OK, I'll ask. Do you really hate animals or is that some sort of literary device? :lol: I've never heard of someone hating animals.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
GM Out, Cars In?
- Thread starter jt04
- Start date
OK, I'll ask. Do you really hate animals or is that some sort of literary device? :lol: I've never heard of someone hating animals.
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
Soarin simply needs a new film. It doesn't make sense why you're flying over California in Florida. What they need to do is have a new film that flies over other natural wonders of the world like the grand canyon, rain forrest, rocky mountains, everglades, desert dunes, etc. It would really enforce the theme of conservation and the name could be changed to "Soarin over the Earth."
Yes and produced by the folks who produced the "Planet Earth" series. I think they are also producing the new nature movie Disney will release soon so the mouse has a connection to them.
Yes and produced by the folks who produced the "Planet Earth" series. I think they are also producing the new nature movie Disney will release soon so the mouse has a connection to them.
Do you mean the Planet Earth the BBC tv show? If so I don't see them making a film for Soarin' and I am not aware of them making a film with Disney as they are the UK national broadcaster.
eddy21
Active Member
little more than that. T.T and dionosaur are the most $$$$$ rides to maintain.
GM reconsidering Epcot sponsorship
The stock market meltdown has many onetime blue-chip companies rethinking expensive marketing deals, including attraction sponsorships at Walt Disney World. Up now: General Motors, which is negotiating the future of its $5 million-a-year sponsorship for the Test Track attraction at Epcot, says Automotive News. GM's 10-year deal expires this year and includes signs, a miniature version of a GM proving ground, a car showroom and a commitment for Disney to buy a set number of GM vehicles. GE, Exxon Mobil and AT&T have dropped out of Epcot attractions in the past, leaving some rides sponsor-free until replacements like Siemens and Hewlett-Packard arrived.
GM reconsidering Epcot sponsorship
The stock market meltdown has many onetime blue-chip companies rethinking expensive marketing deals, including attraction sponsorships at Walt Disney World. Up now: General Motors, which is negotiating the future of its $5 million-a-year sponsorship for the Test Track attraction at Epcot, says Automotive News. GM's 10-year deal expires this year and includes signs, a miniature version of a GM proving ground, a car showroom and a commitment for Disney to buy a set number of GM vehicles. GE, Exxon Mobil and AT&T have dropped out of Epcot attractions in the past, leaving some rides sponsor-free until replacements like Siemens and Hewlett-Packard arrived.
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by WDW1974
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 not sure if you realize it, but you're basically saying what I am here.
WDW is about all of the things you list. I am the type of person who has spend countless days there without ever setting foot in a park, opting to enjoy the amazing resorts, pools, spas, restaurants etc ...
BUT ...
What I am also saying is the parks are a whole lot more than simply being about toons. I guess you could call that an opinion, but based upon speaking with many individuals who have created them and reading countless books on the subject, I'm pretty sure it's also one based on a lot of fact.
That characters have become so prevalent has a lot to do with marketing and dumbing things down to the LCD. And many younger guests, as well as guests who didn't visit the resort in its first quarter century, have been conditioned to accept a Disney experience that is very different than those of us who have been visiting much longer.
Since standards have droppped in so many areas since the mid-90s, it isn't a leap to say many of those guests are much less discerning about the quality of their Disney experience simply because they don't know any better ... they haven't experienced the Disney we 'oldtimers' have ... they don't have the perspective ... and, yeah, many of them think that Disney=Disney cartoon characters everywhere.
Oh, how I long for the days when Hidden Mickeys were just that ... not a cottage industry.
Originally Posted by WDW1974
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 not sure if you realize it, but you're basically saying what I am here.
WDW is about all of the things you list. I am the type of person who has spend countless days there without ever setting foot in a park, opting to enjoy the amazing resorts, pools, spas, restaurants etc ...
BUT ...
What I am also saying is the parks are a whole lot more than simply being about toons. I guess you could call that an opinion, but based upon speaking with many individuals who have created them and reading countless books on the subject, I'm pretty sure it's also one based on a lot of fact.
