PKD
Active Member
I enjoyed/liked the Millennium Wand, and thought it was nice as an "extra" for EPCOT. However, with the Epcot being added...:fork:
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Hand and Wand to come down?
- Thread starter ArchiDanDisney
- Start date
I enjoyed/liked the Millennium Wand, and thought it was nice as an "extra" for EPCOT. However, with the Epcot being added...:fork:
I'm not so sure--The post-wand era might just be another point on the slow decline of American culture. They may speak of it as a historical turning point. Our children will look back and cry "Why didn't they do anything!?" :ROFLOL:
travelskip
Member
I agree, it was great for the Milemnium Celebration.
(I'm just curious as to what's up with Mickey being torn apart and different parts of his clothing/body being scatterred throughout WDW.
Next up: a pair of big yellow shoes at DTD and a pair of red shorts draped around the Tree of Life.)
The wand and hat are great (especially the hat where it out front of the Studios near the river) as special event icons (MC or Uncle Walt 100th). Now they seem to offset the feeling the original creators of the Park were trying to evoke.
If you don't know you're at Epcot, perhaps you missed the toll both sign or the sign on the bus you boarded. The wand just isn't nessacary, so why have it?
jmvd20
Well-Known Member
The actual structure itself is nothing more than scaffold sections in reality. Pre-built and set in place rather quickly. Even if the materials on the sign and hand were designed to let air flow through them you would still need a substantial struture due to the large cantilever over SSE.
I think the only point being made is that when the structure was built they knew it was going to be around larger than a decoration for the millenium celebration. If it was truly to be a temporary item it could have been designed differently to be more cost effective.
SirNim
Well-Known Member
The flat, two-dimensional cardboard cutout relief of the sleeve, gloved hand, and wand itself screams out "temporary" and "cost effective" pretty effectively, I would think.
If it was truly to be a permanent item it could have been designed differently to be more impressive, like a full, rounded, three-dimensional hand, a cylindrical wand, etc.
But it was built flat.
Flat tends to mean temporary... Or at least it should!
jmvd20
Well-Known Member
Touche!
I think many people would be surprised and shocked at how much the wand cost to build. I must admit that I do not know the exact costs associated with it though - I am going based off of the type of structure it is.
By saying that it could have been designed differently to be more cost effective I was thinking along the lines of a permeable base for the sign and hand which would allow air to flow through it instead of acting like a sail as another poster had stated. Also the cantilever could have been built smaller allowing for a less substantial support structure.
At any rate I agree that it really does look like a temporary structure based upon the signage and hand for the same reasons you mentioned. However the structure itself wasn't - Why they did it that way I have no idea.
To be Perfectly honest...it looks less like a cantilever, and more like a boom crane.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
A fully sculpted 25-story wand? Could you imagine? At the rate Disney builds such things, they would've had to start in about 1992 on the structure...and I'm not sure how that would make most of you happier. Most people don't think anything should be associated w/ the Geosphere. There is no question that if they spent a fortune on a 3D wand, it would be very much permanent.
capellt
Member
Is the castle still rocking that pimped my ride look? I thought they removed it? all it's missing is some chrome spinners at the base......please remove the gold.
SDav10495
Member
They did de-pimp the castle...Spence was using that as an example of Disney making good on its promise to take ridiculous decorations off when they say they will.
How much did the cake cost, by the way? I know most of it was inflatable (i.e. very temporary and probably less expensive to remove) but something about it, garish as it was, felt like it cost more to design, plan, and execute than the wand did. Obviously I don't know the actual figures, but in my mind the theory that the wand (aka crane with letters) cost too much for Disney to remove it "so soon"
rolleyes doesn't sit right with me when I remember that they designed and covered a whole castle facade a few years before and had a plan to get rid of it when promised. And that one was designed to put up with the same weather and winds the wand does...
jmvd20
Well-Known Member
Obviously I don't know the actual figures, but in my mind the theory that the wand (aka crane with letters) cost too much for Disney to remove it "so soon"
I don't think it would cost a huge amount of money to get the wand removed - I think the question is why would they remove it? What would be the benefit to Disney Co. to take it down? While numerous people here do not like it I would bet the vast majority of visitors to WDW are either indifferent or like the wand. Therefore why spend the money to remove it?
As far as the weather conditions and castle pimp out go. Adding some bling bling to the castle is vastly different in terms of construction and engineering than building the wand structure from scratch.
polarboi
Member
I always end up on the wrong side of these.
Well, usually.
I like Stitch and enjoy seeing him around the parks. I thought the whole Stitch campaign was cool. (I'm not a fan of SGE, though.)
I've repeatedly defended the use of Pixar attractions in the parks.
I think the Hat is a much cooler icon for the Studios than the Earful Tower.
I still like UoE, and I'm ready to be rid of the CoP.
Oh, and I liked the castle's gold decorations, too, and wish they would have stayed (sans mirror).
So of course I'm always rolling my eyes at the wand threads. But I have to admit, you're starting to win me over.
