News New Park Entrance coming to Epcot

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
The inclusion of IP, on the other hand, is more about the park's identity. It's gone from a facsimile of a world's fair to Disney rides with the aesthetic of a world's fair being used as window dressing. In this case, I think there's much more that can be left up to individual preference in terms of which is "better" (i.e. which they find more enjoyable as part of a Disney vacation), though there's of course the case to be made that a park designed with one theme in mind will inevitably feel a bit contrived when switching to something very different.
The real problem with what you are saying is that so many people absolutely refuse to recognize the the Brand, particularly in Epcot has been changed. It has been changed by those that own it and was changed for a reason, because Epcot was on alcohol induced life support. The original, no matter how much it was loved by some is no longer the Brand. I think to a large extent they are still searching for a brand that will fit. It changes like everything in life changes. We can spend time with blinders on, forcing ourselves to not like something strictly because it is different or we can accept that because things change we are equipped to adapt to it. With the right attitude we can start to enjoy it for its entertainment value not for things like, Arendale isn't Norway so it's no good. It closely resembles Norway, the nation that actually inspired the scenery and winter image. The brand has changed, what was there is no longer. We are powerless to do anything about that, so why not stop fretting about change and try to enjoy what is there for it's own sake or find a new memory. That is always a good thing and easy to do.

I had to do it and I am probably older and more set in my ways than most of you folks. If I can do it after almost 40 years of WDW visits there is no reason why the rest of you can't.
 
Last edited:

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
The real problem with what you are saying is that so many people absolutely refuse to recognize the the Brand, particularly in Epcot has been changed. It has been changed by those that own it and was changed for a reason, because Epcot was on alcohol induced life support. The original, no matter how much it was loved by some is no longer the Brand. I think to a large extent they are still searching for a brand that will fit. It changes like everything in life changes. We can spend time with blinders on, forcing ourselves to not like something strictly because it is different or we can accept that because things change we are equipped to adapt to it. With the right attitude we can start to enjoy it for its entertainment value not for things like, Arendale isn't Norway so it's no good. It closely resembles Norway, the nation that actually inspired the scenery and winter image. The brand has changed, what was there is no longer. We are powerless to do anything about that, so why not stop fretting about change and try to enjoy what is there for it's own sake or find a new memory. That is always a good thing and easy to do.

I had to do it and I am probably older and more set in my ways than most of you folks. If I can do it after almost 40 years WDW visits there is no reason why the rest of you can't.
It's not an easy thing to do... It is not easy to sit back and watch a beloved place you grew up with go through drastic changes that are arguably less than what they are replacing...The loss of intelligent, meaningful design for a dumbed down and confusing plan that no one seems to realize... It is hard for me to say...Oh wow at least they are painting something.
After 50 years of park visits for me, in my 58 years of life, I find a lot of things they are doing upsetting.
I am glad you can sit back and not think about it...and I am glad you can easily accept some of these changes...But for some of us that love the parks and what they each stood for, it is difficult.
I will applaud great things when I see them...and always have. But those posts are few and far between...
I personally love the idea if Ratatouille in the France Pavilion... And Arendelle is not the worst idea, though not my first choice. I agree with Mary Poppins, Coco , and Mulan in EPCOT... Aladdin is a bit harder to take in the same way that Arendelle is... but it is more acceptable than Moana in the Central Courtyard... Moana would have been a brilliant addition to Animal Kingdom.
Lighting on Spceship eart is great and I am surprised it was not done decades ago... so I applaud that for sure!
A lot of the rest is completely baffling...Maybe because the reasons for things have not been discussed, but they seem terribly random.
 

WDWJoeG

Well-Known Member
I think it has a lot to do with nostalgia and building memories. Most people in these threads were old enough to remember experiencing 80s/90s EPCOT so they're gonna have nostalgia for that era and think that everything about it was perfect.

It's almost like how I will consider small details about Disney parks incredibly interesting and cool but someone who has no memories or connections to the parks would not care and would be more than annoyed if I told them about these details.

People have extreme bias for what they can connect to nostalgically speaking.
That's interesting because I visit new theme parks every year around the world and I notice all of these little details even if I've never been there before.

Design matters.

Graphics and signage matter.

Architecture matters.

Theme matters.

