Great watch: The Senseless Death of EPCOT

[Bocabear]

The entrance plaza was definitely a small victory for those of us who loved the original EPCOT. I think the thought that only a tiny group of people loved what EPCOT was is wrong though... I think building with an eye towards the inspirational and aspirational nature of the park will excite a new generation... Many of the younger folk grew up with EPCOT in it's worst shape... That doesn't mean that they would not love the park as it originally was, but updated...they have just never experienced what the park was...

 

[Mickeynerd17]

Become an Imagineer and create those designs you want to see implemented.

Bingo.

 

[WDWFREAK53]

The entrance plaza was definitely a small victory for those of us who loved the original EPCOT. I think the thought that only a tiny group of people loved what EPCOT was is wrong though... I think building with an eye towards the inspirational and aspirational nature of the park will excite a new generation... Many of the younger folk grew up with EPCOT in it's worst shape... That doesn't mean that they would not love the park as it originally was, but updated...they have just never experienced what the park was...

The theming of the original EPCOT, yes. Just updated attractions...nope.

Horizons, Universe of Energy, Wonders of Life, World of Motion, and Imag with new updated scenes and animatronics but utilizing the same ride systems would not get people in the park. While I loved the original EPCOT, I'm also a realist. Take the original overall theme of EPCOT and build new "ground-up" attractions and you may have a shot. (As much as I hate to admit it, you may need to add a splash of character/IP to those attractions too.)

IMO there are only two IP attractions in EPCOT that I am ok with. That first attraction is Ratatouille. It's not perfect but at least it fits the area, is familiar with kids, and revolves around a French restaurant. How the ride actually was implemented is another story altogether but it's one IP attraction that doesn't completely feel shoe-horned in. The second attraction is Turtle Talk with Crush. That is 100% edutainment. It's a fun show and the kids get involved and learn answers to questions that they have. Now, I don't like the Nemo overlay as a whole, and I'd much prefer an updated SeaBase Alpha as an overall pavilion theme but Turtle Talk is a winner in my book.

 

[UNCgolf]

The theming of the original EPCOT, yes. Just updated attractions...nope.

Horizons, Universe of Energy, Wonders of Life, World of Motion, and Imag with new updated scenes and animatronics but utilizing the same ride systems would not get people in the park. While I loved the original EPCOT, I'm also a realist. Take the original overall theme of EPCOT and build new "ground-up" attractions and you may have a shot. (As much as I hate to admit it, you may need to add a splash of character/IP to those attractions too.)

IMO there are only two IP attractions in EPCOT that I am ok with. That first attraction is Ratatouille. It's not perfect but at least it fits the area, is familiar with kids, and revolves around a French restaurant. How the ride actually was implemented is another story altogether but it's one IP attraction that doesn't completely feel shoe-horned in. The second attraction is Turtle Talk with Crush. That is 100% edutainment. It's a fun show and the kids get involved and learn answers to questions that they have. Now, I don't like the Nemo overlay as a whole, and I'd much prefer an updated SeaBase Alpha as an overall pavilion theme but Turtle Talk is a winner in my book.

There's no reason to believe this, nor is there really any evidence to support such a claim.

It's not like people don't still line up and wait to ride attractions like Haunted Mansion, Pirates of the Caribbean, Jungle Cruise, Peter Pan, etc. -- the ride system isn't that important, especially to the Disney consumer base.

 

[WDWFREAK53]

There's absolutely no reason to believe this or any evidence to back up such a claim.

It's not like people don't still line up and wait to ride attractions like Haunted Mansion, Pirates of the Caribbean, Jungle Cruise, Peter Pan, etc. -- the ride system isn't especially important. Especially to the Disney consumer base.

Take out the coasters and thrill rides and do you think those attractions are enough to get people flooding into the gates? It becomes known as a "kiddie park."
What you are saying about Epcot is NO thrill rides. Original EPCOT had zero thrill attractions (Body Wars came later). Try doing that today and see if it works.

You need a mix. Just having the entire front half of a park full of omnimover type attractions (in today's standards) is just not sustainable. Do people leave their Disney vacation talking about Spaceship Earth (the ride) or how great some thrill attraction was? Your average family would be bored with Epcot's "Future World" in comparison to Magic Kingdom, Animal Kingdom, and Hollywood Studios.

So, I guess my evidence would be....do you know of any current theme parks/amusement parks that have zero thrill rides and just a bunch of well done slow-moving attractions?

 

[UNCgolf]

Take out the coasters and thrill rides and do you think those attractions are enough to get people flooding into the gates? It becomes known as a "kiddie park."
What you are saying about Epcot is NO thrill rides. Original EPCOT had zero thrill attractions (Body Wars came later). Try doing that today and see if it works.

You need a mix. Just having the entire front half of a park full of omnimover type attractions (in today's standards) is just not sustainable. Do people leave their Disney vacation talking about Spaceship Earth (the ride) or how great some thrill attraction was? Your average family would be bored with Epcot's "Future World" in comparison to Magic Kingdom, Animal Kingdom, and Hollywood Studios.

So, I guess my evidence would be....do you know of any current theme parks/amusement parks that have zero thrill rides and just a bunch of well done slow-moving attractions?

This is my whole point, though. Disney attracts a different customer base than basically every other theme/amusement park. That's why anyone who wants to ride the new Guardians of Galaxy attraction can do so without any difficulty, which wasn't even the case for a lower level attraction like Ratatouille. There are far more Disney guests who don't care about thrill attractions than any other park.

EPCOT was a big success when it opened, and people aren't more into thrill rides now than they were then. Adding thrill rides to the current version of EPCOT hasn't attracted a bunch of new customers.

This always feels like an argument from people who really love thrill rides -- they don't want to go to a park without some, so they think the vast majority of people feel the same way and a park couldn't possibly work without them. And I'm not even saying EPCOT shouldn't have thrill rides -- just that it doesn't need them to be successful, just as it didn't need them when it opened.

 

[WDWFREAK53]

This is my whole point, though. Disney attracts a different customer base than basically every other theme/amusement park. That's why anyone who wants to ride the new Guardians of Galaxy attraction can do so without any difficulty, which wasn't even the case for a lower level attraction like Ratatouille. There are far more Disney guests who don't care about thrill attractions than any other park.

EPCOT was a big success when it opened, and people aren't more into thrill rides now than they were then. Adding thrill rides to the current version of EPCOT hasn't attracted a bunch of new customers.

This always feels like an argument from people who really love thrill rides -- they don't want to go to a park without some, so they think the vast majority of people feel the same way and a park couldn't possibly work without them. And I'm not even saying EPCOT shouldn't have thrill rides -- just that it doesn't need them to be successful, just as it didn't need them when it opened.

Why didn’t upper management feel so? I’m sure they have way more intel than we do.

I’m not talking about Chapek either.

World of Motion was replaced with Test Track. A thrill ride and advertised as “Disney’s fastest ride.” Horizons was replaced with Mission Space. Both of these attractions had original Epcot in mind. Transportation and Space. They could’ve completely ripped them out and replaced with another state of the art omnimover but they didn’t because they knew what Epcot was lacking. I’m not defending these attractions but there is a reason they opted for thrills while trying to keep the spirit of Epcot.

The age we are in now is a lot different than when Epcot opened…and so is the clientele and the wants of the clientele. I’m not saying there is no room or place for these attractions but they can’t be the only offerings. When Epcot opened it was a technological marvel to see audio animatronics and so many moving figures. Now we almost expect them so we need something in addition to that to wow us.

I understand that the original Epcot is loved by so many (myself included!) but just doing an updated copy wouldn’t work in this day and age. Every time they attempted that, it failed. Ellen was awful. Imagination (both versions) is a step backwards. But what did work? Soarin. And using your argument, Living with the Land should have longer waits than Soarin. Same pavilion but what attraction is the main draw for the masses?

