Journey of Water featuring Moana coming to Epcot

Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
The Seas rock work is constrained to a small footprint right out in front of the building...a small accent... This is a major rockwork addition... It will be completely out of the vernacular of the area it is being put in... The architecture in this whole part of the park is modernistic...and the new additional buildings and revitalized entrance will continue to tell this story... A Polynesian/Nature rock work water play area makes no sense in this location...Especially since the size of the water feature as a lead up to the Seas pavilion would practically dwarf the accessible areas of the pavilion itself... It's not just the theme or the character overlay, it feels odd to have a water play area as the first thing you see coming through the entrance of the park... This whole idea would seem better suited to DAK where it is miserably hot and they could really use that as a springboard for an entire area celebrating the Pacific Islands and their marine life and culture..(replace Chester and Hester)
THAT would make sense, but this just does not fit the idiom of the park...
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
The Seas rock work is constrained to a small footprint right out in front of the building...a small accent... This is a major rockwork addition... It will be completely out of the vernacular of the area it is being put in... The architecture in this whole part of the park is modernistic...and the new additional buildings and revitalized entrance will continue to tell this story... A Polynesian/Nature rock work water play area makes no sense in this location...Especially since the size of the water feature as a lead up to the Seas pavilion would practically dwarf the accessible areas of the pavilion itself... It's not just the theme or the character overlay, it feels odd to have a water play area as the first thing you see coming through the entrance of the park... This whole idea would seem better suited to DAK where it is miserably hot and they could really use that as a springboard for an entire area celebrating the Pacific Islands and their marine life and culture..(replace Chester and Hester)
THAT would make sense, but this just does not fit the idiom of the park...
Click to expand...
A water play area is a rather generic trend that is easy filler. Not exactly a bold idea for an allegedly big new direction.
 
Snow Queen 83

Snow Queen 83

Well-Known Member
RSoxNo1 said:
Out of curiosity why do you feel this way? Is it the substantial rockwork in Future World? It seems more like an extension of the Seas entrance to me, but I'd argue that The Seas is better suited for DAK.
Click to expand...

It just doesn't belong in a park called "Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow". It would be like putting Moana in Tomorrowland.
 
nickys

nickys

Premium Member
Snow Queen 83 said:
It just doesn't belong in a park called "Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow". It would be like putting Moana in Tomorrowland.
Click to expand...

So serious question then. Would you get rid of all IP - all meet and greets etc. from Epcot. And on that subject, is Figment an IP?

As part of an area named Nature, I don’t think the water feature is totally out of place. AFAIK, this isn’t a splash pad type water play park, it’s a walk-through the waterfalls type of thing. And whilst having Moana in it is meh, hopefully it won’t be too in-your-face.

Now if it turns out to be a Moana inspired area that has giant character topiaries or garish figures like at All Stars or POFQ, then I will whole-heartedly agree with you.

Tomorrowland used to have a dance party in it, Chip and Dale were always around.
 
Snow Queen 83

Snow Queen 83

Well-Known Member
Incomudro said:
Epcot may stand for Experimental Prototypical Community of Tomorrow, but even when it opened - it was not such a thing.
In any event, some nature and water doesn't need to clash with those things.
Click to expand...

Yes, it was. Even though it wasn't based on Walt's original vision it still was about the Future. Especially Horizons. Now it's based on whatever IP they want to put in it.
 
