News Magic Kingdom's Main Street Confectionery closing for refurbishment

[yensidtlaw1969]

I think it's just a basic philosophy that "cartoon = Disney"

Yes, a photo of a real person (archival or staged) would look much better, but I'm sure to WDI and guests today that wouldn't look "Disney" enough.

It's funny to me that this wasn't seen as a perfect opportunity to sneak in some Easter Egg photos of Imagineers, but recreating the decidedly-animated Beast's Enchanted Castle for Be Our Guest Restaurant was the PERFECT opportunity to squeeze in uncomfortably (and anachronistically) realistic likenesses of the Imagineer's babies for the cherubs painted on the Ballroom ceiling:

None of this is the end of the world, of course, but it does suggest weird judgement in Art Direction. The parks could really use a stronger hand leading in creative vision.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

And it is so convoluted and they are inconsistent in the worst ways, because meanwhile you have the Phil Holmes portrait type situation in Fantasyland, where it should look more from an animated tale or storybook.

For REAL. How is THIS in Fantasyland:

And THIS is on Main Street??:

EDITED To Add:

Like, how hard is something like this?:

 

[MisterPenguin]

Silly, it was ye olde caricaturist on olde Main Street Thoroughfaire which engraved the likenesses of the important townesfolk!!

 

[celluloid]

To be fair, there's only so much you can do with a portrait of Phil Holmes.

I can think of a lot...but this is a nice thread.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

For REAL. How is THIS in Fantasyland:

View attachment 621173

And THIS is on Main Street??:

View attachment 621175

EDITED To Add:

Like, how hard is something like this?:

View attachment 621177

These mock-ups of far more suitable alternatives really speak to there being something "off" in the creative decisions being made within WDI. I don't think it would be harder or even necessarily more expensive to do this properly. It just doesn't seem to occur to them either at all or as being worth the time and effort. Then bad creative decisions make it through every level of approval without anyone noticing or caring about the issues.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

These mock-ups of far more suitable alternatives really speak to there being something "off" in the creative decisions being made within WDI. I don't think it would be harder or even necessarily more expensive to do this properly. It just doesn't seem to occur to them either at all or as being worth the time and effort. Then bad creative decisions make it through every level of approval without anyone noticing or caring about the issues.

It's just odd. You KNOW both Imagineers and devoted fans would LOVE to point out the fun fact about who's actually featured in that photo. Compared to the weird, inert, and out-of-period cartoons that I doubt anyone feels invested in.

On it's own I don't necessarily see this sort of thing as the canary in the coal mine, but when you step back and see that projects large AND small are being bungled you can't help but question where we're headed. If headlining projects like Galaxy's Edge, the Star Cruiser, Harmonius, and really everything currently underway at EPCOT didn't have such glaring issues I could let something miniscule like this go as a one-off. But, alas . . . so I can't help but wonder who's actually running the show and when something's gonna give.

 

[larryz]

I'm still trying to figure out what chocolate chip cookies have to do with Twix...

 

[etc98]

The transition from Main Street to something more like Toontown has been going on for a long time now.

Helps to justify the meet 'n greets and character merch and the removal of any activity or items that may actually support the OG theme.

This is exemplified in Mickey Avenue in Shanghai Disneyland, which is exactly that, a Toontown version of Main Street. Victorian looking buildings, but with cartoon proportions and cartoon proprietors.

I think it really comes down to this. As Disney’s own portfolio of content, architecture, etc has grown, they have relied more and more on their past work, rather than anything from the real world, for inspiration. The original Disneyland and Magic Kingdom Main Streets were Disney versions of real main streets. These new main streets are Disney versions of Disney main streets.

Main Street in Disneyland and Magic Kingdom are theme park versions of an actual Main Street. They’re sanitized, and exist in a heightened reality, but they’re based on real main streets that existed in the real world.

Moving forward in time, Disneyland Paris’s Main Street is based, not just on real main streets, but also on Disney’s previous main streets. It is a copy of Disney World’s almost down to the building, but even more “Disnified”. More ornamentation, more vibrant colors. It skews farther towards the fantastical than it’s predecessors. It’s a Disney version of a Disney version of a real Main Street. It’s even more heightened, but the real Main Street is still there.

And now you have things like Mickey Avenue and this redo to the confectionery which heighten the reality even further, to the point where these spaces aren’t even inhabited by real people anymore, but by cartoons. It’s completely removed from what actually inspired it. It’s been put through the Disneyfier so many times that the original source, an actual real life Main Street, is lost.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

It's just odd. You KNOW both Imagineers and devoted fans would LOVE to point out the fun fact about who's actually featured in that photo. Compared to the weird, inert, and out-of-period cartoons that I doubt anyone feels invested in.

On it's own I don't necessarily see this sort of thing as the canary in the coal mine, but when you step back and see that projects large AND small are being bungled you can't help but question where we're headed. If headlining projects like Galaxy's Edge, the Star Cruiser, Harmonius, and really everything currently underway at EPCOT didn't have such glaring issues I could let something miniscule like this go as a one-off. But, alas . . . so I can't help but wonder who's actually running the show and when something's gonna give.

Completely agree on both points. This would be exactly the kind of thing they would print in their Imagineering books or discuss on their Disney+ programs. Executing it so poorly also undermines the whole diversity initiative that it's supposed to serve. It's just baffling as it really didn't take you very long to give an example that immediately jumped off the screen as a way to correct the problem.

Also agree that something like this here and there could be perhaps overlooked as the odd misstep, but it is becoming the norm. Indeed, it's always surprising when they get something more or less just right. WDI seem to have un-learned all the lessons of the past in designing compelling themed environments and no-one in there with any influence seems to notice. Indeed, you wonder to what extent WDI is still staffed with people from a theme park background and if they receive any mentoring from those who do have decades of experience, or if those with experience are just trotted out for Disney+ shows about the glory days.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Moving forward in time, Disneyland Paris’s Main Street is based, not just on real main streets, but also on Disney’s previous main streets. It is a copy of Disney World’s almost down to the building, but even more “Disnified”. More ornamentation, more vibrant colors. It skews farther towards the fantastical than it’s predecessors. It’s a Disney version of a Disney version of a real Main Street. It’s even more heightened, but the real Main Street is still there.

I think why DLP works is that much of Main Street is real from a textural standpoint. Real antiques (even the manhole covers), real wood, real brick, real gas lamps. That's what gives credibility to its exaggerated illusion of 1910s America.

In sharp contrast, the current Confectionary at WDW is so flat and lacking in any detail that whatever is supposed to be "Victorian" about it is really superficial. Some woodwork here, an old-fashioned font there etc. It's just 2010s retail that's supposed to look loosely "pretty".

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Completely agree on both points. This would be exactly the kind of thing they would print in their Imagineering books or discuss on their Disney+ programs. Executing it so poorly also undermines the whole diversity initiative that it's supposed to serve. It's just baffling as it really didn't take you very long to give an example that immediately jumped off the screen as a way to correct the problem.

Also agree that something like this here and there could be perhaps overlooked as the odd misstep, but it is becoming the norm. Indeed, it's always surprising when they get something more or less just right. WDI seem to have un-learned all the lessons of the past in designing compelling themed environments and no-one in there with any influence seems to notice. Indeed, you wonder to what extent WDI is still staffed with people from a theme park background and if they receive any mentoring from those who do have decades of experience, or if those with experience are just trotted out for Disney+ shows about the glory days.

That's basically it.

The institutional knowledge that was passed down from the WED generation and known instinctively by later teams with decades of experience both working in the parks and designing them have all been let go from the company.

 

[celluloid]

This is exemplified in Mickey Avenue in Shanghai Disneyland, which is exactly that, a Toontown version of Main Street. Victorian looking buildings, but with cartoon proportions and cartoon proprietors.

I think it really comes down to this. As Disney’s own portfolio of content, architecture, etc has grown, they have relied more and more on their past work, rather than anything from the real world, for inspiration. The original Disneyland and Magic Kingdom Main Streets were Disney versions of real main streets. These new main streets are Disney versions of Disney main streets.

Well said and I sadly had the same thought. This is furthered by the fact that Main Street USA had a little more gravitas when Disneyland opened as the adult world were children when the real towns that inspired it existed.

Now it would be the 50/60s or maybe if just starting to be built the 70s or 80s more realistically.

But of course, not the only reason, you nailed it. The lively charm of Mainstreet could still exist if they go for more classic USA crossroads vs Mickey Avenue.

 

[HauntedPirate]

To be fair, there's only so much you can do with a portrait of Phil Holmes.

True, there are only so many ways to set something on fire.

 

[HauntedPirate]

These mock-ups of far more suitable alternatives really speak to there being something "off" in the creative decisions being made within WDI. I don't think it would be harder or even necessarily more expensive to do this properly. It just doesn't seem to occur to them either at all or as being worth the time and effort. Then bad creative decisions make it through every level of approval without anyone noticing or caring about the issues.

They were given 12 minutes and $18 to come up with a solution. That's the best we're going to get from today's value-engineered, "de-risk everything" management of WDI.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

They were given 12 minutes and $18 to come up with a solution. That's the best we're going to get from today's value-engineered, "de-risk everything" management of WDI.

If we really wanted trouble, we'd even ask for a more appropraite frame:

At the risk of sounding overly impressed with my own work . . . just look at how much better something like that is than this:

None of this is a reach. Simple things like this make a difference - Disney used to even have a name for it, now what was it again . . .

 

[JoeCamel]

If we really wanted trouble, we'd even ask for a more appropraite frame:

View attachment 621199

At the risk of sounding overly impressed with my own work . . . just look at how much better something like that is than this:

View attachment 621198

None of this is a reach. Simple things like this make a difference - Disney used to even have a name for it, now what was it again . . .

Those frames look like the 70's. The original is closer to the oak leaf and acorn style popular in the early 20th century. My parents had boxes of those and many were replaced with the smooth gold in the 70's.

 

[celluloid]

The drawn faces look like they are a mix of One Saturday Morning and a screen where they are about to tell you about Sorcerer's of The Confectionary.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Sorcerer's of The Confectionary.

Help the M&M mascots save our beloved confectionary before the evil Dentist of Doom shuts it down!

(Free to play with each purchase of $50 before tax...)

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

The drawn faces look like they are a mix of One Saturday Morning and a screen where they are about to tell you about Sorcerer's of The Confectionary.

The first time I saw them I remember thinking to myself "these look perfectly suited to the back of a nice Children's Cereal Box".

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

the current Confectionary at WDW is so flat and lacking in any detail that whatever is supposed to be "Victorian" about it is really superficial. Some woodwork here, an old-fashioned font there etc. It's just 2010s retail that's supposed to look loosely "pretty".

Exactly. It’s 2010 “vintage themed” retail. There is nothing actually vintage or charming about the space. It’s fine for an “old time candy store” at the mall, but this is Disney and I expect more.

At Disneyland they still have a few penny arcade games, they have a Sorcerer that gives you fortune telling cards, and the really cool band organ that plays music every few minutes. Those are the types of details that used to be a part of Disney retail.