Journey of Water featuring Moana coming to Epcot

[doctornick]

Epcot currently has more rides than it’s ever had, and more than DAK and DHS has. It would be nice if it had another but I don’t think this is a bad addition

I’m all for more rides in Epcot (and all the parks) but they are more needed in WS pavilions without attractions or as part of Play! The west side of the former FW adding a complimentary smaller scale attraction like this makes sense.

 

[dreday3]

It does, but almost no one cares about riding half of them. That wasn't an issue in the park's prime.

Regardless, I'm not mad about the water thing. Would it have made more sense at DAK? Yeah, probably. Could it be in a better location at EPCOT? Yeah, probably. Is it at least something pretty/relatively educational (hopefully) that's better than a festival center or a Starbucks? Definitely.

Look, I loved Horizons, probably more than a lot of people. But not for one second do I think kids today would be interested in that ride. Or World of Motion.
What they want is Guardians, Nintendo and whatever else and that really seems to irk a lot of Epcot fans. They definitely don't want "edutainment".

(yes, I'm sure some will come here and talk about how their kid would love it, but most wouldn't)

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I don't really understand what this is..

I don't think Disney does either.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I don't think Disney does either.

From the beginning it’s been over hyped by fans expecting so much more. It’s filler dropped into because they tore down CommuniCore for the Starchitect Table that now isn’t happening.

 

[UNCgolf]

Look, I loved Horizons, probably more than a lot of people. But not for one second do I think kids today would be interested in that ride. Or World of Motion.
What they want is Guardians, Nintendo and whatever else and that really seems to irk a lot of Epcot fans. They definitely don't want "edutainment".

(yes, I'm sure some will come here and talk about how their kid would love it, but most wouldn't)

I don't see why kids today would be any less interested than kids were in the 80s. The same kind of people that enjoyed it then would still enjoy it now -- some people would like it and some wouldn't.

The bigger issue is that Disney already has a park (multiple parks, now) for the things you're talking about. They're actively limiting their customer base to a specific kind of person instead of expanding it (of course, the parks are so crowded now that it probably doesn't matter).

 

[dreday3]

I don't see why kids today would be any less interested than kids were in the 80s. The same kind of people that enjoyed it then would still enjoy it now.

As a kid in the early 80s, the idea of being able to talk to someone through the tv was THE FUTURE!!!

Kids today just won't -in general- be as excited by an omnimover ride narrated by "grandparents" talking to us about living under water.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I don't really understand what this is.. a few themed fountains you can walk through and look at? Sounds pretty but a waste of space none the less.

Well it’s not a waste of space when the alternative is 40 year old dead/rotting space.

So that was the alternative.

 

[UNCgolf]

As a kid in the early 80s, the idea of being able to talk to someone through the tv was THE FUTURE!!!

Kids today just won't -in general- be as excited by an omnimover ride narrated by "grandparents" talking to us about living under water.

Why do you think that, though? The kinds of people who were interested in the future then are still interested in it.

I don't think there's any reason to believe some smaller percentage of the population would be interested now -- if anything, there may actually be more people interested now with how wild people go over Tesla, Apple, etc.

 

[James Alucobond]

Kids today just won't -in general- be as excited by an omnimover ride narrated by "grandparents" talking to us about living under water.

Please don't give them the idea of using some no-talent social media influencer schlub as a narrator.

 

[dreday3]

Why do you think that, though? Kids are still interested in the future.

I don't think there's any reason to believe some smaller percentage of the population would be interested now.

They have the future in the palms of their hand, literally, already. They can google instantly to see what may be here by next year and dated the week after.

We did not have that. What we did have was this amazing place called Epcot that showed us what the future could be.

Very different now.

 

[lazyboy97o]

As a kid in the early 80s, the idea of being able to talk to someone through the tv was THE FUTURE!!!

Kids today just won't -in general- be as excited by an omnimover ride narrated by "grandparents" talking to us about living under water.