That characters have become so prevalent has a lot to do with marketing and dumbing things down to the LCD. And many younger guests, as well as guests who didn't visit the resort in its first quarter century, have been conditioned to accept a Disney experience that is very different than those of us who have been visiting much longer.
Since standards have droppped in so many areas since the mid-90s, it isn't a leap to say many of those guests are much less discerning about the quality of their Disney experience simply because they don't know any better ... they haven't experienced the Disney we 'oldtimers' have ... they don't have the perspective ... and, yeah, many of them think that Disney=Disney cartoon characters everywhere.
Oh, how I long for the days when Hidden Mickeys were just that ... not a cottage industry.
nibblesandbits
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry...but how does changing the name from the Living Seas to The Seas with Nemo and Friends (and of course, including Nemo in the pavilion period) alienate a big portion of society. Sure, Finding Nemo was a cartoon, and was loved by many children...but I can't tell you then number of adults who love those adorable clownfish and of course, who could forget, Dory. (Well, she might forget herself...:lookaroun ) Finding Nemo was one of the most popular films as those characters resonated with both children and adults. Technically, I think changing the pavilion over brought more people into the pavilion overall, not less.
The only people who have I've heard have felt alienated from this area are people who are Epcot Center fanatics who wax poetic about how great the place was (and sure, it was great) but don't want to accept that times have changed and that Epcot needed to change with it. If the parks were kept the way they had originally been concieved, the park would been a very stale place right now...much like the Magic Kingdom has become to some people recently on these boards. You can't say that Epcot is stale in it's present state.
And while I agree, the actual ride portion isn't the most educational thing they have on property...at least after you get off the ride, you are escorted into an area where you do have the opportunity to learn more about sea life and some of the fish that live there. Disney could have escorted people right out the door with no second glance at anything else in that pavilion if they had wanted to.
And sure, there are some people who will head straight for the exits after getting off the ride...just wanting to get in the next attraction trying to accomplish everything. We've all been there at one point or another, I'm sure. But, it also allows people who maybe do get done with the ride to think, hmmm...this area looks interesting, I want to find out more. So, yes, now it gives people a choice, but the choice to learn is still there, if you want to take it. I know I have.
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
It didn't work? Really? So all those throngs of happy people I saw at EPCOT Center in the 1980s and 90s were just high on pixie dust or faking it?
The vision for the park has changed because there no longer are visionaries running Disney, its parks and resorts and Imagineering.
It is much simpler (and cheaper) to throw toons everywhere and say that is what people want.
That may be your feelings, but that doesn't make it factual at all. The Seas was modified because after United Technologies ended sponsorship, on a very pricey pavilion, and Disney couldn't sign on a replacement, The Mouse didn't want to invest in it and it got tired and dreary. That is a FACT.
They then made matters worse by closing the sea cabs, which effectively killed the pavilion because it destroyed the whole illusion of traveling to a sea base deep on the floor of the ocean.
It became simply a tired aquarium. Disney killed it because they didn't want to pay for it. When Brad Rex was VP of the park, he actually proposed shuttering the whole place to make his numbers look better.
Nemo was one of many concepts proposed for modernizing The Seas ... it was the cheapest and certainly the easiest.
It's simple to sit back and say that Nemo is more popular than the Seas were in say 2002 by far ... but you can't say that ANY of the other concepts wouldn't have been as popular or moreso.
What happened was very simple. Disney lost sponsors and didn't want to invest in expensive redos. This is a fact. EPCOT was supposed to be an ever-changing World's Fair type experience, but by the mid-90s Disney had no stomach for investing millions annually to keep it fresh ... and cutting edge.
In an area called 'Future World' you can't simply leave attractions for over a decade without updating them some ... in some cases, massively.
Without other companies picking up the tab, Disney did the bare minimum. And, even with it, Imagination comes to mind ... they made bad creative decisions.
Imagination 3.0 now (after over $70 million in rehabs) draws fewer guests than the original ride did.
So ... are you saying that people are dumber today? That they are like a kitty chasing a flashlight you shine on a wall? That the only way they can be entertained (and educated) at WDW is if you toss in toons?
Just asking ... I do think people are largely dumber today ... however, I still have faith in most of them to want better things. I think Walt had it right as did the people who worked for him and followed after he was gone ... you don't talk down to your audience (even and especially children) ... you don't do the simple ... the easy ... you don't give people what you think they want ... you always try to do what's never been done ... you keep raising the bar (not lowering it) ... you give people what they didn't even know they wanted.
EPCOT today is a fun enjoyable place ... but I find it more than ironic that in the 21st century it is a much less ambitious, a simpler and more pedestrian place than it was back in the 20th century.
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
Yes.
Sadly, you can.
From the less than stellar upkeep (everything from custodial, to horticulture to attraction ops/effects) ... to so many dead zones like WoL and the second level of Imagination ... to very tired attractions like UoE, that Honey, I Shrunk the Audience 90s flick ... even parts of World Showcase where shops were shuttered (Canada, France and UK) with either no replacements or were turned into coloring places for kids ... to a night time show that is in a sorry state and needs replacing even when firing on all cylinders ... to attractions that are just plain awful like Imagination or the Martin Short bastardization of O Canada ... sadly, EPCOT does feel stale in many ways.
EPCOT, more than any other Disney park, needs to be kept fresh ... right now, they are largely disguising the fact it isn't with ever-longer annual festivals.
nibblesandbits
Well-Known Member
Ah...you're right...I keep thinking about the new things they've put in over the past few years, but yes...there are some definite things that need updating as well. To me, it is one of the least stale, but yes...after you mentioned some of those things, I can see where you're coming from.
yankspy
Well-Known Member
I thought it was about the future?
How about transportation, communication, imagination, agriculture, the future, the sea, energy, etc.Was I supposed to learn something from the original Epcot pavilions?
I'm a huge Epcot Center fan, but all I remember learning from some of my favorite old Epcot attractions like Horizons was that in the 21st century when we worked on all the high-tech gizmos we would all be thin, we would all wear polyester jumpsuits, and we would all have very fluffy early-1980's feathered hairdo's.
Enchantâmes
Active Member
Imagination needs some work ASAP... :fork:
Mr.EPCOT
Active Member
Well, no, I don't think learning is or was really the goal of the place. I think enlightenment and awareness would be the more appropriate terminology. EPCOT Center isn't the easiest concept to explain, so people would just generally describe it as "the park where you learn at," and that lead to kind of an unfair, misleading stigma that just snowballed. You'll notice it doesn't outright say "teach" in the dedication, just "entertain, inform, and inspire." That's exactly what the park needs to live up to its full potential, and has never really fully achieved. It got really close in its first few years, but, of course, that's the big debate nowadays, isn't it?
HMF
Well-Known Member
Little Mermaid came out 3 years after the Living Seas opened and it did not become The Seas with Ariel & Friends. And please no one bring up Project Gemini because I would like to pretend that never happened.
wickedfan07
Member
It didn't work? Really? So all those throngs of happy people I saw at EPCOT Center in the 1980s and 90s were just high on pixie dust or faking it?[.quote]
Please allow me to rephrase what I said. You are right, Epcot did work...in 1982. If Epcot's attractions had continued to remain hugely popular, Disney would have kept them operating. Perhaps it was the collection of attractions, all the little pieces working together, that has caused Epcot to change. At opening, Epcot was one big Audio Animatronic extravaganza. By 1996, it was decided to change Epcot a bit and attempt to attract a wider audience by introducing a thrill ride. Thus, World of Motion gave way to Test Track. If Disney continued to operate many of the original attractions today (even updated versions of them), Epcot would not be nearly as exciting or appealing today. Are you trying to tell me Epcot would be better if Horizons, World of Motion, the original Spaceship Earth, the Universe of Energy, and The Living Seas were all still operating today? If that's what you are arguing, it is my personal opinion that you are mistaken and merely being nostalgic for things you can't ever experience again.
You are right about that. However, society has changed within that time, too. You can't say that all of the changes to Epcot are (1) bad, and (2) completely because of a lack of vision on the part of the designers and operator. For example, thrill rides came about because Guests wanted them. (Obviously if no one wanted them, there wouldn't be two-hour waits for Soarin andf Test Track.)
Yes, the sponsorship helped that progression of events occur. However, I personally believe Disney would continue to fund an Epcot attraction without a sponsor if that attraction were pulling in a decent and consistent number of Guests on a daily basis. The Living Seas woud have remained open if people kept streaming through in droves; the same goes for Horizons and Wonders of Life. I don't have attendance figures for these attractions, and I haven't had the means or ability to visit the parks as much as you have. I could very well be wrong. But it seems odd to me that Disney would start chipping away at an attraction that everyone loved and couldn't get enough of. If the only people who were banging down the doors of the closed Sea Cabs were Epcot fans like those here, it meant it was time for a change.
I am sure there were other concepts on the table for the pavilion; I don't recall saying Nemo was the only concept available. Perhaps you can enlighten me on the details of some of these other concepts.
Why then did Disney allow the Universe of Energy pavilion to sit and grow stale for 14 years while energy technology was changing rapidly? I thought the Disney of the 1980s was an innovative company who wanted to keep things cutting edge? Why then did they not update UoE until 1996? The same goes for Horizons, World of Motion, The Land or any of the original attractions. You can't tell me the Disney of the 1980s had any more a stomach for what Epcot required than it did by the 90s or now. (Disney under Walt did (he ripped up DL's Tomrrowland how many times while he was alive?), but Disney after Epcot actually opened didn't.
That WAS a bad creative decision, and I have not attempted to defend that attraction at all. If you notice, I've steered far, far away from mentioning it at all. What has happened to that attraction is different I think, because at the end of its original life, I think it was still fairly popular, and a big change wasn't entirely necessary. (I could be wrong about that...no attendance numbers.) Contrast that to say, Horixons, who, in my own personal perception, wasn't doing much business before it closed.
People are only getting dumber because very few people are motivating them to want anything better. Th desire to learn for the sake of learning is virtually gone; there needs to be some direct reward associated with everything for it to be considered worthwhile. "The powers that be," whoever they may be, have talked down to society as a whole for far too long. Walt DID have it right, and you shouldn't talk down to any particular group of people. There are many, many reasons why we have fallen into the habit of "being sheep" and following. (Not least of these are money and corporate greed.) the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting pooer in more ways than just their finances. I'll leave it at that.
I firmly believe that Epcot and Disney could play a huge role in the education of people (not just children) around the world. They have a tremendous opportunity (and with their widespread recognition and global selling power, it is almost a social responsibility) to actually help change the world and teach people to learn. It is sad that they've chosen to just empty the world's wallets in the short term rather than make an investment in the world's future that will pay a dividend far more valuable than any you can find on the stock market (even without a recession).
If I've come off as a Disney apologist, I ...well...apologize. (
yankspy said:
The future is created in the present (aka. "The future world is born today"). Anything about the future is inherently about the present and what we are doing today. Epcot can contain a vision for the future, of course, but it is driven by what is occuring in the world today. (Waiting for the future to come to you is pointess; it will always ellude you.)
And how can you say Epcot is ONLY about the future? What is World Showcase for then?
HMF
Well-Known Member
I disagree I think the Epcot message hit it's peak during the Millenium Celebration . With the exception of JIYI The Millenium Celebration is when Epcot's theme really shine through. ( I first went in 99) I understand people upset about Horizons. To me (with the obvious exception of JIYI) Epcot started it's downward spiral with the Seas with Nemo & Friends. As to why it alieanates part of the audience. How many teenagers or childless adults will flock to something called "The Seas with Nemo & Friends?
yankspy
Well-Known Member
Fair enough. I always sort of thought about Epcot in the sense that WS was the past, we are in the present, and Future World was what was ahead.It didn't work? Really? So all those throngs of happy people I saw at EPCOT Center in the 1980s and 90s were just high on pixie dust or faking it?[.quote]
Please allow me to rephrase what I said. You are right, Epcot did work...in 1982. If Epcot's attractions had continued to remain hugely popular, Disney would have kept them operating. Perhaps it was the collection of attractions, all the little pieces working together, that has caused Epcot to change. At opening, Epcot was one big Audio Animatronic extravaganza. By 1996, it was decided to change Epcot a bit and attempt to attract a wider audience by introducing a thrill ride. Thus, World of Motion gave way to Test Track. If Disney continued to operate many of the original attractions today (even updated versions of them), Epcot would not be nearly as exciting or appealing today. Are you trying to tell me Epcot would be better if Horizons, World of Motion, the original Spaceship Earth, the Universe of Energy, and The Living Seas were all still operating today? If that's what you are arguing, it is my personal opinion that you are mistaken and merely being nostalgic for things you can't ever experience again.
You are right about that. However, society has changed within that time, too. You can't say that all of the changes to Epcot are (1) bad, and (2) completely because of a lack of vision on the part of the designers and operator. For example, thrill rides came about because Guests wanted them. (Obviously if no one wanted them, there wouldn't be two-hour waits for Soarin andf Test Track.)
Yes, the sponsorship helped that progression of events occur. However, I personally believe Disney would continue to fund an Epcot attraction without a sponsor if that attraction were pulling in a decent and consistent number of Guests on a daily basis. The Living Seas woud have remained open if people kept streaming through in droves; the same goes for Horizons and Wonders of Life. I don't have attendance figures for these attractions, and I haven't had the means or ability to visit the parks as much as you have. I could very well be wrong. But it seems odd to me that Disney would start chipping away at an attraction that everyone loved and couldn't get enough of. If the only people who were banging down the doors of the closed Sea Cabs were Epcot fans like those here, it meant it was time for a change.
I am sure there were other concepts on the table for the pavilion; I don't recall saying Nemo was the only concept available. Perhaps you can enlighten me on the details of some of these other concepts.
Why then did Disney allow the Universe of Energy pavilion to sit and grow stale for 14 years while energy technology was changing rapidly? I thought the Disney of the 1980s was an innovative company who wanted to keep things cutting edge? Why then did they not update UoE until 1996? The same goes for Horizons, World of Motion, The Land or any of the original attractions. You can't tell me the Disney of the 1980s had any more a stomach for what Epcot required than it did by the 90s or now. (Disney under Walt did (he ripped up DL's Tomrrowland how many times while he was alive?), but Disney after Epcot actually opened didn't.
That WAS a bad creative decision, and I have not attempted to defend that attraction at all. If you notice, I've steered far, far away from mentioning it at all. What has happened to that attraction is different I think, because at the end of its original life, I think it was still fairly popular, and a big change wasn't entirely necessary. (I could be wrong about that...no attendance numbers.) Contrast that to say, Horixons, who, in my own personal perception, wasn't doing much business before it closed.
People are only getting dumber because very few people are motivating them to want anything better. Th desire to learn for the sake of learning is virtually gone; there needs to be some direct reward associated with everything for it to be considered worthwhile.
Could not have said it better myself
"The powers that be," whoever they may be, have talked down to society as a whole for far too long. Walt DID have it right, and you shouldn't talk down to any particular group of people. There are many, many reasons why we have fallen into the habit of "being sheep" and following. (Not least of these are money and corporate greed.) the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting pooer in more ways than just their finances. I'll leave it at that.
I firmly believe that Epcot and Disney could play a huge role in the education of people (not just children) around the world. They have a tremendous opportunity (and with their widespread recognition and global selling power, it is almost a social responsibility) to actually help change the world and teach people to learn. It is sad that they've chosen to just empty the world's wallets in the short term rather than make an investment in the world's future that will pay a dividend far more valuable than any you can find on the stock market (even without a recession).
If I've come off as a Disney apologist, I ...well...apologize. (
The future is created in the present (aka. "The future world is born today"). Anything about the future is inherently about the present and what we are doing today. Epcot can contain a vision for the future, of course, but it is driven by what is occuring in the world today. (Waiting for the future to come to you is pointess; it will always ellude you.)
And how can you say Epcot is ONLY about the future? What is World Showcase for then?
HMF
Well-Known Member
"In our buisiness' You can educate people' but don't tell them you'r doing it."-Walt Disney."
HMF
Well-Known Member
This is a perfect way to market the Epcot message.:sohappy: