Nice piece of art for 1992 Beast attraction

[wdrive]

Imagineering today would not even attempt to build something so ambitious in such a small space

 

[DDLand]

It could have been awesome. A small scale land imitating the hutong alleyways (that are increasingly more endangered). More appropriate than the traditional "Imperial" style Chinese architecture. And definitely trying to avoid the Westernized streets of old Shanghai.

Part of me thinks Disney got lazy about the research and careful composition. Part of me thinks they were worried about cultural sensitivity (Western company trying to imitate Chinese architecture). Part of me thinks they really just didn't have the guts. Big opportunity lost.

But for what its worth, I really loved the Small World Castle idea that was conceptualized for Hong Kong. Something that could have been really unique and creative for that park.

It’s also reflective of Disneyland’s journey towards meaning nothing. When Disneyland opened, it celebrated the “ideals, the dreams, and the hard facts that have created America.” Roy further clarified that The Magic Kingdom (and Disneyland) was dedicated to the life and imagination of Walt Disney.

What does Disneyland mean today? Shanghai Disneyland’s ejection of classic lands was the next logical step in a process that began decades earlier. The Walt Disney Company places no particular value on America or the company’s founder. It’s a multinational media conglomerate.

Iger and Weis distilled Shanghai Disneyland down to what Disneyland means in the 21st Century. Disneyland is an amusement park with a castle in the middle, that has some random lands surrounding it. If pressed, Iger and Weis might throw in some catchy phrases like “Magic” or “stories come to life.” Many classic Disneyland visual cues still exist at Shanghai Disneyland, but divorced of their actual meaning. The train station typifies that in fabulous symbolism. Instead of trying to introduce the Chinese public to the ideals and stories of a brilliant man, they decided to shrink him down to a statue and some train easter-eggs. The franchises and movies of the Walt Disney Company would be the ambassador instead of the man on the letter-head.

What is Disneyland? Disneyland parks represented 4 out of the top 10 theme parks on the planet in 2018. That year Disneylands welcomed more than 85 million people through their six gates. At a time when billions are being spent on rides at Disneylands all over the world, it’s unclear what the theme of Disneyland is. While many theme park fans decry the state of Epcot, Disneyland has been subjected to the same treatment. The exterior may look prettier than an abandoned Wonders of Life, but do not be fooled. Disneyland is lost, and there’s no sign of it getting better.

I’m sure someone would tell us that Chinese people don’t understand trains...

Which is one of the things that is puzzling about Shanghai. Suppose that was true. Iger’s whole reason for launching Shanghai Disneyland was to “introduce” China to Disney. There’s nothing more Walt Disney than trains. But even half-decent observers soon realize that Iger had no interest in introducing China to Walt Disney, no, he was introducing Disney to China in order to sell lightsabers in Shanghai. I personally like getting to know people better than conglomerates, but maybe I’m alone on that...

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Iger’s whole reason for launching Shanghai Disneyland was to “introduce” China to Disney. There’s nothing more Walt Disney than trains. But even half-decent observers soon realize that Iger had no interest in introducing China to Walt Disney, no, he was introducing Disney to China in order to sell lightsabers in Shanghai.

Beyond it looking like an imitation built by a casino owner, this is the best summary of why I dislike SDL, why it's the only Magic Kingdom I have yet to visit and why I'm not in any rush to do so.

It may be Disney branded, but it's not "Disney" to me.

 

[DDLand]

Beyond it looking like an imitation built by a casino owner, this is the best summary of why I dislike SDL, why it's the only Magic Kingdom I have yet to visit and why I'm not in any rush to do so.

It may be Disney branded, but it's not "Disney" to me.

Yeah, I can’t blame you. Shanghai Disneyland is weird. That is the one Disney park that I look back on and think “was that real.” It is the most pure expression of Bob Iger’s Disney. It’s big and impressive. It’s all about franchises, technology, and international. It is Disney of today!



There are certain elements that are fantastic. Shanghai Disney obsesses with creating beautiful vistas. The lands are set up to create “money shots” where the whole land is perfectly framed. Looking at Adventure Isle, Pirates Cove, the Castle, and Tomorrowland when properly framed is an experience not to be forgotten. Each one is almost cinematic with its scale and detail.



Those vistas disguise a weakness. Look left or right and you will see other elements intruding into the experience. Sightlines in Shanghai do not matter in the most extreme departure from Disneyland design since 1955. “Lands” as we’ve known them do not exist, as the park becomes one “giant” land.



That’s not all. One of the strengths of Disney parks has been their ability to be impressive from a distance, but also stand up to closer scrutiny. Big Thunder Mountain (whichever one) looks fantastic from a distance, but also feels fantastic close up. Often, Shanghai’s impressive vistas end up being lackluster on closer inspection. The pirate land that looks amazing from a distance ends up being a letdown when you inspect the details.



Shanghai suffers from a “manufactured” quality. Far away it looks great, but the closer you get the more weird it feels. This is probably reflective of the Imagineer’s priorities. They seem to start creating lands on the macro first, and then tackling the micro. Imagineers of old seem to have done the opposite. Today’s Imagineers create vistas or monuments and old Imagineers created places or environments. Old Imagineers organized the layout of lands to construct a real place, but modern Imagineers create a monument and try to fit the environment in later. This partially explains why new Disney projects lack an organic feel. The place has to “fit” inside an image that the artist has in mind.



Do Imagineers create environments or monuments? Many modern projects make great monuments, but lousy environments.



Hard idea to get across. Forgive me if I’m a little incoherent.



I fear for Walt Disney Studios Park. While many will be quick to say “it will be better than what’s there before,” I’m still concerned about that project. It’s almost as if WDS’s inspiration is Shanghai Disneyland. The lands appear to have little depth, and each one will be competing with the other. That is something to watch. A Cars Land or Pandora crammed in along the lakeside will only clutter things more. Disney being allergic to great architecture and always choosing rock work is another issue too. What will Pandora, next to Galaxy’s Edge, next to Frozen look like? A really funky collection of out of scale rock work in purple, grey, and brown.



The disturbing thing is that Imagineering’s story problems are not the only insidious issue that the organization faces. The inability to curate parks and environments is frightening when we consider they are tinkering with parks like Disneyland Paris, Tokyo DisneySea, and Disneyland Park. Magic Kingdom’s New Fantasyland and Hub redesign permanently damaged the park. What are they going to do next?



That’s a scary thought.

 

[Toni25]

Yeah, I can’t blame you. Shanghai Disneyland is weird. That is the one Disney park that I look back on and think “was that real.” It is the most pure expression of Bob Iger’s Disney. It’s big and impressive. It’s all about franchises, technology, and international. It is Disney of today!



There are certain elements that are fantastic. Shanghai Disney obsesses with creating beautiful vistas. The lands are set up to create “money shots” where the whole land is perfectly framed. Looking at Adventure Isle, Pirates Cove, the Castle, and Tomorrowland when properly framed is an experience not to be forgotten. Each one is almost cinematic with its scale and detail.



Those vistas disguise a weakness. Look left or right and you will see other elements intruding into the experience. Sightlines in Shanghai do not matter in the most extreme departure from Disneyland design since 1955. “Lands” as we’ve known them do not exist, as the park becomes one “giant” land.



That’s not all. One of the strengths of Disney parks has been their ability to be impressive from a distance, but also stand up to closer scrutiny. Big Thunder Mountain (whichever one) looks fantastic from a distance, but also feels fantastic close up. Often, Shanghai’s impressive vistas end up being lackluster on closer inspection. The pirate land that looks amazing from a distance ends up being a letdown when you inspect the details.



Shanghai suffers from a “manufactured” quality. Far away it looks great, but the closer you get the more weird it feels. This is probably reflective of the Imagineer’s priorities. They seem to start creating lands on the macro first, and then tackling the micro. Imagineers of old seem to have done the opposite. Today’s Imagineers create vistas or monuments and old Imagineers created places or environments. Old Imagineers organized the layout of lands to construct a real place, but modern Imagineers create a monument and try to fit the environment in later. This partially explains why new Disney projects lack an organic feel. The place has to “fit” inside an image that the artist has in mind.



Do Imagineers create environments or monuments? Many modern projects make great monuments, but lousy environments.



Hard idea to get across. Forgive me if I’m a little incoherent.



