Journey of Water featuring Moana coming to Epcot

Tom Morrow

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
Yes, I enjoyed these additions and changes for what they are (except Ratatouille, which I think is a genuinely bad attraction). But in an alternate universe somewhere, there's a version of Epcot where a little more effort was put into making these changes work with the park rather than against it. I want parks to be a cohesive experience, and not just "Collection of IPs location A", "Collection of IPs location B", etc.
 
Tom Morrow

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
Yes, and see here's why it's frustrating. 15 years ago every single one of these changes except Gran Fiesta Tour would have been used on these boards as a parody example of how bad things would have to get for Disney to even consider it. Nemo was met with this reaction, or "as long as they don't continue this trend then it's okay I guess since it revived a dead pavilion". So today having a bunch of Disney park fans boldly stating that there is, in fact, nothing to critique and we're just choosing to be bitter demonstrates a pretty big shift downward in what is regarded as quality from Disney Parks and how powerful Disney's marketing is. They have successfully swayed the popular opinion to "actually, people criticizing the forced IP additions are wrong and what they are wishing for was never great." But we know it was great, or WDW wouldn't have become the number one resort in the world.

So yeah, I can and do find some enjoyment in these additions, but I know that a better version was possible.
 
Chef idea Mickey`=

Chef idea Mickey`=

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
Does it "fit" with EPCOT (or what it's supposed to be, anyway):

Frozen: Nope. Not at all, and probably the worst offender. Arendelle is not Norway. Being Norwegian inspired doesn't matter if the actual location is still fictional so I'm not really sure how they could make the IP work.

Ratatouille: Nope. It takes place in Paris, but the ride is just you running from danger. They could have made it work if they came up with a new concept - Remy takes you on a tour of Paris culture and cuisine, while dodging danger. Boom, done.

Nemo: Nope. The ride is just a recap of the film. They could have made it work by having it be, say, a field trip with Mr. Ray touring coral reefs or something.

Journey of Water: Not really. The edutainment value they attempted to shoe-horn in about the flow of water is superficial at best.

Guardians: Nope. They present what is basically a parody of an old school Epcot pavilion. If the actual ride had something of value to say it might be different, but instead you're just outrunning the bad guy.

Gran Fiesta Tour: Actually, yes! You're trying to find Donald, but Donald is too busy enjoying the sights and culture of Mexico. It's the first IP makeover and the only one they did right.
Click to expand...
I love this! Full agree Gran Fiesta Tour is the only one they got right and is one of my most favorite must go on for me on any Epcot day.

Frozen:
As much as I love Frozen, it's annoying now know-ing about World of Frozen that WDW because of this result 90% will not get a World of Arrendale of it's own. Magic Kingdom could of become a headliner international park if it had this land. Magic Kingdom should have something to be proud of for once have something new and first that none other parks in the world don't have. Sure WDW has Epcot and Animal Kingdom but going by new things even if WDW was the first to ever get Frozen Ever After.

The Nemo idea and Ratatouille` Paris idea is spot on and would of given The Florida version of Ratatouille a unique component when we already don't have the Remy's restaurant.

Journey of Water is fine it just makes the entrance to Epcot look like Disney Park now. I don't care for Guardians yes the big blue building which gotten use to it but other than that the statue fits the pavilion aesthetic along with Mission Space.
 
Chef idea Mickey`=

Chef idea Mickey`=

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
Does it "fit" with EPCOT (or what it's supposed to be, anyway):

Frozen: Nope. Not at all, and probably the worst offender. Arendelle is not Norway. Being Norwegian inspired doesn't matter if the actual location is still fictional so I'm not really sure how they could make the IP work.

Ratatouille: Nope. It takes place in Paris, but the ride is just you running from danger. They could have made it work if they came up with a new concept - Remy takes you on a tour of Paris culture and cuisine, while dodging danger. Boom, done.

Nemo: Nope. The ride is just a recap of the film. They could have made it work by having it be, say, a field trip with Mr. Ray touring coral reefs or something.

Journey of Water: Not really. The edutainment value they attempted to shoe-horn in about the flow of water is superficial at best.

Guardians: Nope. They present what is basically a parody of an old school Epcot pavilion. If the actual ride had something of value to say it might be different, but instead you're just outrunning the bad guy.

Gran Fiesta Tour: Actually, yes! You're trying to find Donald, but Donald is too busy enjoying the sights and culture of Mexico. It's the first IP makeover and the only one they did right.
Click to expand...
If we want to look at it and say after Gran Fiesta Tour that they gotten lazy with the tieing in with Epcot and or the country then it doesn't measure up with Tiana Bayou Adventure on both coasts not just getting a retheme to just scenes from the first movie now in 2024. Now they decided that they have to go creative when they absolutely don't have to and honestly had they just did the Frozen way it would of fit Frontierland and Critter Country way more than this Foods we have no clue how this will end up.🙈
 
_caleb

_caleb

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
_caleb said:
Not sure I follow. You don’t think they had the idea before they announced the idea and started construction?
Click to expand...
You recently said you had no idea of the new direction. It should be known by know, communicated through the design of the experience. So yeah, I’m doubtful they actually had an idea especially given the contradictory yet constant invoking of EPCOT Center.
 
_caleb

_caleb

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
You recently said you had no idea of the new direction. It should be known by know, communicated through the design of the experience. So yeah, I’m doubtful they actually had an idea especially given the contradictory yet constant invoking of EPCOT Center.
Click to expand...
Oh, I see. I mean, we know what they’ve told us—about the neighborhoods and event space, etc. But you’re right, I don’t know what the end vision really is. Do any of us around here?