If not to you, well that's fine. That's why there are County fair carnivals and spinny rides.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
👍🏽I've come to the conclusion that I am the most un-Disney Disney fan. I couldn't tell you the font of any Disney sign two minutes after I looked at it. I was blown away by the vitriol surrounding the new crepetaria and I actually like seeing Ip
I think some folks are purist so any change is going to have implications but as @Nunu said everyone has their own opinion on what is important and its all good.
Maybe you just don’t care about design, which is perfectly okay. If you don’t notice and you don’t care, then you don’t notice and don’t care. The question though is, how is your experienced harmed if the fonts do match? If architectural details are applied in the right context? Do you not enjoy huge chunks of Magic Kingdom, EPCOT and Disney’s Animal Kingdom because it isn’t tied to a franchise? What do you lose if these things were done?
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
It's not an easy thing to do... It is not easy to sit back and watch a beloved place you grew up with go through drastic changes that are arguably less than what they are replacing...The loss of intelligent, meaningful design for a dumbed down and confusing plan that no one seems to realize... It is hard for me to say...Oh wow at least they are painting something.
After 50 years of park visits for me, in my 58 years of life, I find a lot of things they are doing upsetting.
I am glad you can sit back and not think about it...and I am glad you can easily accept some of these changes...But for some of us that love the parks and what they each stood for, it is difficult.
I will applaud great things when I see them...and always have. But those posts are few and far between...
I personally love the idea if Ratatouille in the France Pavilion... And Arendelle is not the worst idea, though not my first choice. I agree with Mary Poppins, Coco , and Mulan in EPCOT... Aladdin is a bit harder to take in the same way that Arendelle is... but it is more acceptable than Moana in the Central Courtyard... Moana would have been a brilliant addition to Animal Kingdom.
Lighting on Spceship eart is great and I am surprised it was not done decades ago... so I applaud that for sure!
A lot of the rest is completely baffling...Maybe because the reasons for things have not been discussed, but they seem terribly random.
I feel that your approach to WDW isn't unusual for someone that started the Disney journey as a young child. The reason is that you hadn't weighed your mind down with peripheral observations. I find the most people tend to confuse detail with reality. They seem to lose track of the idea that WDW is a fantasy park. They look for and identify everything like it is factual accurate and not remember that everything is designed to be symbolic, entertaining or utility based.

I never said that I don't miss a lot of what once was but what is happening now that people should be upset about is not brand or attraction location change because Walt Disney himself was never going to let things stay stagnant. He might have been more creative than those that followed him, but if you got stuck on the change aspect, you would probably been more upset with him then those that came after. My anger is how they have become exclusive and HUGE profit is the only real goal. Technologically areas like Star Wars Land is so much more detailed and technologically challenging that it makes those early years look like a playground at a daycare center. The problem is what good is all that, what good is the font on a sign if you can't afford to go to the place to see it. It has become a place where the general public can no longer go and have fun with their children without running up more debt. And why? So that their profits can be in the billions and their executives can own islands in the Caribbean and yachts the size of the Queen Mary.

As a child everything is magnified. As a child our level of impression is expanded and even if nothing had changed the shine inevitably comes off over the years and instead of seeing an object for what it is we only saw the general picture. Details don't come into focus until we get older and have seen the big picture and are now able to notice things that we don't agree with. Oh, they were there when we first saw them, but we saw them with our 8 year old priorities. I never had the good fortune of going as a child. I was 35 when I first set foot in WDW. I was impressed with the technology, the colors, the music and the attractions, but I also noticed a lot of flaws in those early years that a child would not have allowed to enter their minds. When I read about things that were so perfect in the minds of those early age visits, I can't help but wonder just what they are talking about. I heard that maintenance issues never existed 50 years ago, but they were there, they just didn't see them. They talk about how bright everything was compared to today and I have to ask, are you sure that it was WDW you went too because the colors are so much brighter now then they were back then. In other words we are victims of our own imaginations and unintentional tunnel visioned memories.

It is now more the cost of that entertainment, the complexity of the process to just enter the parks and even the advance technology is standing in the way of any real enjoyment. We use to always have change in our pockets when we traveled because if we needed to make a call it was via a pay phone. There were banks of those all over MK. I'd bet you never noticed those when you first went there. The thought that we would be emotionally and physically tethered to a small flat object that ruled our lives wasn't even imaginable back then. Now it is basically the only way to experience the place to the fullest is to have your face constantly struck on that screen, refreshing and working to do anything so all the roses along the way are no longer even seen much less smelled.

