Journey of Water featuring Moana coming to Epcot

[doctornick]

Whether or not you agree with what's coming, it is nice to see construction actually taking off across the parks. Hopefully more people will find something to enjoy in these new areas as we get to see what they're actually going to look like.

Agreed. At the very least, actually building something there is better than the giant construction site. In an ideal world, if this can be built somewhat quickly, then the construction walls can be shrunken down to include only the south west area of the central plaza. Which would still suck but make things better than the current state.

 

[HauntedPirate]

Agreed. At the very least, actually building something there is better than the giant construction site. In an ideal world, if this can be built somewhat quickly, then the construction walls can be shrunken down to include only the south west area of the central plaza. Which would still suck but make things better than the current state.

The current state wouldn’t be a giant mess if management had a clue.

 

[MrPromey]

He didn’t - but the bar on legs pitch was chosen from the alternatives offered. I know of at least 4 alternatives.

This is a nuance I think a lot of people are missing - that the Journey of Water project was a minor part of a bigger project for this half that was going to include the shelf which was to be the larger and more impressive change - at least how it was all pitched.

I thought this new vertical construction was the reason for the demo work on this half of Communicore to begin with and I always assumed this is why details were spares regarding the Moana part - because there never was going to be all that much to it besides something nice to pass through on your way to the LivingSeas or the new shelf and something nice to gaze down on from the the shelf opposite World Showcase.

Now that the "impressive" element of this change has gone the way of the new Main Street Theater project over at the MK, we're left with what I always saw as the filler between the front of future world and the new weenie (the shelf), now with no new weenie.

To me at least, it feels like a lot of people are pinning their hopes on the edutainment value of something where the concept art shows nothing more than some scenery and where no real details of anything besides water features and landscaping have even been seriously suggested by Disney except in the way they like to talk up things like the re-imagined Purple Wall™ (which they made a specialty drink to commemorate, btw) and a new name tag it apparently took them over a year to design.

What I'm reading here feels like a lot of elaborate imaginative speculation based on a few short lines of actual description from Disney* and not what Disney has actually said they are doing.

What I see is a half torn down spine with an original plan to replace it where the major element of that replacement was shelved after they'd started tearing down what was already there in kind of an "oopsies!" moment.

I feel like current leadership at WDW has had an alarmingly high number of these "oopsies!" in recent years.**

I'd love to either be wrong about my perception of all of this from the start or for, as a result of the main project getting the ax, them deciding to do more with this part than originally planned but I've seen nothing from them or from these boards that give me hope, at least not up to this point.

And given what's happening on the lake under the same leadership...



*If someone can point me to more concrete talk from Disney that details the nature of this project that I've missed, I'd be appreciative.

** I actually started to list them in this space but it's too depressing to spend time on. Lets just say, they have over-promised and under-delivered in all four parks in recent years and for those of you that don't remember, this site's news section is a great place to find "amazing" things we were getting but never got or that we got but were shockingly short-lived or things Disney laughingly tried to hype as amazing such as new paint jobs on buildings while their competitors were opening new major attractions - many of which were true expansions, during the same spans of time.

 

[James Alucobond]

Now that the "impressive" element of this change has gone the way of the new Main Street theater project over at the MK, we're left with what I always saw as the filler between the front of future world and the new weenie, now with no new weenie.

I always thought the table was the most detested element of the update anyway. This is probably weird, but I actually wouldn't mind if the space it was meant to occupy was turned into some sort of flat ride that tied into the World Nature theme while also acting as a "gateway" to Imagination in the same way that Journey of Water leads to and thematically connects The Land and The Seas.

Again, the festival center is not an internal design. The Epcot project is not actually a single team. Tom Fitzgerald didn’t like what the Marvel team was doing in the park.

If there was a lot of conflict at the design level, that's very interesting and something I'd love to hear more about at some point, though I realize it may not be something that people can share at present. I didn't mean to be combative, just pointing out that if Iger's only directives were sweeping statements like, "Reduce the footprint of CommuniCore to save on maintenance," or "Incorporate a newer, more modern structure with lots of architectural interest," those don't seem like unusual or unexpected requests from leadership, and there are innumerable ways that the design team could have handled them. With the kind of budget they had, I can't imagine they wouldn't have been able to come up with a plethora of concepts they liked, so, again, without having any personal insight into the design process, I have no reason to believe they would have presented something to Iger that they actively disliked.

 

[MrPromey]

I always thought the table was the most detested element of the update anyway. This is probably weird, but I actually wouldn't mind if the space it was meant to occupy was turned into some sort of flat ride that tied into the World Nature theme while also acting as a "gateway" to Imagination in the same way that Journey of Water leads to and thematically connects The Land and The Seas.

For a lot of us, it was but space for it apparently had a lot to do with why they were tearing down what they tore down. The big alternative plan Martin references had them using the back half of that side of Comunicore redesigned as the festival center instead of what we're now not getting - that's the insult to injury in all of this.

While what you're suggesting sounds nice, if they cut the shelf out (something that would have offered premium up-charge space in the park) for budgetary reasons, I can hardly imagine them finding the money anytime soon to build us a nice new dark ride pointing to a pavilion that currently houses one of the most poorly rated rides on property and a theater that's showing second-run shorts that were originally tacked on to the start of moves they released in theaters over the last decade.

Nice dreams - I agree - but you can't give Disney credit for something you just came up with on your own that they could someday maybe do...

 

[James Alucobond]

Nice dreams - I agree - but you can't give Disney credit for something you just came up with on your own that they could someday maybe do...

Hahaha, fair enough. Didn't mean to give them credit or anything, I just often get carried away with imagining possibilities for basically anything.

 

[hpyhnt 1000]

I always thought the table was the most detested element of the update anyway. This is probably weird, but I actually wouldn't mind if the space it was meant to occupy was turned into some sort of flat ride that tied into the World Nature theme while also acting as a "gateway" to Imagination in the same way that Journey of Water leads to and thematically connects The Land and The Seas.

The bar on stilts definitely was/is an embarrassing centerpiece of the EPCOT plans, namely because it was just a rooftop bar/private event area. Sure there was a festival space included, but at a square footage significantly smaller and less accessible than the Communicore building(s) it was to replace.

What you propose - a ride that bridges the gap between the new neighborhoods - is exactly what one would expect such a project to include, all the more so considering the perception EPCOT is a park lacking in attractions. Maybe the folks in management come to their senses and do just that, but I'm not hopeful at this point.

 

[mightynine]

With the kind of budget they had, I can't imagine they wouldn't have been able to come up with a plethora of concepts they liked, so, again, without having any personal insight into the design process, I have no reason to believe they would have presented something to Iger that they actively disliked.

You seem to think the designer’s opinion matters, it doesn’t. They are not going to be the one making the decision. If their directive was to design a revenue-producing structure
in coordination with a new nighttime show, those are the ideas they will present.

 

[HauntedPirate]

“Put more trees here” - Bob Iger

Hardly the kind of person who should be making major decisions about what to do with a theme park. Eisner could at least be somewhat trusted to not hose things up too badly, Epcot 94 aside. I wouldn’t trust Iger to approve the design of a doghouse. I trust the bald merchandise guy even less.

 

[doctornick]

What you propose - a ride that bridges the gap between the new neighborhoods - is exactly what one would expect such a project to include, all the more so considering the perception EPCOT is a park lacking in attractions. Maybe the folks in management come to their senses and do just that, but I'm not hopeful at this point.

In an ideal world, I'd love to see an actual attraction in the southeast part of the central spine and then have a festival area/bar on the levels above it - yes, providing views for Harmonious or whatever show ends up happening in the future. Disney of yore was always great with using vertical space like that.

 

[MrPromey]

Hahaha, fair enough. Didn't mean to give them credit or anything, I just often get carried away with imagining possibilities for basically anything.

You’d probably be surprised to discover that most of the unhappy voices around here suffer from that very same affliction.

It may be the one thing that most of us who spend so much time around these forums have in common!

 

[TTA94]

To bad they couldn’t have made Moana into a Splash Mountain type attraction. Maybe not in that location though, or park lol.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

The bar on stilts definitely was/is an embarrassing centerpiece of the EPCOT plans, namely because it was just a rooftop bar/private event area. Sure there was a festival space included, but at a square footage significantly smaller and less accessible than the Communicore building(s) it was to replace.

In and of itself, a specially-designed festival space in the center of the park theoretically makes a lot of sense even if it had an expensive restaurant on top. I don't know whether the proposed building used space efficiently, but it reminded me of the redevelopment of an area in my home city of Melbourne, Australia called Federation Square. That involved a mix of restaurants, a gallery, and museum and was controversial as a lot of people found the architecture ugly & criticised all the space given to expensive restaurants, but it ultimately worked in large part because they built a lot of civic space into it and it became a place where people would sit and read, gather to watch sporting events on a big screen, etc.

At least from what the art suggested, they seemed to want to hold events under and around the festival center, with that design essentially creating an open-air ground level that could be used for a range of functions as well as the two upper levels. At least in theory, it's not quite the madness a lot of people make it out to be. I also didn't think it looked as bad as many on here seem to.

As for the Communicore buildings, I personally think they should have either knocked neither or both of them down. Leaving one is strange and ruins the symmetry of the center. Repurposing both would also obviously have been a good option. The way people talk about those buildings as great works of architecture, though, puts Zach's hyperbole to shame.

 

[James Alucobond]

You seem to think the designer’s opinion matters, it doesn’t. They are not going to be the one making the decision. If their directive was to design a revenue-producing structure
in coordination with a new nighttime show, those are the ideas they will present.

Of course their opinions matter. They're the ones who make tangibly manifest the vague visions and requirements of others. The designer works within the requirements to produce something mutually satisfying for both the designer (from an aesthetic perspective) and client (from a business perspective). Sure, this relationship can break down if one side is unwilling to budge, but I've not seen anyone directly say that this was the case on the micro level of World Celebration. There are obvious problems of massively compromised vision elsewhere in the park (e.g. Harmonious, wherein the original intent simply was not logistically realized), but absent someone flat-out saying so, why are we assuming that the designers of World Celebration are dissatisfied with the design just because some of the members of this forum are? I ask mostly because a simple reshuffling of elements would have allowed the symmetry of World Celebration to persist, so the asymmetry seems intentionally designed even if many are deeming it problematic and counter to the original design principles of EPCOT.

 

[lazyboy97o]

In and of itself, a specially-designed festival space in the center of the park theoretically makes a lot of sense even if it had an expensive restaurant on top. I don't know whether the proposed building used space efficiently, but it reminded me of the redevelopment of an area in my home city of Melbourne, Australia called Federation Square. That involved a mix of restaurants, a gallery, and museum and was controversial as a lot of people found the architecture ugly & criticised all the space given to expensive restaurants, but it ultimately worked in large part because they built a lot of civic space into it and it became a place where people would sit and read, gather to watch sporting events on a big screen, etc.

At least from what the art suggested, they seemed to want to hold events under and around the festival center, with that design essentially creating an open-air ground level that could be used for a range of functions as well as the two upper levels. At least in theory, it's not quite the madness a lot of people make it out to be. I also didn't think it looked as bad as many on here seem to.

A festival center by its name and nature suggests flexibility, a space that can be easily easily changed and reworked to fit each season’s offerings. The very thin, delicate structure shown in the art of the Festival Center is typically achieved with a post-tensioned concrete structure. This is a concrete slab with cable run through it that are tightened after it is poured and because of those cables is not very flexible. Any new work that cuts into the slab has to be every careful not to damage those cables. Any materials, scenic elements, props, theming, equipment, etc. is also limited by the size of the service elevator.

Federation Square works because it activates the pedestrian realm. It gives people places to sit and go. The Festival Center moves the program up and away from the main pedestrian level. The art only shows a big expanse of nothingness except the escalators and rectangular service core. Sure, the space could be filled with something else, but it would be the sort of temporary tacky junk and not something designed as part of the space. It also doesn’t make sense that they would want a big ground level flex space as that is exactly what was torn down.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

A festival center by its name and nature suggests flexibility, a space that can be easily easily changed and reworked to fit each season’s offerings. The very thin, delicate structure shown in the art of the Festival Center is typically achieved with a post-tensioned concrete structure. This is a concrete slab with cable run through it that are tightened after it is poured and because of those cables is not very flexible. Any new work that cuts into the slab has to be every careful not to damage those cables. Any materials, scenic elements, props, theming, equipment, etc. is also limited by the size of the service elevator.

Federation Square works because it activates the pedestrian realm. It gives people places to sit and go. The Festival Center moves the program up and away from the main pedestrian level. The art only shows a big expanse of nothingness except the escalators and rectangular service core. Sure, the space could be filled with something else, but it would be the sort of temporary tacky junk and not something designed as part of the space. It also doesn’t make sense that they would want a big ground level flex space as that is exactly what was torn down.

I do very much appreciate your insights on the structure as I am just really going off the concept art and don't have a training in architecture (though a little in architectural history).

In terms of flexibility, my impression was that the festival space would basically be a large flat, open area surrounded by glass that they could partition however they wanted. Essentially, an elevated conference center. Mind you, I don't know whether that's the case and the elevated aspect does make things more complicated which is obviously not the most efficient solution. There are a lot of museums and galleries, though, that have more than one floor and deal with all these logistics on a regular basis with exhibitions that are a lot more ambitious than what Disney puts on for their annual festivals. So, in principle, it doesn't seem like a crazy idea to me.

I do also take your point about Federation Square being at the pedestrian level, and it is true that the design simply worked from day one as it gave people natural and appealing places to sit, chat, read, etc. as they moved through the city. It was an interesting thing to watch in real time as it had been such a controversial project but then just clicked.

The reason I drew the analogy with the festival center is that my impression was that they were trying something similar in the sense that by moving the festival space up a level rather than just keeping it in the existing Communicore building they could create places to sit in the shade, maybe buy a drink, watch shows, etc. underneath as you wandered through Future World or whatever they're calling it now. Again, I have no idea if that would have been the outcome or if I am projecting. However, the idea of moving the festival center up a level and creating a new space underneath rather than making the existing Communicore building the festival center makes sense for me as an idea.

 

[ChrisFL]

Walt Disney Imagineering isn’t going to just go hire a starchitect on their own. And they don’t use CAD anymore.

They don't use CAD? What do they use? pencils and paper again?

 

[mergatroid]

Fantastic! See how it does in 5 years when several new shiny things come out from Mr. Mouse to entertain the masses.

Somebody else was saying the same about Guardians of the Galaxy movie the other day, it's like there's a desperation for everything to fail. Ironically the same poster was complaining that Galaxy's Edge didn't go with the original characters and location from over 40 years ago.

That's how it seems to go on here at times "I don't like Guardians and nobody will in 5 years" then "Why didn't they use the original Star Wars from over 40 years ago, I love that"

Again it's all subjective and I've not even seen Moana yet, but sometimes I kind of accept that things many like will entertain others and that's the way it goes.

 

[hpyhnt 1000]

In an ideal world, I'd love to see an actual attraction in the southeast part of the central spine and then have a festival area/bar on the levels above it - yes, providing views for Harmonious or whatever show ends up happening in the future. Disney of yore was always great with using vertical space like that.

Absolutely. I have nothing against a rooftop or elevated bar. Adapting the previous Communicore complex to house an expo area, new ride, and a rooftop bar area (whether on the existing rooftop or via a new addition to the complex) would have been great! It's what should have been done but wasn't because... well, we're not really sure why apart from someone's vanity apparently needed to be placated.

In and of itself, a specially-designed festival space in the center of the park theoretically makes a lot of sense even if it had an expensive restaurant on top. I don't know whether the proposed building used space efficiently, but it reminded me of the redevelopment of an area in my home city of Melbourne, Australia called Federation Square. That involved a mix of restaurants, a gallery, and museum and was controversial as a lot of people found the architecture ugly & criticised all the space given to expensive restaurants, but it ultimately worked in large part because they built a lot of civic space into it and it became a place where people would sit and read, gather to watch sporting events on a big screen, etc.

At least from what the art suggested, they seemed to want to hold events under and around the festival center, with that design essentially creating an open-air ground level that could be used for a range of functions as well as the two upper levels. At least in theory, it's not quite the madness a lot of people make it out to be. I also didn't think it looked as bad as many on here seem to.

As for the Communicore buildings, I personally think they should have either knocked neither or both of them down. Leaving one is strange and ruins the symmetry of the center. Repurposing both would also obviously have been a good option. The way people talk about those buildings as great works of architecture, though, puts Zach's hyperbole to shame.

Agree that having a dedicated festival area at the center of the park makes complete sense, certainly more than hiding it away in the far corner in an abandoned pavilion! And putting a restaurant or bar on the roof is a great idea, too. But I think it's also clear there were other, better ways to accomplish those outcomes than the one they went with. Pick anything from costs to usable floor space to construction timeline to guest access; by nearly any metric the bar on stilts ends up being the lesser option, and that makes no sense to me.

As for the Communicore buildings themselves, I'd say their beauty came from their adaptability. You could expand them, alter or add to their facades, divide them or leave them open - and all of that was by design so they could become whatever you needed them to be in service of their next usage. While the old buildings certainly wouldn't win any architectural awards for their exterior appearance, I doubt whatever replaces the SW quadrant will come close to matching their flexibility; at least the Moana splash area is easy to rebuild on in the future.

 

[JenniferS]

Maybe it was just me, but the much ballyhooed symmetry of Epcot was only ever evident to me on the park maps or app. I certainly never “felt” it, boots on the ground.

I was always discombobulated coming out of SSE, as I never knew which side of the park we were entering when we exited the post-show. Will definitely be more apparent in the future, I guess.