Last edited:
JayKZ

JayKZ

Well-Known Member
Snow Queen 83 said:
Yes, it was. Even though it wasn't based on Walt's original vision it still was about based on the Future. Especially Horizons. Now it's based on whatever IP they want to put in it.
Click to expand...
"Epcot" hasn't been an acronym for decades. Besides, in Walt's original vision for E.P.C.O.T. there was lots of greenspace, and presumably water.
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
OK lets not pick about the "EPCOT" point... but the point was that they are veering so far from the creative vision for the park that it is becoming unrecognizable...and without any real cohesiveness. To just slap a "World Of Nature" sign on it does not necessarily make things cohesive...especially when only 2/3 of the pavilions in that area sort of match the name...
And personally I would remove all IP's that have no relevance to the land, attraction, or park...But that is me... IP presence for a meet and greet in each of the parks is nice when it becomes relevant... Go to the Magic Kingdom to see classic characters, DHS for Star Wars and Toy Story characters, etc. But what if you are only going to DHS and the kids want to see Snow White and Cinderella? Then buy a park hopper and make that happen....Having to have every character in every park is like demanding they build Space Mountain in the Animal Kingdom because what if your kids want to go on that and they don't have it there...
It is similar to what they did with merchandise...Part of the fun is finding the treasures in each area, not picking through an enormous Wal-Mart of souvenirs...
 
ImperfectPixie

ImperfectPixie

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
OK lets not pick about the "EPCOT" point... but the point was that they are veering so far from the creative vision for the park that it is becoming unrecognizable...and without any real cohesiveness. To just slap a "World Of Nature" sign on it does not necessarily make things cohesive...especially when only 2/3 of the pavilions in that area sort of match the name...
And personally I would remove all IP's that have no relevance to the land, attraction, or park...But that is me... IP presence for a meet and greet in each of the parks is nice when it becomes relevant... Go to the Magic Kingdom to see classic characters, DHS for Star Wars and Toy Story characters, etc. But what if you are only going to DHS and the kids want to see Snow White and Cinderella? Then buy a park hopper and make that happen....Having to have every character in every park is like demanding they build Space Mountain in the Animal Kingdom because what if your kids want to go on that and they don't have it there...
It is similar to what they did with merchandise...Part of the fun is finding the treasures in each area, not picking through an enormous Wal-Mart of souvenirs...
Click to expand...
AMEN. (I don't count Figment as IP because he was created for his attraction.)
 
Snow Queen 83

Snow Queen 83

Well-Known Member
JayKZ said:
"Epcot" hasn't been an acronym for decades. Besides, in Walt's original vision for E.P.C.O.T. there was lots of greenspace, and presumably water.
Click to expand...

Walt's Epcot and 1982's Epcot are totally different things.

1982's Epcot had pavilions that would showcase modern innovation and enterprise through edutainment. It also had/has a world's fair section that educates guests on other parts of the world.
 
gustaftp

gustaftp

Well-Known Member
Incomudro said:
Epcot may stand for Experimental Prototypical Community of Tomorrow, but even when it opened - it was not such a thing.
In any event, some nature and water doesn't need to clash with those things.
Click to expand...
This.

In fact, I'd argue that protecting and caring for our natural resources is very integral to our future. That's why Disney placed "Land" and "Sea" pavilions in EPCOT to begin with. An outdoor display doesn't clash with a protoype community of tomorrow; in the future I would hope that communities do a better job of integrating nature with the built environment.
 
JayKZ

JayKZ

Well-Known Member
Snow Queen 83 said:
Walt's Epcot and 1982's Epcot are totally different things.

1982's Epcot had pavilions that would showcase modern innovation and enterprise through edutainment. It also had/has a world's fair section that educates guests on other parts of the world.
Click to expand...
And 1982's EPCOT was never an Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow. It was a permanent World's Fair, Disney style.
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
Weather_Lady said:
It's only a matter of time before Universal opens its copycat attraction, "Journey of Water: Featuring Moan...ing Mytle."

Back on topic: I'm delighted to see Epcot prettied up a bit, and so long as they don't scale this back, I think the design looks promising.
Click to expand...
Funny because Universal has just done amazing things with Polynesian rockwork and water features at Volcano Bay...one might argue that this is Disney's rip off of what Universal has just created...And that waterpark is more stunning than any water Park Disney has yet created...
 
The Grand Inquisitor

The Grand Inquisitor

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
Funny because Universal has just done amazing things with Polynesian rockwork and water features at Volcano Bay...one might argue that this is Disney's rip off of what Universal has just created...And that waterpark is more stunning than any water Park Disney has yet created...
Click to expand...
Volcano Bay is better than Typhoon Lagoon and Blizzard Beach(architecture wise).
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom