Great watch: The Senseless Death of EPCOT

[Jrb1979]

I agree. I think the whole open middle area with the lights and festival area will be great.

I remember disliking those 2 buildings (Innoventions West and East) when I went in the 80s and 90s. They were boring, right out of a science museum. Didn't fit with Disney. They were fine and all, but just not entertaining enough.

The new area sounds MUCH MORE MK 2.0.... if they would just FINISH IT!!!!!!

FIFY

Had they upgraded the original rides and finished World Showcase as planned Epcot would be the best park. Other then AK, the parks are all just an extension of MK with the amount of IP in them. At one time each park felt different. Now they all feel the same.

 

[JustAFan]

Perhaps if handled with more care, it could have stayed more relevant, but the fundamental message and design of the attraction isn't inherently flawed or out-dated.

I'll argue that any attraction anywhere that tries to talk about current or future technology will always be out of date by tomorrow and in need of constant refreshing. That includes Spaceship Earth and Carousel of Progress.

 

[Poseidon Quest]

I'll argue that any attraction anywhere that tries to talk about current or future technology will always be out of date by tomorrow and in need of constant refreshing. That includes Spaceship Earth and Carousel of Progress.

Which makes up, what, 5% of the experience for Spaceship Earth and World of Motion? Those scenes are originally designed to be fantastical and vague, easily updatable by a company that definitely would have continued to update them until Eisner came in. That's not to dismiss how poorly the company was run overall by the old guard, but I still think that there's a balance that allows you to spend loads of money while still being insanely profitable as the OLC has exemplified.

While it is certainly true that the Carousel of Progress will stay perpetually out-dated, it doesn't need to stay relevant to still be a fantastic experience. Its dated perspective is what gives it charm and regardless of how relevant its content is, still manages to be highly entertaining. I find the Herbie and Mighty Ducks sections of the All Star Movies to be far more out-dated than the CoP.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I'll argue that any attraction anywhere that tries to talk about current or future technology will always be out of date by tomorrow and in need of constant refreshing. That includes Spaceship Earth and Carousel of Progress.

CoP is way past the time for any useable update. It is far more valuable now just being a historic, classic attraction. Just a moment of thought should tell us that many later then my generation have not seen any of what is currently displayed. Isn't it good to have a place to take our children to show them what life was like before modern technology. Even at my age I never witnessed the first half of the 20th century. SSE does that same thing plus it is a fun ride. They need to add something useful to the downhill side of the ride other than that it is also a valuable historical depiction that the last two generations (at least) that are not aware of the previous way of life. The highlight was and still is the scene at the top with that perspective big blue marble. However, it needs a renewable section after that.

 

[Mickeynerd17]

If you want to truly fix Epcot, you have to solve quite a lot of problems like the ultimate conundrum of keeping the future from dating as long as possible, keeping people engaged and from staring at their phones all day long, having a consistent theme, interesting and immersive experiences, and having a truly unique yet completely Disney experience. It seems impossible, but I'm still a firm believer that a real solution can be found. What that would entail I don't quite know and I'm still thinking about it, but I know right now what's currently happening to Epcot is not the solution.

Everything currently getting installed, from Communicore Hall to Connections/Creations is way too temporary and basic. They're using current "modern" architecture on the minimalist side, simple, similar names throughout, and the only thing of note is how the concrete is made from recycled materials. GOTG has staying power, but I fear the motion sickness issues it's having may hurt guest appeal in the long run.

I'm not saying any of this is necessarily "bad", I'm saying so much more can be done with some wisely spent dollars, big dreams, and some serious research into Epcots problems, how previous attempts at correcting said problems have failed, and finding a real solution.

Any real redo of the park has to be full-in. You can't try a half-baked overlay like Tomorrowland 1994 nor does the old methods of updating everything every 15 years work either (not economically feasible on such a grand scale). We need a blend of fantasy, reality, timelessness and complete immersion. I'm talking Rise of the Resistance levels of immersion. Journey into Imagination and Horizons I believe were the best examples of this, but Horizons had the problem of using obviously 80's styling while Imagination had technology that was too advanced for its time to be reliable in operations and was too expensive.