People always say “Kids today won’t like this or that” and yet they’re there visiting a 50 year old theme park riding 50 year old rides (many based on older rides).

 

[khlaylav]

It does, but almost no one cares about riding half of them. That wasn't an issue in the park's prime.

Regardless, I'm not mad about the water thing. Would it have made more sense at DAK? Yeah, probably. Could it be in a better location at EPCOT? Yeah, probably. Is it at least something pretty/relatively educational (hopefully) that's better than a festival center or a Starbucks? Definitely.

Eh. To me, placing it in AK only makes sense if you're actually focusing it on animals rather than just the water cycle. And then a different IP might be called for, and then you put it in Nemo, and then the debate continues on where it fits and oh dear I've gone cross-eyed.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

From the beginning it’s been over hyped by fans expecting so much more. It’s filler dropped into because they tore down CommuniCore for the Starchitect Table that now isn’t happening.

The whole spine project has been a massive waste of time and money.

The end result will not be substantially different than what was there before.

But the combination of wanting something new and for the walls to come down ASAP has built up this image in people's mind of something truly worth the wait.

It can't just be filler after so many years of off and on construction and promotion. So it will be amazing, even if it's not.

 

[dreday3]

People always say “Kids today won’t like this or that” and yet they’re there visiting a 50 year old theme park riding 50 year old rides (many based on older rides).

The initial post I was responding to stated "no one cares about half of them" -the rides. So apparently not many people enjoy them.

Hey man, go for it! Build me another version of Horizons. Same pace, same type of ride. If you guys think it will be a big hit among the youth, I stand corrected.

 

[lazyboy97o]

They have the future in the palms of their hand, literally, already. They can look up instantly to see what may be here by next year and dated the week after.

They have Moana / Star Wars / Marvel / Whatever in the palms of their hand, literally, already.

 

[J4546]

I agree, this attraction is about the water cycle not animals, and fits epcot more than AK imo.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I don't see why kids today would be any less interested than kids were in the 80s. The same kind of people that enjoyed it then would still enjoy it now -- some people would like it and some wouldn't.

The bigger issue is that Disney already has a park (multiple parks, now) for the things you're talking about. They're actively limiting their customer base to a specific kind of person instead of expanding it (of course, the parks are so crowded now that it probably doesn't matter).

The original omnimover rides would not be useful today.

At the top of that list is horizons. It was killed early, so people let nostalgia take over instead of actually remember how 70’s it was…world a motion is there too.

The “best” of those rides are still there…SS, living with the land and imagination. They just ruined imagination.

I am an ardent defender of Epcot and the mentality…no doubt. But they needed to stick to the goal and constantly reinject…and Eisner and the Bobs never we’re gonna do that.

 

[UNCgolf]

They have the future in the palms of their hand, literally, already. They can google instantly to see what may be here by next year and dated the week after.

We did not have that. What we did have was this amazing place called Epcot that showed us what the future could be.

Very different now.

But googling it and watching a video or reading about it is very different than actually experiencing it -- it's the same reason kids still love going to science museums (not to mention zoos and aquariums) even though they can look at pictures or watch videos of the things in them whenever they want.

I don't think EPCOT was ever really about showing a specific version of the future anyways, though. It was more about general inspiration and optimism about it.

 

[dreday3]

They have Moana / Star Wars / Marvel / Whatever in the palms of their hand, literally, already.

So yeah, that's my point. They don't want Horizons, they want to ride Iron Man.

 

[marni1971]

There was never a ride in this location, there was a building.
I could only imagine the backlash by the purists if a ride was constructed at this spot.
They did away the instantly dated way of showing tech., that few people can even access in such a crowded enviroment - and turned it into a lush, beautiful, naturalistic walkthrough that ties in a bit of that edutainement so many harp about Epcot removing - and tied it to The Seas.

Where to begin….

Nah. I give up.