TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
Tell me why it does fit? Or you just think it fits cause you like it?
-
The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More -
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
EPCOT Journey of Water featuring Moana coming to Epcot
- Thread starter Rteetz
- Start date
Centauri Space Station
Well-Known Member
_caleb
Well-Known Member
This is how it “fits”:
And then you post this:
…which seems disingenuous given that there literally is a “long term plan to make the seas and the area around it” into a cohesive land (though not necessarily “tropical,” you added that part).
And I never said I like any of it.
peter11435
Well-Known Member
It fits because the themes represented are congruent with that of EPCOT and the World Nature area where it resides.
Last edited:
Chef idea Mickey`=
Well-Known Member
I guess it fits World Discovery more so than if it stayed Future World. Mission Space isn't Future World unless it showcased futuristic approaches to navigating around space. If Test Track was about electric green cars then it would Co exist with Future World. Now that Epcot is going by Discovery, Nature and Celebration it seems it's going by present day Earth. Guardians is Discovery but Discovery in IP imagination.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
I was referring to guardians but I can see how it got confusing.
Epcot82Guy
Well-Known Member
I think we're really talking past each other - at least as someone reading this. As with many of the newer EPCOT projects, I think we have to be precise about concept vs. execution.
The concept of JoW works quite well, I would say. The inclusion of Moana feels like an afterthought/way to get it past the mandate. And, that pulls it a bit away from integrating more seamlessly into World Nature. But, how much that bothers someone is more personal.
The execution of JoW is a different story. The attraction itself is nice. It feels very lush and natural, and Moana actually works to translate that message. And (going back to concept), that works in the idea of World Nature. But, they stopped. As a physical space, JoW feels very disconnected from all of EPCOT. It backs up to the very circular, balanced hub. It feels disconnected (i.e. physically far) from the Land and Seas. It's entrance is down a lush pathway heavily planted - that then opens up in the old more walkway/intentionally landscaped areas of the former FWW.
This may be more an issue of World Nature vs. JoW itself. If they had heavily redone the walking areas and planting of World Nature to make it feel more lush/forest like (from Land to Seas to JoW), I think it would feel more integrated. But, they didn't (or at least haven't). It actually feels (i.e. looks) more akin to the new gardens/design of Celebration Gardens and its landscaping design than it does World Nature. And, that makes confused design in execution.
Same goes for the other side where World Celebration (IMAG) and World Nature (The Land) just switch. You could say the same about FL to TL in MK, but there are very distinct feelings on each side of that divide. I would argue The Land feels way more connected to and aligned with IMAG than JoW (because it was originally designed that way).
This is why it feels disconnected. Because having a thesis statement that doesn't actually translate visually or physically doesn't a theme make. It has to be executed in both concept AND execution.
EDIT: And, to be clear, this is coming from a fan of the attraction. I really enjoy it. But, I can also see how it creates issues in the land it allegedly resides in - and enjoying it doesn't override those.
The concept of JoW works quite well, I would say. The inclusion of Moana feels like an afterthought/way to get it past the mandate. And, that pulls it a bit away from integrating more seamlessly into World Nature. But, how much that bothers someone is more personal.
The execution of JoW is a different story. The attraction itself is nice. It feels very lush and natural, and Moana actually works to translate that message. And (going back to concept), that works in the idea of World Nature. But, they stopped. As a physical space, JoW feels very disconnected from all of EPCOT. It backs up to the very circular, balanced hub. It feels disconnected (i.e. physically far) from the Land and Seas. It's entrance is down a lush pathway heavily planted - that then opens up in the old more walkway/intentionally landscaped areas of the former FWW.
This may be more an issue of World Nature vs. JoW itself. If they had heavily redone the walking areas and planting of World Nature to make it feel more lush/forest like (from Land to Seas to JoW), I think it would feel more integrated. But, they didn't (or at least haven't). It actually feels (i.e. looks) more akin to the new gardens/design of Celebration Gardens and its landscaping design than it does World Nature. And, that makes confused design in execution.
Same goes for the other side where World Celebration (IMAG) and World Nature (The Land) just switch. You could say the same about FL to TL in MK, but there are very distinct feelings on each side of that divide. I would argue The Land feels way more connected to and aligned with IMAG than JoW (because it was originally designed that way).
This is why it feels disconnected. Because having a thesis statement that doesn't actually translate visually or physically doesn't a theme make. It has to be executed in both concept AND execution.
EDIT: And, to be clear, this is coming from a fan of the attraction. I really enjoy it. But, I can also see how it creates issues in the land it allegedly resides in - and enjoying it doesn't override those.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
@Epcot82Guy said exactly what I think in a much better way!!!!
_caleb
Well-Known Member
Good thoughts here. I think you’ve offered a much better informed and more nuanced opinion than “Moana doesn’t fit!”
I’d hope we could all recognize that World Nature is a new land concept that reconfigures what was Future World. Because they didn’t close the park completely to re-do that quarter of the park, the thematic connection (walkways, landscaping, etc) between The Land and The Seas pavilions and Journey of Water isn’t instantly going to be seamless.