Both rides were plagued by a company with neither the resources at the time (created by bad business decisions (ahem, DLP)), nor the willpower to keep them going (again, finances played a part in that). We need a company with a mindset like OLC with TDL. Good maintainence and a really high quality standard that will not tolerate broken effects or moldy show scenes (imagination, Horizons, SSE, and others).

Another issue is with the guests themselves. Epcot in the past has required the guest to either have an extensive background knowledge in the subjects conveyed or has required the guest to have a longing for discovery and knowledge. As a teen myself I find my peers are increasingly losing this kind of longing and are more focused on what's happening with their mobile technology (social media, YouTube, etc). Guests need to be on their phones as little as possible. This would mean a different fast pass system and different app functions/offerings, but if you force guests off their phones, they may be more open to seeing the world, and the wonders, around them.

Now, with as much thought as I've given to the topic, I have a ton of ideas (rides, shows, etc) on how to solve this, but no definite answers. Ultimately I believe WDO will have to take a leap of faith, a very well thought out guesstimate of success. You can take inspiration from anywhere and anything. You have Progress City, the parks history, external sources, even some IP as well.

Dream BIG. Take the Horizons building and make a real spaceship out of it. Travel with the GOTG and do something with the energy rods from the second film. Go on a futuristic road trip/high speed chase at the TT building. Explore a new Imagination Institute tied with the comics and fight the Doubtfinder. Resurrect the Seabase but expand the ride into a multi-sensory encounter with current, even primeval aquatic animals.

So many ideas, so many possibilities,
We just need the right people to make it happen. Take EPCOT and explore the Magic of REAL Possibility.

Who knows, I'm probably being too optimistic/idealistic, but I'm willing to at least try. If all of this fails, then fine. Shove your IP in and make EPCOT a castle park. Whatever.

But only after you fully, 100% try. No half-baked band-aids. 20+ years of band-aids won't heal this wound. We need a real surgery to fix EPCOT.

 

[HauntedPirate]

I have been going there since two months after it opened. So, since you know so much how about you telling us exactly what it is/was about instead of spending time insulting people. Correct me and explain why I am wrong and how you know that I am wrong instead of resorting to the crap that you are spewing. A person that cannot defend their position and back it up with fact and proof or at least admit it is your opinion, like I do, is not worth my spending anymore time on. My take from your position that you "don't have the time or inclination" tells me you are the one full of it.

As I said, I have neither the time nor inclination to correct your drivel. You've been corrected dozens of times by dozens of posted on dozens of topics, yet continue to put forth your opinions as what actually happened and take someone's lack of desire to correct you AGAIN as "you're full of it". There's a reason many have to click "Show ignored content" for you. And you continue to prove why it's necessary.

 

[flynnibus]

Which makes up, what, 5% of the experience for Spaceship Earth and World of Motion? Those scenes are originally designed to be fantastical and vague, easily updatable by a company that definitely would have continued to update them until Eisner came in. That's not to dismiss how poorly the company was run overall by the old guard, but I still think that there's a balance that allows you to spend loads of money while still being insanely profitable as the OLC has exemplified.

You keep hanging these problems on Eisner - the problem was not Eisner - The problem was the changes in society and the world outside Disney moving faster and faster while Disney's established model for major attraction lifecycles was dying and was not fading as commercially viable way to operate.

Take CoP for example. It aged w/o updates at Disneyland too... not because of Eisner.. and it got updated when? Yeah, when a new sponsorship contract was on the table for taking the attraction at WDW. See the trend and association here? Changes tied to sponsor $$.

Futureworld was inherently linked to its corporate parents from the get-go. Disney clung to that model far too long and the operating model meant Future world updates were tied to their ability to lure and sway their corporate angels. They attractions suffered, and getting big deals meant 'big changes'.

SSE at least has a plot line that tries to enlighten people to think of communications as more than just what you know today.. but as a critical concept of how we even got to where we are and a critical piece of how we move forward. It's meant to be an enlightenment story that establishes communications as far more important than you believed prior and uses history examples to illustrate its points.

WoM's story lacked this same enlightenment angle.. instead it basically just focused on the evolution of movement and pushing the tagline of 'fun to be free'... because the notion of personal freedom/movement car manufacturers want to push. And surprise.. it climaxes with the personal automobile of all types for you. The future closer segment is more an epilogue but continues to push the idea 'freedom of movement' rather than the kind of impact/essential/enabler angle SSE uses with communications.

Just because it used scenes picked from history does not make it timeless. It helps avoid getting pigeon holed trying to capture the present or predicting the future, but it still must use references and concepts that will feel relevant to current audiences. That's what sank GMR too - It was centered around a concept (golden age of hollywood and celebrating hollywood achievements) that newer audiences just didn't care about. The scenes didn't age out as much as the very thing the scenes were trying to support did. WoM's punchline is plucked right from the advertising pitches of 50s America. It doesn't resonate today.

While it is certainly true that the Carousel of Progress will stay perpetually out-dated, it doesn't need to stay relevant to still be a fantastic experience. Its dated perspective is what gives it charm and regardless of how relevant its content is, still manages to be highly entertaining.

For fans of theme parks - sure. For rando looking for entertainment - far less. And Disney and its sponsors were not trying to operate museums.

Eventually story telling formats fall out of favor too. HM and POTC differ from the future world pavilions in this manner in that they try to be far more immersive to the guest. You don't just watch a scene as a drive-by, but you are put in the setting, you have sequence of places to build that impression, you are 'transported there' to a far more significant degree than any of the future world pavilions did. These concepts help retain their entertainment value for people beyond just the scenes they represent. These are just some of the factors why shows like them continue to be headliners while other shows that use similar pieces or constructs, have fallen by the way side.

Then you have shows like Country Bears.. and Mr Lincoln.. that really are kept around more for history/nostalgia. Their main gimmic has been made so mundane the show needs more to carry it. Shows like American Adventure add stagecraft to the mix and a far more moving narrative to help carry the load. Tiki Room adds the surround and environmental pieces which give it more uniqueness to help carry it beyond the catchy songs and nostalgia elements.

You can take a 8yr old and put them in the tiki room in 2022 and many will find wonderment and things that will stick with them. That is impact that helps keep an attraction open for decades.

'its fun to be free' doesn't resonate generations later when movement is as assumed as getting an uber on your phone.

 

[flynnibus]

I mean.. Kitchen Karbet would flounder today. None of the music styles would bring any entertainment to younger generations.

add in the lyrics were all about food benefits that again, no one cares to hear.

And Food Rocks showed how just trying to fix the music element and trying to make things contemporary couldn't fix the appeal of this show. It was never compelling enough and lacked the appeal that the tiki room mustered with basically similar fundamentals.

It's fine to adore the past.. but to believe KK or CC would work today is pure fantasy.

 

[Bocabear]

I would suggest that after a few years of pandemic shutdowns and closures, it resonates more than ever...It really is fun to be free... but there are consequences...the ride could end with a covid testing clinic replacing the auto showroom. There... done.LOL

 

[Mickeynerd17]

I mean.. Kitchen Karbet would flounder today. None of the music styles would bring any entertainment to younger generations.

Actually, a lot of KK's music was Jazz, which is still quite popular among many groups (and myself, I actually play some jazz), but definitely not mainstream culture.

Imagine singing kale chips and Starbucks cups today.

 

[HauntedPirate]

I mean.. Kitchen Karbet would flounder today. None of the music styles would bring any entertainment to younger generations.

add in the lyrics were all about food benefits that again, no one cares to hear.

And Food Rocks showed how just trying to fix the music element and trying to make things contemporary couldn't fix the appeal of this show. It was never compelling enough and lacked the appeal that the tiki room mustered with basically similar fundamentals.

It's fine to adore the past.. but to believe KK or CC would work today is pure fantasy.

Two words would have fixed those attractions faster than Chapek's head turning around at the sound of quarter falling to the ground - Olivia Rodrigo.

 

[Poseidon Quest]

You keep hanging these problems on Eisner - the problem was not Eisner - The problem was the changes in society and the world outside Disney moving faster and faster while Disney's established model for major attraction lifecycles was dying and was not fading as commercially viable way to operate.

Take CoP for example. It aged w/o updates at Disneyland too... not because of Eisner.. and it got updated when? Yeah, when a new sponsorship contract was on the table for taking the attraction at WDW. See the trend and association here? Changes tied to sponsor $$.

Futureworld was inherently linked to its corporate parents from the get-go. Disney clung to that model far too long and the operating model meant Future world updates were tied to their ability to lure and sway their corporate angels. They attractions suffered, and getting big deals meant 'big changes'.

SSE at least has a plot line that tries to enlighten people to think of communications as more than just what you know today.. but as a critical concept of how we even got to where we are and a critical piece of how we move forward. It's meant to be an enlightenment story that establishes communications as far more important than you believed prior and uses history examples to illustrate its points.

WoM's story lacked this same enlightenment angle.. instead it basically just focused on the evolution of movement and pushing the tagline of 'fun to be free'... because the notion of personal freedom/movement car manufacturers want to push. And surprise.. it climaxes with the personal automobile of all types for you. The future closer segment is more an epilogue but continues to push the idea 'freedom of movement' rather than the kind of impact/essential/enabler angle SSE uses with communications.

Just because it used scenes picked from history does not make it timeless. It helps avoid getting pigeon holed trying to capture the present or predicting the future, but it still must use references and concepts that will feel relevant to current audiences. That's what sank GMR too - It was centered around a concept (golden age of hollywood and celebrating hollywood achievements) that newer audiences just didn't care about. The scenes didn't age out as much as the very thing the scenes were trying to support did. WoM's punchline is plucked right from the advertising pitches of 50s America. It doesn't resonate today.

You make compelling arguments, especially in regards to WoM. While I'm extremely disappointed to not have experienced it, I did recognize that it was one of the weaker Future World attractions but couldn't quite place why. Even so, I feel that with the right creative investment, it could have been updated with a newer message (and hopefully not bungled like the latest version of SSE) and considered a classic. I can't say that Test Track was an unworthy successor. Having gone through video of it relatively recently, I was surprised by how educational it was, at least throughout its queue. I also took notice of how much nuance it had, in how it played with the emotions of the riders to induce suspense and fear. I've come to recognize it as one of Imagineering's best attractions. It's a shame it's been replaced with some half-baked budget version.

For fans of theme parks - sure. For rando looking for entertainment - far less. And Disney and its sponsors were not trying to operate museums.

Eventually story telling formats fall out of favor too. HM and POTC differ from the future world pavilions in this manner in that they try to be far more immersive to the guest. You don't just watch a scene as a drive-by, but you are put in the setting, you have sequence of places to build that impression, you are 'transported there' to a far more significant degree than any of the future world pavilions did. These concepts help retain their entertainment value for people beyond just the scenes they represent. These are just some of the factors why shows like them continue to be headliners while other shows that use similar pieces or constructs, have fallen by the way side.

Then you have shows like Country Bears.. and Mr Lincoln.. that really are kept around more for history/nostalgia. Their main gimmic has been made so mundane the show needs more to carry it. Shows like American Adventure add stagecraft to the mix and a far more moving narrative to help carry the load. Tiki Room adds the surround and environmental pieces which give it more uniqueness to help carry it beyond the catchy songs and nostalgia elements.

You can take a 8yr old and put them in the tiki room in 2022 and many will find wonderment and things that will stick with them. That is impact that helps keep an attraction open for decades.

'its fun to be free' doesn't resonate generations later when movement is as assumed as getting an uber on your phone.

Here's where I disagree though. First, I don't really care what the general population thinks. Disney doesn't need to shove Lightning McQueen in a 5 year old's face to survive. I think that they would be fine if they focused on quality rather than easily identifiable IP. Their parks have major capacity issues and implementing small, but unique and charming shows/rides (like CoP, Country Bears, Disneyland's Fantasyland dark rides, etc.) would do wonders in helping with the guest experience, which should be the priority. I loathe shareholders and the board's desire to increase profits every quarter. Eventually, it'll implode on itself.

Second, I do recognize that Pirates and HM aren't transporting you to radically different settings, but I would definitely consider an attraction like Horizons immersive. In the same way that I would like to step into these idealized versions of different eras in the CoP, I would definitely like to see the various futures portrayed at the beginning of the ride, or the various settings like John's futuristic city home or the Sea Castle. I obviously recognize that it made specific predictions about the future, but I found that it was almost fantastical in nature and certainly charming and inspiring.

One of the best attraction's I've ever seen is Dream Flight at Efteling, and it's whole purpose is immersing riders into radically different scenes. There is no narrative, just atmosphere and immersion.

 

[flynnibus]

You make compelling arguments, especially in regards to WoM. While I'm extremely disappointed to not have experienced it, I did recognize that it was one of the weaker Future World attractions but couldn't quite place why. Even so, I feel that with the right creative investment, it could have been updated with a newer message (and hopefully not bungled like the latest version of SSE) and considered a classic.

That's a big 'what if...' scenario. Look at how badly they mungled the Imagination pavilion in just the same period. WoL was equally off-the-mark. Another aspect that hurt some of these attractions was simply their similarity to other attractions, even in the same park.

Classic EPCOT should be praised for many things.. especially it's ambition and scale. The first phases of future world were incredible for their time. The problem is.. they tell a human tale.. and the public's perspective on human tales changes far more rapidly than fantasy or the like. What happened in the American household from 1979 to 1995 is far greater than what used to take a century of progress. So what was incredible in 1984.. wasn't nearly as much so in 1994. Disney's biggest sin was holding onto a sponsorship model above all else.

A big aspect of Disney up through the 80s was they seemed to do things that were unlike anything anywhere else. You were wowed and catered to in ways that just seemed different than anywhere else. In the 90s and 2000s... the rest of the world closed that gap. And in many ways Disney was making itself more like the outside world, and less unique. (Innovations). The competition was moving faster than Disney was (easier to copy then innovate.. and much of the new industry was ex-Disney). There are some gems in the period (Typhoon Lagoon, Everest, ToT, etc) - but as a whole Disney was losing it's lead. Maybe it was the sum of the all things it had to do by growing so much that eventually bogged them down.

I can't say that Test Track was an unworthy successor. Having gone through video of it relatively recently, I was surprised by how educational it was, at least throughout its queue. I also took notice of how much nuance it had, in how it played with the emotions of the riders to induce suspense and fear. I've come to recognize it as one of Imagineering's best attractions. It's a shame it's been replaced with some half-baked budget version.

Test Track certainly was much more on point in it's younger years. I mean when we look back, it has remained popular (even if just as a physical ride) longer than WoM operated. I don't see it as much of a imagineering masterpiece... but it's premise was fun and it certainly was ambitious for it's time. Same as M:S... it's craaazzzy ambitious and brings a 1:1 experience that was unlike anything else at the parks. It just alienated a lot of the audience and a lot of fans hate on it for being less than what the blue sky concepts were.

Here's where I disagree though. First, I don't really care what the general population thinks.

Then you should just stop now and realize you are playing imagineer in a fanboi only universe. Theme parks operate to attract and entertain the general public - not solely enthusiasts. To dig in and try to hide from that reality just means you will never have a opinion that weighs out in the real world.

Disney doesn't need to shove Lightning McQueen in a 5 year old's face to survive. I think that they would be fine if they focused on quality rather than easily identifiable IP.

A different tangent honestly and not a case of 'one or the other'. I do think IP mandates are a crutch and artifical - but they should be complementary, not necessarily the driver. Most of the conflict comes from land and park designs struggling with this... not so much individual attractions. I mean, people don't hate on Peter Pan or most of the other original FL attractions.. or hate on forcing dumbo on a spinner, etc. The challenge comes when the changes are forced into places that create other conflicts with things around them or disrupt other larger concepts woven into the park design.

 

[Poseidon Quest]

Then you should just stop now and realize you are playing imagineer in a fanboi only universe. Theme parks operate to attract and entertain the general public - not solely enthusiasts. To dig in and try to hide from that reality just means you will never have a opinion that weighs out in the real world.

I don't agree that it's unrealistic. Disney remained top of the game because they were defined by that quality and reputation for uniqueness. IP can be used tastefully but this current era of essentially creating empty, clickbait attractions that bring in people through franchise name only is just a symptom of toxic shareholder culture and that endless need to increase profit. If Disney decided to make guest friendly decisions, add more capacity to their parks and really allow their creatives to go wild, they would still be fine and still see enough attendance to be more than sustainable. If the OLC can do it, then I see no reason Disney can't. I suppose there's that factor of needing to balance it all with their media divisions, but it's not like that's really in trouble either.

 

[flynnibus]

I don't agree that it's unrealistic

I never said your tangent about IP was unrealistic - I responded to your statement "I don't really care what the general population thinks" as your preface. If you don't want to weigh decisions as it applies to the general population you are living in fanboi world.

As many other industries face with licensed goods or pursuing original stories. Original is great when it works, but you aren't going to get any pity dollars from people when it doesn't.. so make your choices based on what you think will work for your audience, not solely based on fanboi dreams.

 

[Mickeynerd17]

As many other industries face with licensed goods or pursuing original stories. Original is great when it works, but you aren't going to get any pity dollars from people when it doesn't.. so make your choices based on what you think will work for your audience, not solely based on fanboi dreams.

Bingo. I feel many people don't understand the corporate aspect behind these park changes.

Calling it "bad CEO", "Toxic Shareholders", etc isn't solving anything and never will. Shouting "Bring Back Dreamfinder!!1!1!" won't do anything either. It's up to the folks at WDI to convince upper management to invest corporate dollars into projects.

The one single thing WDO really cares about is cold hard cash. They're changing the parks based off of what they believe will make them the most money both short and long term.

If a fanboi designer wants something to come to fruition, they have to make the argument for why said addition/change will make the company more money than [insert competing concept here]. There's a reason why the imagineering design challenge exists for college students: to learn how to get your idea/pitch sold. It's designed to do so for aspiring designers as a learning tool. Universal has the same kind of thing (I think it's called the Ryerson Design Competition?)

Now, to be realistic, this doesn't always work. You could have a directive from upper management that ties the designer's hands and forces a kind of project, good or bad, no matter whether said designer wanted to do that in the first place. The only other option is being fired, which obviously isn't good.

So, want to redo epcot in a "proper" way? Convince corporate that they'll make more money with the park in the long term, or at least get a good return on investment. The IP push is solely because they think that's what people want, and the crowd numbers show it.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

Bingo. I feel many people don't understand the corporate aspect behind these park changes.

Calling it "bad CEO", "Toxic Shareholders", etc isn't solving anything and never will. Shouting "Bring Back Dreamfinder!!1!1!" won't do anything either. It's up to the folks at WDI to convince upper management to invest corporate dollars into projects.

The one single thing WDO really cares about is cold hard cash. They're changing the parks based off of what they believe will make them the most money both short and long term.

If a fanboi designer wants something to come to fruition, they have to make the argument for why said addition/change will make the company more money than [insert competing concept here]. There's a reason why the imagineering design challenge exists for college students: to learn how to get your idea/pitch sold. It's designed to do so for aspiring designers as a learning tool. Universal has the same kind of thing (I think it's called the Ryerson Design Competition?)

Now, to be realistic, this doesn't always work. You could have a directive from upper management that ties the designer's hands and forces a kind of project, good or bad, no matter whether said designer wanted to do that in the first place. The only other option is being fired, which obviously isn't good.

So, want to redo epcot in a "proper" way? Convince corporate that they'll make more money with the park in the long term, or at least get a good return on investment. The IP push is solely because they think that's what people want, and the crowd numbers show it.

You're sadly exactly right. It's why I've personally made the tough decision to basically never go to WDW despite moving to Orlando. It's not spite. It's the only thing I can do personally that speaks. (Plus the fact it just makes me sad to be in the parks now, let alone at current prices and entry requirements.)

 

[Mickeynerd17]

You're sadly exactly right. It's why I've personally made the tough decision to basically never go to WDW despite moving to Orlando. It's not spite. It's the only thing I can do personally that speaks. (Plus the fact it just makes me sad to be in the parks now, let alone at current prices and entry requirements.)

Understandable.

Unfortunately (or not unfortunately for me ), I'm too much of an addict to 100% stop going. I've only curtailed my visiting due to the insane crowds and generally angry guests.

I'm waiting for when Disney starts trying to entice people back, like in 2005. Very low crowds relative to today and you got a ton more for your buck. The only difference is I'm hoping to be a resident by that point instead of flying in all the time.

Until then, I'll keep digitally recreating EPCOT on my computer.

 

[Communicora]

It was a this is today into tomorrow morning technology park. But, it was possible to keep up in the early 80's but after that technology took off like a shot and there wasn't anyway that Disney could keep up.

Most of the “time pieces” like Spaceship Earth, World of Motion, and Horizons were historical lookbacks and the possibility of what ‘could be” at the very end, moreso as a rhetorical question asked ‘after’ what we viewed through time than any literal showcase of it.

About “how we envisioned the future/visions of the future”. Wasn’t a showcase of “this will be the future” or real technology of what the future ‘will Infact be. But how our hypothetical fantastical/idealistic visions changed overtime. That’s the difference.

I'll argue that any attraction anywhere that tries to talk about current or future technology will always be out of date by tomorrow and in need of constant refreshing. That includes Spaceship Earth and Carousel of Progress.

I included some posts I agree with and disagree with above. EPCOT was never a "technology park" The themed pavilions and their core attractions centered on humankind's optimism and desire to collaborate, create and explore. This was the red thread that held the whole park together.

It's also a myth they completely lacked excitement. No, there weren't thrill rides, but I will always remember spiraling down the DNA chain in Horizons or that moment when the seats broke apart in Universe of Energy and reassembled to carry us through to see Dinosaurs -- complete with what felt like realistic smells and effects. Both were thrilling in their own way.

Communicore was one area where they did focus on the technologies of the current day. I was recently amused to see that the touchscreen roller coaster building attraction I loved as a kid has now been recreated with modern technology in the Oceaneers Club on the Disney Wish. Disney just got lazy with keeping Communicore and Innoventions up to date. There's no real excuse for that.

It would not have been difficult to rethink how some of the more fantastical future segments were presented in some of the core attractions. Horizons in particular could have been updated through a revamped presentation on the imax screen and script changes during the set pieces and updates in the choose your own adventure ending.

Disney simply chose not to invest and we are left with a park that has no satisfying overriding theme. That's the reason it feels hollow to me, even though some of the new attractions seem fun.

 

[Admiral01]

We all like to talk about EPCOT as the technology park or the edutainment park. I’ve always viewed it more simply.

At WDW, the Magic Kingdom was the “magical” park.
EPCOT was the “inspiration” park.

Disneyland was also a “magical” park
Tokyo Disneyland was also also a “magical” park

In the days when there were three castle parks and one non-castle park worldwide (before 1989), three pushed magic as their theme and only EPCOT did anything different. I never walked out of the Magic Kingdom feeling anything really. It would have been a fun day, but that was it. But I’d leave EPCOT feeling super inspired. Inspired by imagination, and the future, and the world. It inspired me to want to learn more about the things I’d seen. It inspired me to want to see the world. And it inspired me to want to make a better future. THAT was EPCOT to me, and that’s what it’s lost. I no longer feel inspired when visiting that park.

As has been said here many times, we’ve added more parks but despite the variety of gates we’ve lost varsity in the attractions and in the overall feeling of each park. And the more things are homogenized the more bland it feels. DisneySea is the only park these days that fees different to me. I get the feeling of exploration in that park. The rest all kinda run together with Disney trying to force the feeling of “magic” everywhere.

Why is Disney scared to have any variety in its theme park offerings? Have they really lost their sense of creativity?

I miss feeling inspired.