It is really only a few that focus in on sign fonts, to most it means nothing, if it is neat clean and readable the signs will have fulfilled its mission. If an attraction is good, it is good no matter where it is located. Once inside the attraction is where the immersion actually is. Walking through the parent park to get to an attraction is part of the picture, but not the immersion. The "willful suspension of disbelief" is where the guest part comes in. If we are unable to do that, than we will have missed the whole point. Disney cannot control how everyone engages their imagination, they can only try to create that little spark of inspiration that fires up the imagination to run with it.
 
Last edited:

GimpYancIent

Well-Known Member
I feel that your approach to WDW isn't unusual for someone that started the Disney journey as a young child. The reason is that you hadn't weighed your mind down with peripheral observations. I find the most people tend to confuse detail with reality. They seem to lose track of the idea that WDW is a fantasy park. They look for and identify everything like it is factual accurate and not remember that everything is designed to be symbolic, entertaining or utility based.

I never said that I don't miss a lot of what once was but what is happening now that people should be upset about is not brand or attraction location change because Walt Disney himself was never going to let things stay stagnant. He might have been more creative than those that followed him, but if you got stuck on the change aspect, you would probably been more upset with him then those that came after. My anger is how they have become exclusive and HUGE profit is the only real goal. Technologically areas like Star Wars Land is so much more detailed and technologically challenging that it makes those early years look like a playground at a daycare center. The problem is what good is all that, what good is the font on a sign if you can't afford to go to the place to see it. It has become a place where the general public can no longer go and have fun with their children without running up more debt. And why? So that their profits can be in the billions and their executives can own islands in the Caribbean and yachts the size of the Queen Mary.

As a child everything is magnified. As a child our level of impression is expanded and even if nothing had changed the shine inevitably comes off over the years and instead of seeing an object for what it is we only saw the general picture. Details don't come into focus until we get older and have seen the big picture and are now able to notice things that we don't agree with. Oh, they were there when we first saw them, but we saw them with our 8 year old priorities. I never had the good fortune of going as a child. I was 35 when I first set foot in WDW. I was impressed with the technology, the colors, the music and the attractions, but I also noticed a lot of flaws in those early years that a child would not have allowed to enter their minds. When I read about things that were so perfect in the minds of those early age visits, I can't help but wonder just what they are talking about. I heard that maintenance issues never existed 50 years ago, but they were there, they just didn't see them. They talk about how bright everything was compared to today and I have to ask, are you sure that it was WDW you went too because the colors are so much brighter now then they were back then. In other words we are victims of our own imaginations and unintentional tunnel visioned memories.

It is now more the cost of that entertainment, the complexity of the process to just enter the parks and even the advance technology is standing in the way of any real enjoyment. We use to always have change in our pockets when we traveled because if we needed to make a call it was via a pay phone. There were banks of those all over MK. I'd bet you never noticed those when you first went there. The thought that we would be emotionally and physically tethered to a small flat object that ruled our lives wasn't even imaginable back then. Now it is basically the only way to experience the place to the fullest is to have your face constantly struck on that screen, refreshing and working to do anything so all the roses along the way are no longer even seen much less smelled.

It is really only a few that focus in on sign fonts, to most it means nothing, if it is neat clean and readable the signs will have fulfilled its mission. If an attraction is good, it is good no matter where it is located. Once inside the attraction is where the immersion actually is. Walking through a park to get to an attraction is part of the picture, but not the immersion. The "willful suspension of disbelief" is where the guest part comes in. If we are unable to do that, than we will have missed the whole point. Disney cannot control how everyone engages their imagination, they can only try to create that little spark of inspiration that fires up the imagination to run with it.
Well thought out and presented.
 

SplashJacket

Well-Known Member
It's not an easy thing to do... It is not easy to sit back and watch a beloved place you grew up with go through drastic changes that are arguably less than what they are replacing...The loss of intelligent, meaningful design for a dumbed down and confusing plan that no one seems to realize... It is hard for me to say...Oh wow at least they are painting something.
After 50 years of park visits for me, in my 58 years of life, I find a lot of things they are doing upsetting.
I am glad you can sit back and not think about it...and I am glad you can easily accept some of these changes...But for some of us that love the parks and what they each stood for, it is difficult.
I will applaud great things when I see them...and always have. But those posts are few and far between...
I personally love the idea if Ratatouille in the France Pavilion... And Arendelle is not the worst idea, though not my first choice. I agree with Mary Poppins, Coco , and Mulan in EPCOT... Aladdin is a bit harder to take in the same way that Arendelle is... but it is more acceptable than Moana in the Central Courtyard... Moana would have been a brilliant addition to Animal Kingdom.
Lighting on Spceship eart is great and I am surprised it was not done decades ago... so I applaud that for sure!
A lot of the rest is completely baffling...Maybe because the reasons for things have not been discussed, but they seem terribly random.
My mom is the exact same age. She spent her career as an architect. She first visited Disneyland before she turned one. She visited Magic Kingdom and stayed at the Contemporary in 1971. She visited Epcot, Hollywood Studios, and Animal Kingdom opening year. Her first vacation with my father was to Walt Disney World.

Despite her frequent and nearly yearly visits throughout her lifetime, she just doesn’t have the nostalgia for EPCOT that permeates this forum. Why not? I couldn’t tell you. Had I existed amidst Epcot’s prime, as the attractions and themes of yesteryear continue to come down, I feel as though I would also be sad.

My mom sorely misses Illuminations, 20,000 Leagues, the Mickey Mouse Review, The Great Movie Ride, Back Lot Tour, and Snow White’s Scary Adventure. She also misses the Main Street Cinema.

It’s not that she didn’t love Epcot. Epcot has always been her second favorite (behind Magic Kingdom). She just loved the pavilions of world showcase, which have mostly remained intact or improved. To her, future world was fine, but just something you walk past to get to world showcase.
 

Rich Brownn

Well-Known Member
I feel that your approach to WDW isn't unusual for someone that started the Disney journey as a young child. The reason is that you hadn't weighed your mind down with peripheral observations. I find the most people tend to confuse detail with reality. They seem to lose track of the idea that WDW is a fantasy park. They look for and identify everything like it is factual accurate and not remember that everything is designed to be symbolic, entertaining or utility based.

I never said that I don't miss a lot of what once was but what is happening now that people should be upset about is not brand or attraction location change because Walt Disney himself was never going to let things stay stagnant. He might have been more creative than those that followed him, but if you got stuck on the change aspect, you would probably been more upset with him then those that came after. My anger is how they have become exclusive and HUGE profit is the only real goal. Technologically areas like Star Wars Land is so much more detailed and technologically challenging that it makes those early years look like a playground at a daycare center. The problem is what good is all that, what good is the font on a sign if you can't afford to go to the place to see it. It has become a place where the general public can no longer go and have fun with their children without running up more debt. And why? So that their profits can be in the billions and their executives can own islands in the Caribbean and yachts the size of the Queen Mary.

As a child everything is magnified. As a child our level of impression is expanded and even if nothing had changed the shine inevitably comes off over the years and instead of seeing an object for what it is we only saw the general picture. Details don't come into focus until we get older and have seen the big picture and are now able to notice things that we don't agree with. Oh, they were there when we first saw them, but we saw them with our 8 year old priorities. I never had the good fortune of going as a child. I was 35 when I first set foot in WDW. I was impressed with the technology, the colors, the music and the attractions, but I also noticed a lot of flaws in those early years that a child would not have allowed to enter their minds. When I read about things that were so perfect in the minds of those early age visits, I can't help but wonder just what they are talking about. I heard that maintenance issues never existed 50 years ago, but they were there, they just didn't see them. They talk about how bright everything was compared to today and I have to ask, are you sure that it was WDW you went too because the colors are so much brighter now then they were back then. In other words we are victims of our own imaginations and unintentional tunnel visioned memories.

It is now more the cost of that entertainment, the complexity of the process to just enter the parks and even the advance technology is standing in the way of any real enjoyment. We use to always have change in our pockets when we traveled because if we needed to make a call it was via a pay phone. There were banks of those all over MK. I'd bet you never noticed those when you first went there. The thought that we would be emotionally and physically tethered to a small flat object that ruled our lives wasn't even imaginable back then. Now it is basically the only way to experience the place to the fullest is to have your face constantly struck on that screen, refreshing and working to do anything so all the roses along the way are no longer even seen much less smelled.

It is really only a few that focus in on sign fonts, to most it means nothing, if it is neat clean and readable the signs will have fulfilled its mission. If an attraction is good, it is good no matter where it is located. Once inside the attraction is where the immersion actually is. Walking through the parent park to get to an attraction is part of the picture, but not the immersion. The "willful suspension of disbelief" is where the guest part comes in. If we are unable to do that, than we will have missed the whole point. Disney cannot control how everyone engages their imagination, they can only try to create that little spark of inspiration that fires up the imagination to run with it.
I saw WDW for the first time when I was 18. I saw it through the eyes of an adult, and can still recognize today's WDW is less than it was then.
RoTR is fantastic. But for every RoTR we get 5 Slinky dogs and 8 shops.
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
I saw WDW for the first time when I was 18. I saw it through the eyes of an adult, and can still recognize today's WDW is less than it was then.
RoTR is fantastic. But for every RoTR we get 5 Slinky dogs and 8 shops.
I don't disagree, but we were talking about superficial things that some people notice and some people don't. Plus, no disrespect intended, but 18 is just the cusp of adulthood. Even though for me 18 was 56 years ago. There is nothing wrong with Slinky Dog unless one is bent on heart stopping coasters. It is a good family type coaster and if Disney needs anything, it needs something for kids and adults to do together. It must be fairly good since it appears to have a fairly long line most of the time. It is one of the good things that Disney has done for the last 10 years. We all seem to remember that families consist of adults and kids, they need something to remember as well. Shops? I'll take your word for it, I never go into the shops anyway and never have.
 

pdude81

Well-Known Member
My mom is the exact same age. She spent her career as an architect. She first visited Disneyland before she turned one. She visited Magic Kingdom and stayed at the Contemporary in 1971. She visited Epcot, Hollywood Studios, and Animal Kingdom opening year. Her first vacation with my father was to Walt Disney World.

Despite her frequent and nearly yearly visits throughout her lifetime, she just doesn’t have the nostalgia for EPCOT that permeates this forum. Why not? I couldn’t tell you. Had I existed amidst Epcot’s prime, as the attractions and themes of yesteryear continue to come down, I feel as though I would also be sad.

My mom sorely misses Illuminations, 20,000 Leagues, the Mickey Mouse Review, The Great Movie Ride, Back Lot Tour, and Snow White’s Scary Adventure. She also misses the Main Street Cinema.

It’s not that she didn’t love Epcot. Epcot has always been her second favorite (behind Magic Kingdom). She just loved the pavilions of world showcase, which have mostly remained intact or improved. To her, future world was fine, but just something you walk past to get to world showcase.
People tend to miss things they had a strong connection to during their formative years. So it could be generational.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
I don't disagree, but we were talking about superficial things that some people notice and some people don't. Plus, no disrespect intended, but 18 is just the cusp of adulthood. Even though for me 18 was 56 years ago. There is nothing wrong with Slinky Dog unless one is bent on heart stopping coasters. It is a good family type coaster and if Disney needs anything, it needs something for kids and adults to do together. It must be fairly good since it appears to have a fairly long line most of the time. It is one of the good things that Disney has done for the last 10 years. We all seem to remember that families consist of adults and kids, they need something to remember as well. Shops? I'll take your word for it, I never go into the shops anyway and never have.
Agreed on slinky dog. Every ride doesn’t have to be a headlining e-ticket. What the parks actually need is more B/C/D ticket rides to fill them out. For example I think the other 3 parks should all have people mover type rides added. I also agree that DHS especially needed a few more rides for kids and adults to ride together and Toy Story Land in general helped out with that.
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
I don't disagree, but we were talking about superficial things that some people notice and some people don't. Plus, no disrespect intended, but 18 is just the cusp of adulthood. Even though for me 18 was 56 years ago. There is nothing wrong with Slinky Dog unless one is bent on heart stopping coasters. It is a good family type coaster and if Disney needs anything, it needs something for kids and adults to do together. It must be fairly good since it appears to have a fairly long line most of the time. It is one of the good things that Disney has done for the last 10 years. We all seem to remember that families consist of adults and kids, they need something to remember as well. Shops? I'll take your word for it, I never go into the shops anyway and never have.

It's not that Slinky Dog is bad, it's that it you can ride it in dozens of other places around the country. Something like Seven Dwarfs Mine Train, while disappointing, at least has a certain level of theming that's beyond what you'd get at most other parks. Slinky has essentially nothing on the actual ride.
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
It's not that Slinky Dog is bad, it's that it you can ride it in dozens of other places around the country. Something like Seven Dwarfs Mine Train, while disappointing, at least has a certain level of theming that's beyond what you'd get at most other parks. Slinky has essentially nothing on the actual ride.
Nothing except the train is made to look like Slinky Dog. For it's purpose and location (back yard toy train). What more should it be?
 

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

Back
Top Bottom