I’d hazard to guess that a good chunk of riders of Living with the Land are there to kill time while they wait for their LL for Soarin or they went to Soarin and figured they’d check it off while they are in the area. (And I’m saying this as a Disney lover that rides this most visits).

 

[UNCgolf]

Why didn’t upper management feel so? I’m sure they have way more intel than we do.

I’m not talking about Chapek either.

World of Motion was replaced with Test Track. A thrill ride and advertised as “Disney’s fastest ride.” Horizons was replaced with Mission Space. Both of these attractions had original Epcot in mind. Transportation and Space. They could’ve completely ripped them out and replaced with another state of the art omnimover but they didn’t because they knew what Epcot was lacking. I’m not defending these attractions but there is a reason they opted for thrills while trying to keep the spirit of Epcot.

The age we are in now is a lot different than when Epcot opened…and so is the clientele and the wants of the clientele. I’m not saying there is no room or place for these attractions but they can’t be the only offerings. When Epcot opened it was a technological marvel to see audio animatronics and so many moving figures. Now we almost expect them so we need something in addition to that to wow us.

I understand that the original Epcot is loved by so many (myself included!) but just doing an updated copy wouldn’t work in this day and age. Every time they attempted that, it failed. Ellen was awful. Imagination (both versions) is a step backwards. But what did work? Soarin. And using your argument, Living with the Land should have longer waits than Soarin. Same pavilion but what attraction is the main draw for the masses?

I’d hazard to guess that a good chunk of riders of Living with the Land are there to kill time while they wait for their LL for Soarin or they went to Soarin and figured they’d check it off while they are in the area. (And I’m saying this as a Disney lover that rides this most visits).

But Soarin' isn't a thrill ride (and while I love Living with the Land, it's certainly not on the level of attractions like Horizons and original Imagination). Test Track does pretty well, but Mission: SPACE does not. I also think those changes were because that's what the sponsors wanted, not because Disney's management thought they were necessary, but I'm not 100% on that.

I'm not saying it's out of the realm of possibility that you're correct -- just that we don't really have evidence either way. Making those changes to Test Track, Mission: SPACE, etc. didn't really help EPCOT, and even Guardians doesn't seem to be driving traffic to the park the way they might have hoped. If anything, it suggests that "family" thrill rides are a potential benefit for the Disney consumer base, but more intense thrills may not drive as much traffic.

 

[Jrb1979]

But Soarin' isn't a thrill ride (and while I love Living with the Land, it's certainly not on the level of attractions like Horizons and original Imagination). Test Track does pretty well, but Mission: SPACE does not. I also think those changes were because that's what the sponsors wanted, not because Disney's management thought they were necessary, but I'm not 100% on that.

I'm not saying it's out of the realm of possibility that you're correct -- just that we don't really have evidence either way. Making those changes to Test Track, Mission: SPACE, etc. didn't really help EPCOT, and even Guardians doesn't seem to be driving traffic to the park the way they might have hoped. If anything, it suggests that "family" thrill rides are a potential benefit for the Disney consumer base, but more intense thrills may not drive as much traffic.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying. The majority of Disney guests aren't ride people or don't visit other parks much.

As far as Epcot goes, IMO it's less about having thrill rides and more adding in IP to draw people to the park. It's unfortunate that unless IP is attached the majority of guests and corporate just don't care about the attraction. For me Epcot was the best of Disney's parks as it was different. Little IP in the park and the attractions were original. I still say Epcot could have been the best park had to finished World Showcase as planned with all its attractions. Instead we end up with 3 parks as an extension of MK. The only different park now is AK.

 

[mikejs78]

The entrance plaza was definitely a small victory for those of us who loved the original EPCOT. I think the thought that only a tiny group of people loved what EPCOT was is wrong though... I think building with an eye towards the inspirational and aspirational nature of the park will excite a new generation... Many of the younger folk grew up with EPCOT in it's worst shape... That doesn't mean that they would not love the park as it originally was, but updated...they have just never experienced what the park was...

The theming of the original EPCOT, yes. Just updated attractions...nope.

Horizons, Universe of Energy, Wonders of Life, World of Motion, and Imag with new updated scenes and animatronics but utilizing the same ride systems would not get people in the park. While I loved the original EPCOT, I'm also a realist. Take the original overall theme of EPCOT and build new "ground-up" attractions and you may have a shot. (As much as I hate to admit it, you may need to add a splash of character/IP to those attractions too.)

IMO there are only two IP attractions in EPCOT that I am ok with. That first attraction is Ratatouille. It's not perfect but at least it fits the area, is familiar with kids, and revolves around a French restaurant. How the ride actually was implemented is another story altogether but it's one IP attraction that doesn't completely feel shoe-horned in. The second attraction is Turtle Talk with Crush. That is 100% edutainment. It's a fun show and the kids get involved and learn answers to questions that they have. Now, I don't like the Nemo overlay as a whole, and I'd much prefer an updated SeaBase Alpha as an overall pavilion theme but Turtle Talk is a winner in my book.

I don't think that IP and Epcot inspiration are mutually exclusive, as you mention to be the case with Turtle Talk. For example, as much as I'd prefer a return to Seabase Alpha, they could easily make the Nemo ride much more inspirational. Instead of a "let's find Nemo", they could have Nemo and friends talk about Marine life. Even Guardians - instead of the plot they have now, they could have made it a thrilling experience where you go back to the big bang to learn about it, and see the formation of galaxies and our own solar system. (In fact I kind of feel the imagineers have this in mind, as the attraction as is could be redone in that vein with new video and audio).

So while I'd prefer less IP, there's absolutely no reason they couldn't use IP to present inspirational themes worthy of Epcot.

 

[UNCgolf]

I don't think that IP and Epcot inspiration are mutually exclusive, as you mention to be the case with Turtle Talk. For example, as much as I'd prefer a return to Seabase Alpha, they could easily make the Nemo ride much more inspirational. Instead of a "let's find Nemo", they could have Nemo and friends talk about Marine life. Even Guardians - instead of the plot they have now, they could have made it a thrilling experience where you go back to the big bang to learn about it, and see the formation of galaxies and our own solar system. (In fact I kind of feel the imagineers have this in mind, as the attraction as is could be redone in that vein with new video and audio).

So while I'd prefer less IP, there's absolutely no reason they couldn't use IP to present inspirational themes worthy of Epcot.

I agree with this. While I'd prefer EPCOT IP free (and I would LOVE a return to Seabase Alpha, as I think it was one of Disney's crowning achievements as an overall concept), there are numerous ways they could use IP to help fulfill the original ideas behind EPCOT.

What they've actually done with things like the Finding Nemo ride and Frozen in Norway is the opposite of that. Even Ratatouille in France has very little to do with actual France - which isn't surprising since it wasn't originally built to serve that purpose - but at least it was an expansion.

The Nemo ride especially would have been easy to do, as you mentioned. Instead they ignored that aspect completely AND built a bad ride. It's basically the worst of both worlds.

 

[Jenny72]

Do we have any concrete evidence that movie IP is a significant driver of interest in theme park rides? Or are we just used to thinking that it must be? There's so much content out there on Youtube/streaming/etc that I'm not convinced people are as attached to movies (why is it *always* movies??) as people seem to think. I hear a lot of this: "We should have an attraction based on [insert movie here]!" But my kids haven't seen it and their friends haven't seen it. Or if they have, it certainly wouldn't make them ask their parents if they can go to Disney to ride the [insert movie here] ride. They'd be more excited to go to Disney in general, to see the castle and the big ball. The magic.

I think the desire to have every ride connected to a movie is not so much to draw people into the parks as the reverse: to draw people to the movie and merchandise. Maybe it's just the people that I know, but most of them would be just as excited, if not more so, to go on a ride that deals with "pirates" or "dreams" or "storms" as a ride that deals with "Luca" or "Coco" or "Seeing Red" etc. etc. The interest in timeless themes is far broader than the interest in any one particular movie. (There may be a few exceptions: Star Wars, Marvel, etc.)

There's also just a lack of imagination on creating rides. It's almost like Disney looked at Universal and just started copying them.

 

[UNCgolf]

Do we have any concrete evidence that movie IP is a significant driver of interest in theme park rides? Or are we just used to thinking that it must be? There's so much content out there on Youtube/streaming/etc that I'm not convinced people are as attached to movies (why is it *always* movies??) as people seem to think. I hear a lot of this: "We should have an attraction based on [insert movie here]!" But my kids haven't seen it and their friends haven't seen it. Or if they have, it certainly wouldn't make them ask their parents if they can go to Disney to ride the [insert movie here] ride. They'd be more excited to go to Disney in general, to see the castle and the big ball. The magic.

I think the desire to have every ride connected to a movie is not so much to draw people into the parks as the reverse: to draw people to the movie and merchandise. Maybe it's just the people that I know, but most of them would be just as excited, if not more so, to go on a ride that deals with "pirates" or "dreams" or "storms" as a ride that deals with "Luca" or "Coco" or "Seeing Red" etc. etc. The interest in timeless themes is far broader than the interest in any one particular movie. (There may be a few exceptions: Star Wars, Marvel, etc.)

There's also just a lack of imagination on creating rides. It's almost like Disney looked at Universal and just started copying them.

One of the biggest reasons to use IP is that you don't necessarily have to build a great attraction -- the IP will prop up mediocrity and let you get away with something lesser.

Just look at Frozen Ever After. Opinions on it vary, but I don't think anyone would argue it's actually a great ride. But people love Frozen so they want to ride. If it was essentially the same ride but with non-Frozen, generic characters, it would likely never have a wait longer than 10-15 minutes.

It cuts both ways, in that I think IP usage also constrains rides and handcuffs the designers in certain ways, but from a business standpoint it's easy to see why they want IP as a cushion/backstop. They can just advertise the IP if the ride itself doesn't live up to expectations.

 

[SteveAZee]

One of the biggest reasons to use IP is that you don't necessarily have to build a great attraction -- the IP will prop up mediocrity and let you get away with something lesser.

Just look at Frozen Ever After. Opinions on it vary, but I don't think anyone would argue it's actually a great ride. But people love Frozen so they want to ride. If it was essentially the same ride but with non-Frozen, generic characters, it would likely never have a wait longer than 10-15 minutes.

It cuts both ways, in that I think IP usage also constrains rides and handcuffs the designers in certain ways, but from a business standpoint it's easy to see why they want IP as a cushion/backstop. They can just advertise the IP if the ride itself doesn't live up to expectations.

Yes... and having an attraction with IP will sell more merch tied to that IP, both in the park and likely elsewhere. It helps reinforce the appeal of that IP... they return home bigger fans of Elsa (for example) than they were before and maybe, just maybe, they'll finally buy Frozen II.

 

[AFoodie]

I’d take a “stale” Horizons any day!

 

[Goofyernmost]

I’d take a “stale” Horizons any day!

I liked Horizons and spent many enjoyable ride around the omni-track in its day. However, even I got to the point of walking right past it and so did many others over time. As someone that was once a die hard Epcot fan, I certainly can see why Disney would feel that it wasn't pulling its own weight anymore, along with most of the others. From my understanding it was General Motors that insisted on trashing World of Motion. That one still pulled people in but Test Track brought even more into the park. That and SSE were they only two that still was viable as a draw factor. SSE has also had the additional factor that the design of the attraction is now iconic and to this point I think that no one in the Imagineering circle office can think of anything that would fit in there.

 

[ladybat2]

One of the things I greatly missed in Epcot the last time I was there in 2019 was the beautiful space kind of music that used to come out of hidden speakers every where in the park. That was back in 1984 and 1993. It was the first time I had ever heard music like that. They called it "new age" music. I've been a fan of it ever since and listen to that kind of music all the time now. There was no sign of that music in Epcot in 2019 and when I saw what they had done to Journey into Imagination and the universe of Energy I was shocked and sad beyond words and beautiful attractions that had been removed and replaced with that stupid test track and mission space. And space ship earth looked run down and dirty and kept stopping every few seconds. I mourned for my grand kids who will never see the Epcot I knew. I happen to like animatronics better than film screens and roller coasters. I can go to six flags for cheap thrills like that and pay a lot less. Animatronics are robots. No one made them better than Disney back in the day. There is nothing cooler than robots. CGI and movie screens do not hold a candle to a good old Disney animatronic. CGI has become to much like watching cartoons. Well any way, thats how I feel about what has happened to our Epcot.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Same here. It's not so far gone as to not be correctable. (And in a way that could satisfy most camps of fans.) But, there is no desire to do so, it seems. Quite the contrary, in fact.

Epcot died a long time ago after it had been on life support for years. For those that lament about what it is today, where was the mourning when the place had gone from a very classy edutainment, one of a kind, to a place where the big thing was to "Drink around the World". It was already dead by then.

Although I do miss some of the stuff from before it was near dead just about 10 years after it opened,. Sure a few of us devoted fans always went for as long as things still were what we remembered, but there weren't enough of us to even carry the casket. The new stuff is, of course, very different from what we all remember but it has created "one little spark" of inspiration that has it breathing on its own again. No small accomplishment! Is it the same? Certainly not, but it is beginning to show a bit of life that has been missing for years. It still has a lot of the old, but the new is what is clicking the turnstiles.

It's odd to me how Guardians became the "go to" attraction that many people are claiming killed EPCOT, when it's been going that direction for decades. I guess the large blue box didn't help.

Guardians didn't kill EPCOT at all. If anything it added a headliner attraction to a park that desperately needed it.

If we want to see an evolved park that still holds the original EPCOT ideals as part of its core value, there are changes that could still make that happen.

• A Spaceship Earth update will help, but Spaceship Earth isn't the problem. It just needs to remain relevant.
• A significant update to Imagination. No movies, ideally not-cracked out Figment, perhaps even Dreamfinder. A family friendly E-ticket that the ride once was.
• An update to The Seas Pavilion that rethemes the ride. If you want Mr. Ray to give you a tour of the ocean, that's fine. But a search for Nemo makes zero sense for EPCOT.
• A replacement to Harmonious that has a similar message as Illuminations and 5 less permanently docked barges.

If those 4 things are done, the park will be in much better shape than it is today. It would still probably be one more headliner attraction away from an attraction lineup standpoint, but an argument could be made that the Festivals are the headliners.

 

[Beacon Joe]

Well we're back from Disney World. Been back for a couple of weeks. The post-Disney funk is different this time, and pretty much because of EPCOT.

Yes, I rope-dropped Guardians due to my son. And then paid to ride it again because I'm a sucker contributing to the problem, and my son enjoyed it so much he wanted to ride with the whole family. The ride itself, I enjoyed immensely. It's an incredibly fun little coaster. As a coaster fan and a fan of both Tears for Fears and Blondie, I really, really liked it. Setting aside the building itself and arguments over why it's in Future World or whatever it's now called to begin with, I just couldn't escape that, man, that queue and background story are absolutely stupid. Insultingly stupid.

Like "turn your brain off and tune out the inane dialogue and just wait for the fun part" level of stupid. Which is fine for some place like Six Flags.

And that's I guess what EPCOT is now. EPCOT, a place to turn off your brain. Who would have thought it would have turned out like this?

 

[Mickeynerd17]

"turn your brain off and tune out the inane dialogue and just wait for the fun part" level of stupid.

The current Mission: Space preshow does the same thing to me. I personally can't stand listening because its so unrealistic. Unfortunate to hear that from Cosmic Rewind though.