The park still seems to be in transition from what it was to whatever it’s going to be. This is why blanket “it doesn’t fit” criticisms seem unwarranted (or, at least premature). Maybe there are NO plans to connect these areas beyond what’s already been done. But I’ve been under the impression that the reorganization of Future World into World Nature, World Discovery, and World Celebration isn’t complete.
_caleb
Well-Known Member
Even with Guardians, I don’t see how “It doesn’t fit!” is a valid criticism. It may not fit the themed land previously known as Future World, but to say it doesn’t fit World Discovery, “a land themed around the stories about science, technology and intergalactic adventure come to life,” seems to ignore what they’ve clearly said they’re turning the area into.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
I don’t think it fits Epcot period. I mean they did try with the entrance and all but it’s such a stretch. I also think the attraction isn’t even as good as the mummy at universal so there’s that hot take haha.
Epcot82Guy
Well-Known Member
That is very fair. To add a bit more of the nuance, I think another aspect is how you view the park in its current state.
If you are viewing this plan as mostly done or complete, and "new EPCOT" is now ready - I think there is a lot of valid criticism about it being disjointed and a bit of a thematic mess and partial update.
If, on the other hand, you are viewing this as effectively v0.7 on its way to a more cohesive v1.0, that changes the argument.
I personally disagree with your last statement right now. For me, the plans seem to be getting more fragmented. And their projects as of late tend to get owned by multiple teams that don't really communicate. BUT, that is my assumption - just as you said yours is assumption on your side. We don't know right now. And, if your statement is indeed true - and there is an overarching plan that creates more consistency - I will happily admit my error. (As we all should with assumptions.)
For me, it's the lack of overall plan and theme in recent projects (in favor of what seems to be more attraction-specific branding) is my biggest gripe. But, as Luminous showed, I will be the first to applaud a step back in the direction I would like to see.
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
I still think the best option for what we’ve been left with at the moment would be to make all of former Future World into World Celebration, with each of the four quadrants representing a theme—nature and conservation for the northwest, imagination and inspiration for the southwest, invention and creation for the southeast, and exploration for the northeast. Keep the green and red theming for the current Nature and Discovery areas and blue for the central corridor, but shift the southeast toward orange/yellow and the southwest toward teal. Adjust planter layout and theming accordingly (like, perhaps add more rockwork to the planters in the nature area, for instance).
Poseidon Quest
Well-Known Member
It could not be any clearer that there is no vision for Epcot going forward. The new gardens were slapped together because they needed to get something done quickly.
Epcot has no theme, other than "the magic of possibility", because the company does not care. The vision for the park is a giant billboard for Disney+ and the company has achieved that.
Epcot82Guy
Well-Known Member
I actually don't hate that idea. You could actually pull the colors from the new ring logo to create a new set of ideas. And, each attraction could then tie in that way. I offer that just as an idea.
I actually think the separation was too "half done" to work. So, stepping back like you suggest would be a much better idea.
I still think Epcot should be anchored in the real world somehow, and the Guardians story is a step too far into fantasy. But, you could easily update that with a "Mission 2" or "New Exhibit" to bring it back more to our real world somehow. The infrastructure works great (save for the Big Blue Box, but another story). Same with the World Showcase issues (i.e. showcasing cultures that inspired some of Disney's best stories...)
_caleb
Well-Known Member
Again, are you talking about old Epcot, or new Epcot? The move to these new "neighborhoods" is a pretty significant change in the overall direction of the parks. Still a "permanent World's Fair," but no longer future oriented in the same way that it was.
_caleb
Well-Known Member
So all the concept art, plans, announcements, construction, signage, and changes at Epcot make it clear that there's no vision for Epcot? You might not like or understand the vision, but that doesn't mean there isn't one.
This isn't a theme? Or is it just one you don't like?
So now there IS a vision for Epcot, it's just that it serve as "a giant billboard for Disney+?"
Maybe people just aren't careful with the wording of their posts, but stuff like this makes it hard to have a discussion about what Disney is ACTUALLY doing with Epcot.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
For guardians I’m talking about any park other than studios.
I’m not exactly sure what the new Epcot is.
Tony the Tigger
Well-Known Member
I find a decent amount of the criticism unrealistic.
If you were to bulldoze the whole park and start over, by all means, make your points and be fastidious.
That's not happening. To replace any one attraction with any other (different) attraction that's going to perfectly fit is a longshot. Can it happen? Sure. Should it be expected in every instance? That's not realistic, IMO.
Then the business has a choice: add the Frozen attraction, or nitpick between Arendelle and Arendal. Add a minor water attraction near the Living Seas or..?
Again, some of us make the perfect the enemy of the good. It's pointless. This isn't philosophical. It's nuts and bolts.
So either you never change anything, you flatten the whole thing and start over, or you do things that line up pretty well but maybe not perfectly using the properties to which you have access and are popular.
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
Finally saw this a few weeks ago, both during the day and at night. During the day I feel it is not worth it and it really doesn't feel like it belongs where it is.
At night, however, it is very beautiful and worth it due to the lighting. It actually even, slightly, feels in-line with Epcot due to the combination of technology and "nature" on demonstration to you.
At night, however, it is very beautiful and worth it due to the lighting. It actually even, slightly, feels in-line with Epcot due to the combination of technology and "nature" on demonstration to you.