I totally get the rationale for the hat and wand. With so many other theme parks in the area, people don't always realize that all 4 WDW parks are in fact Disney, and the Disney execs wanted to help them remember that WDW extends beyond the MK. Thus we have Mickey's hand at Epcot, Mickey's hat at DS, and they were sure to brand AK as "Disney's Animal Kingdom" rather than just "Animal Kingdom."
And yes, the hat and wand do detract from the original purposes of their respective parks. Hollywood's Golden Age doesn't jibe with a giant hat in the middle of the street, but then again, other DS attractions don't really keep the flow entirely either (I'm looking at you, RnR and ToT). And the cartoonishness of a giant 2D Mickey hand doesn't fit with the stylistic feel of Future World, but then again, that was the point - to bring in some levity and familiar Disney warmth to a section of WDW that can feel a bit, well, cold.
But it wasn't until someone here pointed out how the wand ruins SSE's perspective and tends to dwarf it that I really got it. Because it's true; SSE doesn't feel as grand or magnificent with the wand towering over it. And now that SSE is once again becoming a major current attraction with a nice post show and a return to more global themes, it's important for the building to be majestic and have that awe-inspiring feel.
So yeah, I'm starting to catch the anti-wand fever. :lookaroun
I'm okay with the hat, honestly, even though I totally get why you all hate it. But does it have to be a pin trading station?
-p.b.
Well, usually.
I like Stitch and enjoy seeing him around the parks. I thought the whole Stitch campaign was cool. (I'm not a fan of SGE, though.)
I've repeatedly defended the use of Pixar attractions in the parks.
I think the Hat is a much cooler icon for the Studios than the Earful Tower.
I still like UoE, and I'm ready to be rid of the CoP.
Oh, and I liked the castle's gold decorations, too, and wish they would have stayed (sans mirror).
So of course I'm always rolling my eyes at the wand threads.
But I have to admit, you're starting to win me over.I totally get the rationale for the hat and wand. With so many other theme parks in the area, people don't always realize that all 4 WDW parks are in fact Disney, and the Disney execs wanted to help them remember that WDW extends beyond the MK. Thus we have Mickey's hand at Epcot, Mickey's hat at DS, and they were sure to brand AK as "Disney's Animal Kingdom" rather than just "Animal Kingdom."
And yes, the hat and wand do detract from the original purposes of their respective parks. Hollywood's Golden Age doesn't jibe with a giant hat in the middle of the street, but then again, other DS attractions don't really keep the flow entirely either (I'm looking at you, RnR and ToT). And the cartoonishness of a giant 2D Mickey hand doesn't fit with the stylistic feel of Future World, but then again, that was the point - to bring in some levity and familiar Disney warmth to a section of WDW that can feel a bit, well, cold.
But it wasn't until someone here pointed out how the wand ruins SSE's perspective and tends to dwarf it that I really got it. Because it's true; SSE doesn't feel as grand or magnificent with the wand towering over it. And now that SSE is once again becoming a major current attraction with a nice post show and a return to more global themes, it's important for the building to be majestic and have that awe-inspiring feel.
So yeah, I'm starting to catch the anti-wand fever. :lookaroun
I'm okay with the hat, honestly, even though I totally get why you all hate it. But does it have to be a pin trading station?
-p.b.
tirian
Well-Known Member
I actually don't mind the hat, either. At least it's three-dimensional. Besides, the Studios is not exactly a fully-realized park. With the exception of Hollywood and Sunset Blvds, the Studios is just a mish-mash of various architectural styles and themes with no solid concept tying them together. ("It's a movie studio! Just accept it!" doesn't work.)
XS-Spence
New Member
um...no. It definitely was not attached.
OK, my bad then, I just could've swore that I saw supports at one time. That aside, I stand by my statement that it IS decoration and should be removed.
Courtney488
New Member
Ah! Stop giving them new ideas! lol
PKD
Active Member
um...no. It definitely was not attached.
I think we have all missed the really big issue that is at hand. (pun intended) Looking at Mickey's hand, he seems to be a little "Fem" don't you think?
Timmay
Well-Known Member
I think we have all missed the really big issue that is at hand. (pun intended) Looking at Mickey's hand, he seems to be a little "Fem" don't you think?
No, he just has class!!
"Pinky out, SpongeBob!"
celticdog
Well-Known Member
It'll be there in October. I seriously doubt they would start a massive undertaking right before the summer season. I would think, if it was to come down, that the process would start in January, the beginning of the off-season.
Kman101
Well-Known Member
The Hat at MGM is alright. It's a cool focal point and good for pictures but I personally prefer the Earful Tower. Maybe had they of had the tower where the hat was, it would be better and different, not shoved at the side of the park that's near the interstate.
I was just at Epcot yesterday, first time seeing the hand/wand in person and it was pretty neat. Sorry. I know that's an unpopular opinion but it's a nice addition. Would I prefer it gone, yeah, I miss the old Epcot but I won't dwell on it and go on rants acting like it's the end of the world.
I was just at Epcot yesterday, first time seeing the hand/wand in person and it was pretty neat. Sorry. I know that's an unpopular opinion but it's a nice addition. Would I prefer it gone, yeah, I miss the old Epcot but I won't dwell on it and go on rants acting like it's the end of the world.