb to a new sponsor, there would be no reason to go over to that area in Epcot.

 

[MousDad]

The sad thing is a whole generation has been conditioned to think that Disney Parks are largely about cartoon characters and the hottest franchise (HSM anyone?)

I hate to break it to those fanbois, but what made Disney parks so wonderful for over four decades had a lot more to do with the total experience ... and not toons and having THE DISNEY MAGIC shoved down your throat at every chance.

News flash. It's not the fanboys that think that, it's the general public. The fanboys agree with you. :ROFLOL:

BTW - Is "fanbois" pronounced [fan-bwah]?

 

[markjohns1]

Thread drifting a little.

I wonder if they had updated the Living Seas prior to Nemo with a little fish called Demo, or Memo, or somethig and kept the same storyline and retheming, with the interactive technology of Turtle Talk, would it be this poorly received? Could people, just for a second, get past their high minded ideals about what they think that Epcot should be and see that children are engaged and learning in the pavilion?

It's like you read my mind.

Figment is okay because he's a character original to the park while the other characters are simply cashing in the success of already existant movie franchises.

I don't think characters from movies need to be put in just to get kids to learn. You can do that perfectly well without any characters. My local science center is a good example, no characters but kids have a blast and learn a great deal too.

Disney is a for-profit company. It's odd that "cashing in" only applies for a character in an existant movie franchise, and not to a character created for an attraction which clearly was done in part to sell merchandise. The company needs to cash in. Where do we think the funding for new attractions comes from?

I hope a sponsor is found for TT, not only because we may see some improvements to the attraction, but it will save us from a huge post-show void. I do enjoy the showroom. Browsing through new vehicles without having salesmen circle like vultures is refreshing.

The sad thing is a whole generation has been conditioned to think that Disney Parks are largely about cartoon characters and the hottest franchise (HSM anyone?)

I hate to break it to those fanbois, but what made Disney parks so wonderful for over four decades had a lot more to do with the total experience ... and not toons and having THE DISNEY MAGIC shoved down your throat at every chance.

The Disney Parks are about whatever you're into. It's amusing to presume that there are correct and incorrect reasons for enjoying the Disney Parks. I'm sure you'll find someone who thinks WDW is about great resorts, great food, great camping, or even great golfing. There's something for everyone, which is one thing I find the Disney Parks to be all about.

 

[jakeman]

I'm sorry if that hurts anyone's feelings, but WDW was a lot better place when you weren't tripping over characters all over.

That's your opinion, nothing more.

Furthermore, your opinion of the parks is well stated, but also nothing more than your opinion.

It's not something to argue, but it's also not something to treat as fact when it is not.

 

[WDW Insider]

Why did you add Nemo to the Living Seas?

Because it allowed for a brand new attraction in a pavillion that badly needed one for an age-group that needed to be targeted in Epcot. Changing TT to a Cars theme achieves none of that (the ride is an E-Ride, retheming would be expensive, the ride is considered a thrill ride but the franchised being discussed is inheritently more closely related to young children).

 

[KaliSplash]

I shall not be surprised at all if GM pulls out. Congress was raising cane just a couple of weeks ago about a bank that sponsored a PGA golf tournament AND taking bailout money. Wachovia is pulling its name off the Charlotte PGA stop. Bank of America apparently had been considered a possible name for Yankee Stadium, if I remember correctly.

Someone in Congress is going to notice that GM is spending money at Disney while asking for bailout money. (I'm sure they already have).

So I'm sure Mickey will try to find a sponsor. Mickey needs money, too! Just ask their accountants

 

[Lee]

...the ride is considered a thrill ride but the franchised being discussed is inheritently more closely related to young children.

Radiator Springs Racers?:lookaroun

 

[Missing20K]

Because it allowed for a brand new attraction in a pavillion that badly needed one for an age-group that needed to be targeted in Epcot. Changing TT to a Cars theme achieves none of that (the ride is an E-Ride, retheming would be expensive, the ride is considered a thrill ride but the franchised being discussed is inheritently more closely related to young children).

Radiator Springs Racers?:lookaroun

Now I'm

 

[wickedfan07]

Radiator Springs Racers?:lookaroun

Radiator Springs Racers is being built alongside one or two other kid-accessible Cars attractions, right? Perhaps this is why it's not a concern in DCA. At Epcot, Test Track: Cars Edition would be the ONLY Cars experience in the park, meaning families may be more likely to be dissapointed at not being able to experience a Cars attraction together. At DCa, they'd be able to go on at least one of the other Cars attractions and come back and work up to RSR ona later trip.

Just a thought. Either way, it's good to know that Test Track should not be overtaken by Lightning McQueen and Mater anytime within the reasonable future.

 

[Lee]

Either way, it's good to know that Test Track should not be overtaken by Lightning McQueen and Mater anytime within the reasonable future.

Should not and will not.

 

[wickedfan07]

Should not and will not.

I like the sound of that!

 

[marsrunner]

Well, I'm glad that Cars won't be overtaking the TT pavillion. I have nothing against Pixar or any other character per se, but the big problem is that current Disney managment tends not to add them to Epcot in a way that enhances the pavillions original mission: to educate or at least inform. I don't think at all that Nemo is a good addition to the Living Seas. It draws people in, sure, but what exactly is Nemo or Crush INFORMING anyone about? My daughter loved Turtle Talk with Crush, but they didn't teach you anything about turtles, the ocean or anything else, unless you consider learning what a turtle means when he says "DUDE" educational.
Figment fits because (well, at least in the pavillions original incarnation) he facilitated children learning about imagination; why its useful, what can be done with it, etc., etc. He was a character that the kids liked and would listen to, rather than having some stuffy scientist try to explain to you. All the original pavillions did this to one degree or another. They just don't anymore by and large.
If they could add any existing cartoon character or create a new cartoon character and put him in any pavillion and have the educational experience enhanced, then I'd be all for it. Educational pavillions like these don't have to be boring. They weren't originally. Some may have gotten stale over the years, but the solution to that is not slapping Nemo on top of it and then pretending its educational. It isn't. I mean for crying out loud, the Nemo clam ride or whatever the hell it is is the same basic thing as the Submarine Voyage at Disneyland. There, it works, because the Magic Kingdom is not and never has been about informing anyone of anything. Turtle Talk with Crush is in California Adventure, and its fine there, because that place isn't informing anyone about anything either. Heck, its barely entertaining them! :rimshot:

 

[flynnibus]

That is unfortunate that they are so resistant to change they refuse to see the good the overlay has done the pavilion.

The old pavilion was more then just a big aquarium. It was a show that offered suspension of disbelief.. a Sci-Fi vision of the future.. and educational value about the seas past and future.

Today's version is simply an aquarium with Disney characters to see while you visit the aquarium.

 

[jakeman]

The old pavilion was more then just a big aquarium. It was a show that offered suspension of disbelief.. a Sci-Fi vision of the future.. and educational value about the seas past and future.

Today's version is simply an aquarium with Disney characters to see while you visit the aquarium.

Thank you for proving my point.