I fear for Walt Disney Studios Park. While many will be quick to say “it will be better than what’s there before,” I’m still concerned about that project. It’s almost as if WDS’s inspiration is Shanghai Disneyland. The lands appear to have little depth, and each one will be competing with the other. That is something to watch. A Cars Land or Pandora crammed in along the lakeside will only clutter things more. Disney being allergic to great architecture and always choosing rock work is another issue too. What will Pandora, next to Galaxy’s Edge, next to Frozen look like? A really funky collection of out of scale rock work in purple, grey, and brown.



The disturbing thing is that Imagineering’s story problems are not the only insidious issue that the organization faces. The inability to curate parks and environments is frightening when we consider they are tinkering with parks like Disneyland Paris, Tokyo DisneySea, and Disneyland Park. Magic Kingdom’s New Fantasyland and Hub redesign permanently damaged the park. What are they going to do next?



That’s a scary thought.

I actually find it super weird that Shanghai Disneyland is the ONLY Disney park without any kind of transportation inside...which doesn't make sense, considering how huge it is, you would think they should have considered some kind of infrastructure, transport is the basis of any town/city in real life...China is HUGE on transportation. I expected maybe a modern train station and a monorail to circle the park, like the old train?
I still expect a "Main Street/ Mickey Avenue Vehicles" type of thing at least...or they could be more innovative and come up with a Disney Metro inside the park? Sort of like a underground slow dark ride to get you around with multiple stops.

 

[Robbiem]

I actually find it super weird that Shanghai Disneyland is the ONLY Disney park without any kind of transportation inside...which doesn't make sense, considering how huge it is, you would think they should have considered some kind of infrastructure, transport is the basis of any town/city in real life...China is HUGE on transportation. I expected maybe a modern train station and a monorail to circle the park, like the old train?
I still expect a "Main Street/ Mickey Avenue Vehicles" type of thing at least...or they could be more innovative and come up with a Disney Metro inside the park? Sort of like a underground slow dark ride to get you around with multiple stops.

something like the world history cruise thing planned for westcot where it was part dark ride part transportation would be awesome

 

[Otamin]

Hopefully one day the Imagineers will be able to get back to the level they once were, but I just don’t see it ever happening. Certainly not with the current executive team demanding IP is slapped everywhere.

I haven’t been to Shanghai Disneyland (and I don’t plan to), but it just seems like a soulless mess of a park. I understand wanting to do something different, but some of the design choices are incredibly odd to me.

The next park Disney park should show whether or not Shanghai was a one-off mess or not, but I can't help but feel many of its shortcomings will be seen again.

 

[Toni25]

Hopefully one day the Imagineers will be able to get back to the level they once were, but I just don’t see it ever happening. Certainly not with the current executive team demanding IP is slapped everywhere.

I haven’t been to Shanghai Disneyland (and I don’t plan to), but it just seems like a soulless mess of a park. I understand wanting to do something different, but some of the design choices are incredibly odd to me.

The next park Disney park should show whether or not Shanghai was a one-off mess or not, but I can't help but feel many of its shortcomings will be seen again.

I mean...lets not exaggerate, I don't think it's a mess or that soulless compared to other amusement parks. It's a great entertainment center and really stunning...I never visited it, but would love to, it has some truly great rides. It just feel less like a "land" and more like an amusement park. I find it really interesting how Imagineers decided to experiment and take a less classic direction with it. It feels like it is the most distinct from other Castle Parks, and I don't mean it in a bad way.

It probably fits with what the Chinese expect, they seem to have a liking for big and over the top, excessive kind of things.
Maybe us Europeans have a higher respect for more romanticized type of environments. But there is a lot of hope for us who like the miniature type of romantic/nostalgic lands...I think Fantasy Springs is proof of that.

Also, trends change. If the response for Fantasy Springs will be overwhelming, I am sure Imagineers will consider that direction more in the future...after all, they really try to please the masses.

 

[brb1006]

Which I believe was the last project supervised by Tony Baxter.

The original WED designers had a background in film, animation, theater, etc and the second generation learned from them.

Now WDI is led by people who have taken courses in theme design, not the fundamentals that created the art form.

It's like going to the Venetian Casino to learn about Italian art, and not the real Venice.

Well that explains why modern concept art by WDI lacks so much charm.

Here's footage of Figaro at Princess Fantasy Faire.

 

[brb1006]

Beyond it looking like an imitation built by a casino owner, this is the best summary of why I dislike SDL, why it's the only Magic Kingdom I have yet to visit and why I'm not in any rush to do so.

It may be Disney branded, but it's not "Disney" to me.

Even the walkaround characters aren't as energetic compared to the other Disney Parks.

Same with Mickey's Storybook Express, even the parade's music felt off.

 

[brb1006]

Yeah, I can’t blame you. Shanghai Disneyland is weird. That is the one Disney park that I look back on and think “was that real.” It is the most pure expression of Bob Iger’s Disney. It’s big and impressive. It’s all about franchises, technology, and international. It is Disney of today!



There are certain elements that are fantastic. Shanghai Disney obsesses with creating beautiful vistas. The lands are set up to create “money shots” where the whole land is perfectly framed. Looking at Adventure Isle, Pirates Cove, the Castle, and Tomorrowland when properly framed is an experience not to be forgotten. Each one is almost cinematic with its scale and detail.



Those vistas disguise a weakness. Look left or right and you will see other elements intruding into the experience. Sightlines in Shanghai do not matter in the most extreme departure from Disneyland design since 1955. “Lands” as we’ve known them do not exist, as the park becomes one “giant” land.



That’s not all. One of the strengths of Disney parks has been their ability to be impressive from a distance, but also stand up to closer scrutiny. Big Thunder Mountain (whichever one) looks fantastic from a distance, but also feels fantastic close up. Often, Shanghai’s impressive vistas end up being lackluster on closer inspection. The pirate land that looks amazing from a distance ends up being a letdown when you inspect the details.



Shanghai suffers from a “manufactured” quality. Far away it looks great, but the closer you get the more weird it feels. This is probably reflective of the Imagineer’s priorities. They seem to start creating lands on the macro first, and then tackling the micro. Imagineers of old seem to have done the opposite. Today’s Imagineers create vistas or monuments and old Imagineers created places or environments. Old Imagineers organized the layout of lands to construct a real place, but modern Imagineers create a monument and try to fit the environment in later. This partially explains why new Disney projects lack an organic feel. The place has to “fit” inside an image that the artist has in mind.



Do Imagineers create environments or monuments? Many modern projects make great monuments, but lousy environments.



Hard idea to get across. Forgive me if I’m a little incoherent.



I fear for Walt Disney Studios Park. While many will be quick to say “it will be better than what’s there before,” I’m still concerned about that project. It’s almost as if WDS’s inspiration is Shanghai Disneyland. The lands appear to have little depth, and each one will be competing with the other. That is something to watch. A Cars Land or Pandora crammed in along the lakeside will only clutter things more. Disney being allergic to great architecture and always choosing rock work is another issue too. What will Pandora, next to Galaxy’s Edge, next to Frozen look like? A really funky collection of out of scale rock work in purple, grey, and brown.



The disturbing thing is that Imagineering’s story problems are not the only insidious issue that the organization faces. The inability to curate parks and environments is frightening when we consider they are tinkering with parks like Disneyland Paris, Tokyo DisneySea, and Disneyland Park. Magic Kingdom’s New Fantasyland and Hub redesign permanently damaged the park. What are they going to do next?



That’s a scary thought.

It also doesn't help that apparently Disney Characters (outside of Mickey & Friends) aren't as well-known or beloved as they are globally. But the chinese only care about Disney's recent hits, Pixar, while the old Disney characters are just there.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I mean...lets not exaggerate, I don't think it's a mess or that soulless compared to other amusement parks. It's a great entertainment center and really stunning...I never visited it, but would love to, it has some truly great rides. It just feel less like a "land" and more like an amusement park. I find it really interesting how Imagineers decided to experiment and take a less classic direction with it. It feels like it is the most distinct from other Castle Parks, and I don't mean it in a bad way.

It probably fits with what the Chinese expect, they seem to have a liking for big and over the top, excessive kind of things.
Maybe us Europeans have a higher respect for more romanticized type of environments. But there is a lot of hope for us who like the miniature type of romantic/nostalgic lands...I think Fantasy Springs is proof of that.

Also, trends change. If the response for Fantasy Springs will be overwhelming, I am sure Imagineers will consider that direction more in the future...after all, they really try to please the masses.

Even Fantasy Springs is looking to rely more on rockwogk and walls of trees to sort of create boundaries instead of having any strong definition of space. It is also odd things just sort of glommed onto the park, noodling off on its own direction and not playing with the rest of the park's organization.

 

[DDLand]

Even Fantasy Springs is looking to rely more on rockwogk and walls of trees to sort of create boundaries instead of having any strong definition of space. It is also odd things just sort of glommed onto the park, noodling off on its own direction and not playing with the rest of the park's organization.

100%

Tokyo Disney Sea is wickedly brilliant because all the lands are cohesive. The organization of that park blows my mind. It’s one thing to make a beautiful seacoast Italian town, a stunning New York, and a charming Cape Cod village. That’s hard. It’s entirely different to make those lands feel naturally connected. There’s never a moment where you go “wow I just went from New York to Italy.” It just flows so gracefully*. At the same time the park doesn’t sacrifice the integrity of the story.

Then we have the brilliant Mount Prometheus acting as a connecting element. Playing off of Mount Prometheus is another masterstroke. It’s the perfect contrast between the wide expanses of water. Usually when I’m in a theme park I’m like “I see how they did that.” That park is one where I’m consistently blown away by the cleverness of the artists/writers. One simply doesn’t come up with Tokyo Disney Sea. It’s excruciatingly hammered out in revision after revision. While execution is excellent, its organization is legendary.

Then we have Fantasy Springs... It’s ripped from the context of Mount Prometheus. If the icon is visible, it will be distant. The land is separated from the continuous body of water that connects all the lands. It’s a significant walk from park entrance. The park is actually hub and spoke**, but this jumps straight off. Instead of flowing, a tunnel will lead to this new area.

In short, Fantasy Springs will look, feel, and act like it’s not part of the park. Then there is the story and thematic issues. Oh, and don’t forget about the Casino (magical springs flowing up in Vegas is no less implausible than Dr. Strange finding magical ruins in Anaheim).

Then there are the same rock walls that they keep building and spending a fortune on. It makes sense too. If I was an apathetic executive looking at concept art, I would choose the mountain over the buildings every time. Main Street and Frontierland don’t look “epic” in concept art. A massive rocky monument looks way more impressive than a street scene. Imagining Main Street or that beast ride is more abstract. It’s more subtle. You have to put yourself inside of a place and imagine how you feel. Or you can build something BIG that looks cool in concept art.

Is it any wonder the CEO’s (eh I mean Executive Chairman) pet projects all are massive with little heart. He’s taken a keen interest in Shanghai and WDS. What do we get? Monuments that have none of the charming whimsy people love. At the same time companies are spending billions on “immersion,” they forget what people liked being immersed in. Nice.

*Notice that park organization is currently heading to two extremes. One is the breakdown of individual lands. Sightlines seem to be unimportant in many modern projects. See recent Shanghai and Magic Kingdom work that typifies this. The park is treated as one whole with little care for individual land identity. Then there is the other extreme exemplified by Epic Universe. This is the complete compartmentalization of lands so there are literally no interactions between lands. The guest walks under a bridge or through a cave/portal into a land. The land is not really part of the park. It could be cut off and added to any theme park with no story repercussions. TDS’s skill of blending lands while balancing individual land identity seems to be in the process of going extinct. Only Animal Kingdom is still creating areas where the park’s story is both assertive and supportive of the land. Even my beloved DAK doesn’t come close to the organization of TDS. Not picking favorites though! Edit: That’s why when I hear “Tokyo Disney Sea level park being built” I roll my eyes. That park and DAK both have such a story and organizational lead. I dare someone to make a Tokyo DisneySea like park. It’s more than detail- it’s story. I think I’ll be waiting for a while.
**One of my few criticisms of TDS. The “hub” is Mysterious Island. The land is much loved, but it has a glaring flaw. The walls of volcanic rock provide little help for way finding. Guests can use the volcano to orient themselves, but that’s not really guest friendly. At the same time I couldn’t come up with a better solution, and if pressed I wouldn’t suggest a change. The costs of improvement outway the benefits.

 

[AndyS2992]

Tokyo Disney Sea is wickedly brilliant because all the lands are cohesive. The organization of that park blows my mind.

Which is funny because Tokyo Disneyland park is an absolute mess when it comes to layout. Big open spaces of nothing, dead ends and bottle necks, rides crammed to together, I could go on. Some of their rides are also the extremely dated versions which were removed from all the others decades ago. The park could really do with bulldozing and starting again in my opinion and then I'd imagine they'd have the potential then to create the most mind blowing Magic Kingdom. Just think, if all the rebuilt Fantasyland dark rides, including Haunted Mansion, used the same technology as their new Beauty and the Beast ride.. would be spectacular.

 

[lazyboy97o]

*Notice that park organization is currently heading to two extremes. One is the breakdown of individual lands. Sightlines seem to be unimportant in many modern projects.

What’s odd though is that there is not even any sort of internal consistency. It’s not like Disney has their way and Universal has another. These major companies flip flop not only between successive projects but even within projects themselves. Diagonal Alley was painstakingly crafted to not having any intruding sights into the land but then, almost immediately, it’s central attraction dumps people into a bare queue with unobstructed views backstage. Smuggler’s Run had a similar issue with guests being routed out back and Disney’s Hollywood Studios the fakeness of Galaxy’s Edge is visible not just from outside the park but in the adjacent land, undermining all of the work that went into crafting the immersion. While Universal has been building Universal’s Epic Universe of Epicness with its isolated lands you also have the new Islands of Adventure coasters where a painted metal building has been cast as a tree in the Forbidden Forrest and a new steel mass is being erected in the middle of the park’s central vista. There’s obsession on one aspect and a seeming lack of concern on the other.

 

[Robbiem]

Which is funny because Tokyo Disneyland park is an absolute mess when it comes to layout. Big open spaces of nothing, dead ends and bottle necks, rides crammed to together, I could go on. Some of their rides are also the extremely dated versions which were removed from all the others decades ago. The park could really do with bulldozing and starting again in my opinion and then I'd imagine they'd have the potential then to create the most mind blowing Magic Kingdom. Just think, if all the rebuilt Fantasyland dark rides, including Haunted Mansion, used the same technology as their new Beauty and the Beast ride.. would be spectacular.

I think there are some interesting aspects of Tokyo Disneyland’s design like the way that centre street opens up to adventureland and tomorrowland giving you a shortcut avoiding the hub and the transition to the new orleans area is really well done But i agree that there are quite a few areas where the park shows its age. Lots of painted concrete floor, the mall like World bizarre and some dated rides like old school dumbo and fantasyland dark rides and an odd tomorrowland which must have looked dated in 1983

 

[Otamin]

I mean...lets not exaggerate, I don't think it's a mess or that soulless compared to other amusement parks. It's a great entertainment center and really stunning...I never visited it, but would love to, it has some truly great rides. It just feel less like a "land" and more like an amusement park. I find it really interesting how Imagineers decided to experiment and take a less classic direction with it. It feels like it is the most distinct from other Castle Parks, and I don't mean it in a bad way.

It probably fits with what the Chinese expect, they seem to have a liking for big and over the top, excessive kind of things.
Maybe us Europeans have a higher respect for more romanticized type of environments. But there is a lot of hope for us who like the miniature type of romantic/nostalgic lands...I think Fantasy Springs is proof of that.

Also, trends change. If the response for Fantasy Springs will be overwhelming, I am sure Imagineers will consider that direction more in the future...after all, they really try to please the masses.

Mess was a bit of an exaggeration, yes, but I still think the park in general is a tad soulless.

As you said though it probably fits with what the Chinese expect, so some of the design decisions are probably attributed to that.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

The walls of volcanic rock provide little help for way finding.

The isolation of Mysterious Island is true to Disney's depiction of Vulcania in their 20,000 Leagues... movie.

Nemo's secret base would not have been out in the open.

I agree about the orientation concern, but I think the land works as designed.

 

[Robbiem]

Disneysea is designed a bit like animal kingdom. Its not a true hub and spoke design but isn’t totally linear like world showcase in Epcot so for example you can’t go from mysterious island to Arabian coast directly you must go through mermaid lagoon or lost river delta. Similarly you can go from mermaid lagoon to port discovery via MI.

its not as intuitive as hub and spoke but I don't think anything will be but I think its a much better layout than most second gates including DCA and WDSP