News New Crêperie restaurant coming to Epcot's France Pavilion as part of Ratatouille expansion

[eliza61nyc]

You’re conflating theme for ornament. Being simple does not make something less “themed.”

Ok than I'm out, I get no "theme" from the ice cream kiosk. It most definitely does not say France except that the words are french.
I'll leave it to you professional.
Maybe they were going with "simple" for the crepeteria??
So in passing what's the theme of the electric umbrella???

Maybe it will fit in with the rest of the shops in the back.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Ok than I'm out, I get no "theme" from the ice cream kiosk. It most definitely does not say France except that the words are french.
I'll leave it to you professional.
Maybe they were going with "simple" for the crepeteria??
So in passing what's the theme of the electric umbrella???

Maybe it will fit in with the rest of the shops in the back.

The crêperie’s problem isn’t that it is simple.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Not sure why so many people are complaining about the design of the buildings. As someone from that region I think it looks totally acceptable.

If you show me the concept art and ask me to name a region, I'd immediately identify it as northern French. Not Spanish, not Belgian, not even southern French.

Unlike the Riviera resort. If not for the name I never would've guessed where they took their cue from.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Why did an Imagineer bother with manholes?

http://www.sottostudios.com/archive/2018/5/7/a-hole-new-layer-of-detail-at-disneyland-paris

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Why did an Imagineer bother with manholes?

http://www.sottostudios.com/archive/2018/5/7/a-hole-new-layer-of-detail-at-disneyland-paris

Did you think anyone would argue with this?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Did you think anyone would argue with this?

Why not? Why are manhole covers more important and more noticed by the “average guest” than buildings?

 

[Goofyque']

Okay, big manhole cover fan here. I take pictures of them, and our matching shirts for Tokyo Disney were imprints from the beautiful detailed covers in Okinawa. I love the little details. I doubt very much that the manhole cover details showed up on the concept art. I remain excited about crepes and the building that houses them.

 

[Kman101]

Never fear, it’s just people who like to hear themselves talk, and think they’d be better Disney Imagineers - but none of them get that job.

(Save the objections; I do not share the love of hearing them talk. “Well, some of us have standards! Huff, puff...”)

Will check the place out if it’s open when I’m there.

I agree.

And it's concept art. Yes, finalized product is usually spot on, but we DON'T know how it will look when seeing it in person. It could be flat and terrible, or it could be just fine and work. But I saw a lot of hate tossed towards the concept art. But again, it's just their opinion, and to be fair, some do have expertise in certain fields. But it seems a bit much sometimes.

Will their be potpourri between the creperie and the craperie?

Will we get flavored scents like Islands bathrooms are getting?

 

[Kman101]

Is someone forcing you to read the posts?

Nope. But the back and forth is tiresome.

 

[Kman101]

A drawing whose whole purpose is to convey the look of the building...

It's also just that. A drawing. You've seen the finished product? There's nothing wrong dissecting it and pointing out the flaws, as you see them. But this lecturing some of you do is a bit much.

 

[lazyboy97o]

It's also just that. A drawing. You've seen the finished product? There's nothing wrong dissecting it and pointing out the flaws, as you see them. But this lecturing some of you do is a bit much.

The finished product is built based on drawings. It has also been mentioned how this image looks like it may well be derived from “blueprints” and not just freely drawn.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Why not? Why are manhole covers more important and more noticed by the “average guest” than buildings?

I didn't say they were.

Where I would take issue is if we were looking at concept art and people were decrying the manhole covers because they were not aesthetically perfect (in the drawing.) ("That doesn't look like a real manhole cover! That looks cartoonish! There is no way a manhole cover from Charleston and a manhole cover from NYC could ever possibly appear on the same Main Street!")

I'm not against detail work (duh.) I'm against technical gotcha stuff.

 

[eliza61nyc]

Why did an Imagineer bother with manholes?

http://www.sottostudios.com/archive/2018/5/7/a-hole-new-layer-of-detail-at-disneyland-paris

Ok??
What we need more manholes in Epcot?
Disneyland Paris is better than WDW in Orlando?
A blogger likes manhole covers??
If you like manhole covers you can't possibly like the crepeteria building?
What's the connection? Was this to prove that you think the crepeteria will be ugly??

Nice article though, when I go outside again I'll make sure to check out the manholes??

 

[eliza61nyc]

Ok how about everyone change their minds. The building is ugly, another example of Epcot and Disney no longer caring, it looks like a target or a American mall.

I really think that's what the real issue is. You want everyone to jump on the bandwagon. Would you feel better if we all agreed it looks like a mall store and that the imagineers had no imagination?

What is this building supposed to look like???

 

[peter11435]

Ok how about everyone change their minds. The building is ugly, another example of Epcot and Disney no longer caring, it looks like a target or a American mall.

I really think that's what the real issue is. You want everyone to jump on the bandwagon. Would you feel better if we all agreed it looks like a mall store and that the imagineers had no imagination?

What is this building supposed to look like???

I’m generally positive about most changes at WDW including most of the current Epcot projects. So I definitely am not part of any bandwagon that searches for reasons to complain. The issues with this project are not that it is out of theme, or ugly, or lacking details. The issue is that it has very obvious architectural errors.

 

[jt04]

I'm one in the camp that feels something is not right about this design.

After looking at it and thinking about it, I think the thing that is holding this back from meeting expectation is the height. With the location of this, they clearly have to be careful on how tall it is. That means many of the things that would really make this feel 'French' or 'Paris' or in line with other parts of the pavilion can't be achieved because of the height.

In thinking about it, with the location of this, I wish they would have gone with a design that is like a river restaurant. Something inspired by:
View attachment 358196

Can we just get this facing the waterway and the passing friendship boats?

With outdoor seating of course.

 

[eliza61nyc]

I’m generally positive about most changes at WDW including most of the current Epcot projects. So I definitely am not part of any bandwagon that searches for reasons to complain. The issues with this project are not that it is out of theme, or ugly, or lacking details. The issue is that it has very obvious architectural errors.

Obvious to who? and again what's it supposed to look like? You're saying a visitor to Epcot is going to look at the building and say it's not supposed to have a faux Mansferd roof??

I'm willing to bet that visitors will see the building and say "lets get a crepe". I really wonder how many folks are going to notice architectural errors?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Ok how about everyone change their minds. The building is ugly, another example of Epcot and Disney no longer caring, it looks like a target or a American mall.

I really think that's what the real issue is. You want everyone to jump on the bandwagon. Would you feel better if we all agreed it looks like a mall store and that the imagineers had no imagination?

What is this building supposed to look like???

Nobody cares if people like the building. The issue is with dismissing criticism as inherently invalid based entirely on a personal lack of knowledge and/or care. I think everyone criticizing the building would be very interested in being proven wrong, being shown how these issues actually are oddities of a certain region or even specific town in France.

The problem isn’t the type of building. It is the execution.

 

[peter11435]

Obvious to who? and again what's it supposed to look like? You're saying a visitor to Epcot is going to look at the building and say it's not supposed to have a faux Mansferd roof??

All of the errors have been pointed out in this thread numerous times. Many of the errors may take a more trained eye to identify but some should be noticeable to nearly anyone.

I’m sure there will be some Epcot visitors who will notice the mansard roof. Even if just one out of a thousand, that would mean 10,000 people a year would see their errors.

But that’s irrelevant, the fact that nobody will notice a mistake is not a justification for making one.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Obvious to who? and again what's it supposed to look like? You're saying a visitor to Epcot is going to look at the building and say it's not supposed to have a faux Mansferd roof??

I'm willing to bet that visitors will see the building and say "lets get a crepe". I really wonder how many folks are going to notice architectural errors?

And who notices manhole covers? Why are basic elements of a building not worth effort but so many other details are worthwhile and celebrated? Going right back to my last comment, the only counter so far presented to the criticism is a lack of personal knowledge or care. Can you offer up a reason these issues are not of concern without using a variation of “I/Others do not know/care”?