-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Nothing coming in 2010?
- Thread starter djkidkaz
- Start date
SirGoofy
Member
Oh, no....Never said that. He just misses the overall theme of the land he's in by about 5000 miles.
Kind of like the spinner in Adventureland. Entertains. Eats up guests. Does it fit?
Don't lie.... :wave:
EDIT: No idea how Nemo inspires. Save for buying plush.Inform is a stretch, too, duuuuuuude.
Aladdin himself and the theme of the ride does fit in Adventureland, just not in it's current spot. Also, it's crappy ride.
Also, if you would spend some time in the pavilion to listen to the manatee and tank trainers presentations, you would find that there's plenty to inform you and to inspire you to save the marine wildlife.
Take your blinders off.:wave:
everest-dude
Member
what is hista
SirGoofy
Member
Honey I Shrunk the Audience.
aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
It doesnt scream or even whisper Imagination. :brick:
_Scar
Active Member
muteki
Well-Known Member
Fixed :wave:
disneyireland
Member
figment is imagination. it may not be in original form but the pavillion is imagination and should not be changed
aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
um, true it should not be changed in terms of using the theme of imagination, however the current ride through is anything but imagination, except for the fact that figment is in there.
......the original was pure imagination
......the first redo was the worst thing disney has ever done with 0% imagination and 0% figment
......the redo to fix that mess was a step up and thankfully brought figment back, but still is a horrible ride and not up to par.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
The Future of 1982 World? I've said that it's somewhat flawed thinking to have Future World and Tomorrowland in the same resort when they might have attractions that fit the theming between them to fill up one of the lands.
I talk about this on last week's episode of my podcast. A company that has employed some of the most creative minds in history should have a much better representation of imagination in a place meant to showcase it.
The lack of imagination is so apparent on the modern Journey Into Imagination it's laughable. What happened to Disney's Blue Sky concept? Why is the ride so structured? Why do you go from various labs, and why is it organized by our senses?
They mention this at the end of the current ride - Imagination works best when it's set free, so why wasn't that allowed for this pavilion?
EPCOT Explorer
New Member
Arabia fits in your Tropical Jungle/South Seas area how? Explain that.
I've spent more than enough time in that pavilion. 2007 and 2008 had me for about an hour in there. Those parts of it, sure. They inform. They are minutia, however, when you look at the ride, and what's missing. They have a purpose, but the theme is all wrong. There's no cohesion.
Stop defending mediocrity. :wave:
It used to.
Back when it actually took you through the creative process and showed the fruits of your imagination's labors.
The "5 Senses" idea fails at that.
misterID
Well-Known Member
I think TL and FW are 2 totally different beasts. TL was set to an imaginary future, ala, Jules Verne. And FW was meant as a more realistic, scientific future, which I think works perfectly. The bad thing is there really isn't much that screams future in futureworld.
The beginning of Horizons with the imagined future scenes would be cool to somehow transplant in TL. Even if it were on the people mover.
The original Imagination: Everything in the pavillion, down to dreamfinder and Figment, represented human imagination. Now it represents cheapness, mediocrity, lameness and what happens when people have no imagination.
aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
I think TL and FW are 2 totally different beasts. TL was set to an imaginary future, ala, Jules Verne. And FW was meant as a more realistic, scientific future, which I think works perfectly. The bad thing is there really isn't much that screams future in futureworld.
The beginning of Horizons with the imagined future scenes would be cool to somehow transplant in TL. Even if it were on the people mover.
The original Imagination: Everything in the pavillion, down to dreamfinder and Figment, represented human imagination. Now it represents cheapness, mediocrity, lameness and what happens when people have no imagination.
Perfectly stated, I think that paragraph should be sent to both Imagineering and Kodak.
DisneyMusician2
Well-Known Member
With the current track record of Eastman Kodak, they might find this to be on par with the latest offerings in their field!
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
I think TL and FW are 2 totally different beasts. TL was set to an imaginary future, ala, Jules Verne. And FW was meant as a more realistic, scientific future, which I think works perfectly. The bad thing is there really isn't much that screams future in futureworld.
The beginning of Horizons with the imagined future scenes would be cool to somehow transplant in TL. Even if it were on the people mover.
The original Imagination: Everything in the pavillion, down to dreamfinder and Figment, represented human imagination. Now it represents cheapness, mediocrity, lameness and what happens when people have no imagination.
I agree with all of this, but I think so many of us criticize the theming of Tomorrowland and to a lesser extent Future World. Tomorrowland has never reached that Jules Verne vision of the Future - Sure, you had 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, but Horizons actually had Jules Verne in the attraction. I agree on what the intent of Future World and Tomorrowland were meant to be, but Future World was never an accurate description of the land - they really should have called it Discoveryland because Future World as a whole was never entirely Futuristic. If they were against calling the entire land Discoveryland, they could call Future World East (Mission: Space side) "Future World", and they can call Future World West (The Seas and The Land side) "Discoveryland".
As to Future World and Tomorrowland being different, had Mission: SPACE been more successful it would have been cloned around the world. I have to assume it would have been put in Tomorrowland.
SeaCastle
Well-Known Member
I don't remember who specifically, but a high seniority Imagineer commented a few years ago about how Tomorrowland (I believe, there was a chance it could have been Future World) was becoming increasingly irrelevant. I wonder if this is at all related to the increasing Toonmorrowization of Tomorrowland.
EPCOT Explorer
New Member
No....I can never accept them doing that. It makes the whole idea of EPCOT seem horribly generic of they drop the "Future" motif. For it's first 15 years of operation (roughly) FW was about the future, be it far flung or just around the corner. Dumbing that down to generic "Discovery" like any other kids's science museum really takes away something special about the park- it's integral theme. Keeping it focused on the future is something that is very unique, very cohesive and very Disney. The park is based off of Walt's philosophy for the future, in the first place. They don't need to change that and stray from that any further. They just need to return to it in a modern and new way.
Future World....It's time for it to get a total retheme.
SirGoofy
Member
If put in it's own "Miniland", separate from the jungle area, and yes, it would fit. Not that I want it, because I loath cartoons being the only things added to the parks, but it would fit.
The only thing mediocre about the pavilion is the exit. The hydrolators should have been kept.
Other than that it's the second best pavilion behind The Land.