So when Disney says, “This land is about nature and stuff” and then they build the artificial, but naturey Journey of Water, how can we say, “That doesn’t fit!”?

When they say, “This other land is now about discovery, where “stories about science, technology, and intergalactic adventure come to life” and then put in a fantasy world showcase “pavilion,” on what grounds can we say, “That doesn’t fit!”?
 
Disgruntled Walt

Disgruntled Walt

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
Here's a question: are the messages of World Nature and Animal Kingdom identical now? It seems like AK is less about animals and more about exotic natural locations, at least based on the rumored new additions. I think it was a mistake to rebrand 1/3 of Future World into something basically with the same message as AK.
 
_caleb

_caleb

Well-Known Member
imagineer97 said:
Here's a question: are the messages of World Nature and Animal Kingdom identical now? It seems like AK is less about animals and more about exotic natural locations, at least based on the rumored new additions. I think it was a mistake to rebrand 1/3 of Future World into something basically with the same message as AK.
Click to expand...
World Nature is described as “dedicated to understanding and preserving the beauty, awe, and balance of the natural world.” (SOURCE)

The Animal Kingdom dedication (by Michael Eisner in 1998) reads:
“Welcome to a kingdom of animals… real, ancient, and imagined: a kingdom ruled by lions, dinosaurs, and dragons; a kingdom of balance, harmony, and survival; a kingdom we enter to share in the wonder, gaze at the beauty, thrill at the drama, and learn.”
 
Poseidon Quest

Poseidon Quest

Well-Known Member
_caleb said:
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.
Click to expand...

Explain to me what the concept art and changes were/are conveying.

_caleb said:
This isn't a theme? Or is it just one you don't like?
Click to expand...

Explain to me what the theme of the park is.

_caleb said:
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.
Click to expand...

Further, playing dumb isn't going to make anyone agree with you. It's just, well, you pretending to not understand the difference between creative vision and corporate cynicism.
 
Last edited:
_caleb

_caleb

Well-Known Member
Poseidon Quest said:
Explain to me what the concept art and changes were/are conveying.



Explain to me what the theme of the park is.



Further, playing dumb isn't going to make anyone agree with you. It's just, well, you pretending to not understand the difference between creative vision and corporate cynicism.
Click to expand...
I’m not playing dumb, I’m trying to understand your perspective. And what do I care if anyone agrees with me?

Disney says what the theme of park is. And they’ve changed it a bit over the years, haven’t they? The concept art conveyed that the park was changing—specifically from FutureWorld to the 3 “neighborhoods:” World Celebration, World Nature, and World Discovery. Each of these has its own “theme,” I’ve posted a couple of them in this thread.

You may not like or understand these themes, but Disney’s communicated that they exist. I can see how someone might not like what they’re doing, or prefer they’d have done something different, but I have no idea how anyone could insist that Journey of Water “doesn’t fit” into Epcot’s “World Nature” land. Based on what?

I don’t think I’m a total idiot, but I guess I don’t understand the difference between creative vision and corporate cynicism (can a corporation be cynical?)—at least how you’re using these terms here.
 
_caleb

_caleb

Well-Known Member
TrainsOfDisney said:
The theme is “new Epcot” apparently.
Click to expand...
No, Disney has established that the new Epcot themes are:
  • World Celebration: "new experiences that connect us to one another and the world around us.”
  • World Nature: "understanding and preserving the beauty, awe and balance of the natural world."
  • World Discovery: “bringing stories about science, technology, and intergalactic adventure to life.”
  • World Showcase: “a celebration of culture, cuisine, architecture, and traditions.”
These are the themes. They did not exist before Disney announced them at D23 in 2019 (back when the theme of Future World was a showcase for the future), but they do now, and Disney has been (and is still) building them. Anyone who says there isn’t a theme is wrong because these are the themes.

Are they good themes? I’m not sure, because I don’t know exactly what any of these means. Maybe you do? Because folks here keep insisting they know what “fits” in each and what doesn’t.
 
Tom Morrow

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
I think trying to make Future World three different themed areas was a big misstep. Both sides are still just crescents lined with big pavilions. If World Discovery was drastically different, aesthetically, than World Nature, it would make more sense, but instead it's like... Nature has rounded planters and Discovery has angled planters?

The whole thing should have just been called World Discovery.
 
Bryan_the_Imagineer

Bryan_the_Imagineer

Active Member
Tom Morrow said:
I think trying to make Future World three different themed areas was a big misstep. Both sides are still just crescents lined with big pavilions. If World Discovery was drastically different, aesthetically, than World Nature, it would make more sense, but instead it's like... Nature has rounded planters and Discovery has angled planters?

The whole thing should have just been called World Discovery.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more, the sides and the pavilions were created with a specific design, theme, and placement in mind, it was a mistake to fix something that wasn't broke. Not only do the neighborhoods make no sense (World Celebration and World Discovery are, aside from a few differences, the same damn thing) but the execution was poorly done as they didn't bother making transitions from and to the neighborhoods. Now even the placement of the pavilions now seem incoherent (Why is Imagination sticking out in World Nature & far out from Celebration) They IMO should've either grouped East & West into Future World or made everything World Celebration since it's the same thing and theme. It's just another sign of Disney ruining Epcot for the worse. What a disappointment.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom