Orlando Becoming East Coast Headquarters for Disney Parks, Experiences, and Products

[britain]

Looking at the TDL Expansion thread they seem to love rock work and waterfalls.

The castle isn’t anything to write home about but overall the area leading up the entrance and the interior are nicely done.

One starts to think that from Iger/Chapek's view, the dark Eisner years (DCA, DSP) can be attributed to 1: No imaginative Disney rock work, and 2: No popular IP.

They get a lot of flack about number 2, but I'll give credit when credit is due: They understand that "mountains" are part of the Disney special sauce.

 

[Schmidt]

IMO, there's nothing in that picture that isn't disappointing. A bad forced perspective. Walls along a bridge that keep you from seeing a pretty good river scene (but what good is a nice scene if no one sees it?). The utter baffling conceit that there's a door in a mountain supposedly a mile from the castle that has the castle immediately behind that door. All leading to a warehouse room that's too loud, for food that's too expensive, with an awful SFX of flickering candles in which large groups of them flicker in unison making them look extra fake. One and done for me.

My God you guys really dissect this.
It’s a theme park to me. At face value it’s gorgeous. It feels like most peoples problems are more preference than anything else. The force perspective works just fine. Is it perfect? Nope far from it, but still something that’s easy to overlook.

 

[EPCOTCenterLover]

My God you guys really dissect this.
It’s a theme park to me. At face value it’s gorgeous. It feels like most peoples problems are more preference than anything else. The force perspective works just fine. Is it perfect? Nope far from it, but still something that’s easy to overlook.

When paying high prices for an experience from a world class company, I expect excellence in return. This falls short in many ways. It has its strengths, but to compare it favorably to Tokyo is laughable.

 

[Schmidt]

When paying high prices for an experience from a world class company, I expect excellence in return. This falls short in many ways. It has its strengths, but to compare it favorably to Tokyo is laughable.

 

[Schmidt]

Tokyo is amazing! I agree. You can’t compare to different countries and economies, not to mention you have 2 companies footing the bill. That also doesn’t mean WDW isn’t amazing either. Lots of jaded old timers here. Don’t worry I’m sort of an old timer too. I still don’t get this hyper focus.

To say that this project is not amazing is absurd in my book. I mean have you actually been there. It’s great!!! Just because it’s not what you wanted doesn’t mean it’s not a great experience. This is a world class experience in my and most guests opinions that walk through that area.

 

[MisterPenguin]

My God you guys really dissect this.
It’s a theme park to me. At face value it’s gorgeous. It feels like most peoples problems are more preference than anything else. The force perspective works just fine. Is it perfect? Nope far from it, but still something that’s easy to overlook.

Problem is that there are many instances in which WDW has done forced perspective very well: Main Street, castle, American Adventure. So, when they do a poor job at it, it stands out.

 

[Lil Copter Cap]

Yeaaah, it's not so much of "This is bad" but "This is bad for Disney's standard of design and storytelling"

If I saw this in a local amusement or theme park, sure. But to see a tiny miniature castle on a hill, that looks even smaller when on the nearby SDMT ride...count me out.

The inside design I have no qualms with, in all honesty.

All to say, perhaps (??) this move will inspire a new chapter in WDI. For better or worse. It's either going to be great for the company or so bad change and reinvestment will have to come from it. It feels like there are so many changes happening all at once internally and externally and that typically never leads to a good or desirable outcome...

 

[HauntedPirate]

It feels like there are so many changes happening all at once internally and externally and that typically never leads to a good or desirable outcome...

It kind of feels like someone is trying to “imprint his stench stamp” on the company because he knows his time as CEO is short. He had his “Master Ship Builder” sign erected at Castaway Cay less than 2 years after being installed as head of P&R, which seems like someone’s ego, and insecurities, running wild when they didn’t really build anything but want their name out there.

 

[celluloid]

My God you guys really dissect this.
It’s a theme park to me. At face value it’s gorgeous. It feels like most peoples problems are more preference than anything else. The force perspective works just fine. Is it perfect? Nope far from it, but still something that’s easy to overlook.

It is fine if you disagree. You brought up the specific example and people justified their stance with specific evidence. Nothing to "My God" about. Don't take it personally. Art is always preference, it is subjective. Objectively though, it is not to the standard that the company is previously known for, and was a focal money making point of a highly touted expansion, so it is critiqued as such.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

Projects at the Disneyland Resort have not been more efficient than projects at Walt Disney World. Projects handled by the field offices have not been more efficient. Just being physically closer to a dozen layers of bureaucracy isn’t going to make them magically go away.

Disney deciding to respond to Epic Universe won’t somehow make them more efficient.

Walt Disney Imagineering and Universal Creative already compete for talent and use the same vendors and contractors. None of that has brought down costs and in fact Universal’s costs have become more like Disney’s.

Moving closer might not remove 12 layers of bureaucracy but firing 85% of the staff will lol. It’s like tanking and rebuilding a team. They made it to the playoffs and were swept in round one. Blow it up. Rebuild. That seems to be what they’re doing. You don’t just fire 85% of your staff and not make drastic changes.

This is a very strong case of wishful thinking.

Why do you assume that changing location will somehow turn things around?

If you’re far away from an asset then it is more difficult to efficiently manage. Dow Chemical tackled this problem by instituting regional management long ago. For example, Dow Canada, Dow Europe, etc. By being closer to their market and their assets, they were able to make better decisions. If upper management is in Burbank and WDI at Glendale, how can they effectively manage their golden goose from 2,000 miles away? In any case the bigger change will be from rebuilding WDI.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Moving closer might not remove 12 layers of bureaucracy but firing 85% of the staff will lol. It’s like tanking and rebuilding a team. They made it to the playoffs and were swept in round one. Blow it up. Rebuild. That seems to be what they’re doing. You don’t just fire 85% of your staff and not make drastic changes.

Getting rid of people is meaningless if you don’t change processes, especially when you no longer have people with experience to know which process is critical and which is not.

If you’re far away from an asset then it is more difficult to efficiently manage. Dow Chemical tackled this problem by instituting regional management long ago. For example, Dow Canada, Dow Europe, etc. By being closer to their market and their assets, they were able to make better decisions. If upper management is in Burbank and WDI at Glendale, how can they effectively manage their golden goose from 2,000 miles away? In any case the bigger change will be from rebuilding WDI.

Again, projects at the Disneyland Resort were not better managed. Does being in Florida really that meaningfully closer to Paris? What you describe would be more like returning to the older model where each resort was more separate from the others.

 

[comics101]

Considering Joe was shoved and Tony isn’t allowed should tell you enough about the current environment.

But I didn’t say that.

Nor should I talk about the politics and infighting. It’s not good.

I posted this recently in a thread over in the Imagineering section. It seems relevant to the discussion going on here.

[T]his is a creative problem bigger than Chapek alone. Let's remember that Iger was CEO when the EPCOT overhaul was announced. I honestly wonder if the problem is that, when it comes to WDI, the best of the best have all left the company. @Eddie Sotto, Tony Baxter, Joe Rohde...These were legends who were often trained and mentored by Walt's original Imagineers. Rather than utilize their talent and past experience and allow incoming Imagineers to learn from them, Disney has instead chosen to push them out of the fold and replace them with Social Media Influencers and Social Justice Warriors.

...I'm all for diversity and inclusion, but there is absolutely nothing in Carmen Smith's background to suggest that she has any business making creative decisions for theme parks. And Zach Riddley? Oy! Does anyone here honestly believe that Instafluencer Zach Riddley has taken the time to gain insight from the Imagineering greats that came before him? Seems to me he's far too busy building a social media following and advancing his career.

 

[comics101]

Problem is that there are many instances in which WDW has done forced perspective very well: Main Street, castle, American Adventure. So, when they do a poor job at it, it stands out.

I couldn't help but notice that all of the examples you listed were built 40+ years ago.

 

[trainplane3]

I posted this recently in a thread over in the Imagineering section. It seems relevant to the discussion going on here.

Funny you should mention Zach. I was talking to someone and joked they should reach out to him. They searched him up and their response was "they do what now?". Me - "Yeah, he's overseeing the Epcot project". Them - "That's...interesting they chose him out of a lot of others...". There's a more to it but it seems like he has some kind of reputation.

He doesn't even have complete control over his account as we've seen in the past.

Then again, we get incredible posts like "Epcot mannequins=story":

 

[hopemax]

The whole Zach thing goes against the narrative that Disney hated "celebrity Imagineers" like Tony and Joe. Seems to me they just hated the way they would use their weight to push back against stupid ideas.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I posted this recently in a thread over in the Imagineering section. It seems relevant to the discussion going on here.

In a lot of ways it’s a problem of being too inspired and too passionate. Being a theme park designer is now something to which people aspire. You can get a degree from known universities in themed entertainment design. So the inspiration in theme parks, and especially Disney’s parks, is no longer the real world but theme parks themselves.

Go look at Joe Rhode’s Instagram account and it’s about people, places, art and history. His fascination is with the real and he imitates that in his work. Herb Ryman was known for his traveling to paint. As was Marc Davis. Hench vigorously studied philosophy and design theory. When Walt brought in Nelbert Chouinard to teach the animators she didn’t have them copying animation but studying real life subjects. When it came time to make Bambi they brought in real deer to study (Andreas Deja recently posted on his blog reactions to The Lion King from some of the old guard and Marc Davis complained the lions looked to cartoony). The lands of the parks were built very much as real places, or at least the illusion of real places whereas now they’re built as fake places. New Fantasyland 1983 drew more inspiration from European villages than the films that inspire so much of the land’s content but New Fantasyland 2012 is very much drawn from the movies first and foremost. The parks have moved from copies to copies of copies.

This has also combined with increasing specialization. The visual elements of theme have become something distinct, an application applied on top of a box. Disciplines have become more layered instead of melded together and intertwined.

 

[hopemax]

In a lot of ways it’s a problem of being too inspired and too passionate. Being a theme park designer is now something to which people aspire. You can get a degree from known universities in themed entertainment design. So the inspiration in theme parks, and especially Disney’s parks, is no longer the real world but theme parks themselves.

Go look at Joe Rhode’s Instagram account and it’s about people, places, art and history. His fascination is with the real and he imitates that in his work. Herb Ryman was known for his traveling to paint. As was Marc Davis. Hench vigorously studied philosophy and design theory. When Walt brought in Nelbert Chouinard to teach the animators she didn’t have them copying animation but real life subject. When it came time to make Bambi they brought in real deer to study (Andreas Deja recently posted on his blog reactions to The Lion King from some of the old guard and Marc Davis complained the lions looked to cartoony). The lands of the parks were built very much as real places, or at least the illusion of real places whereas now they’re built as fake places. New Fantasyland 1983 drew more inspiration from European villages than the films that inspire so much of the land’s content but Nee Fantasyland 2012 is very much drawn from the movies first and foremost. The parks have moved from copies to copies of copies.

This has also combined with increasing specialization. The visual elements of theme have become something distinct, an application applied on top of a box. Disciplines have become more layered instead of melded together and intertwined.

I also point to the experience with different media as well. Movies and theme parks are different, but having movie backgrounds gave the original Imagineers the experience to naturally build a scene, and populate it in a way that really spoke to consumers. I've long though Emile Kuri was an underrated contributor to the success of Disneyland. Theme parks haven't really seen that sort of thing again until Stuart Craig and Alan Gilmore's contributions to the WWoHP. Innate skills that people who only design themed entertainment may not have honed.

We talk about the financial / creative pairings at the CEO level leads to success, and not so much about how a pairing between a movie production + theme park operations could be likewise beneficial. I don't know how much of a door goes between studio ops to WDI, but I would like to see what would happen if there were more of that again. But the good studio people might prefer to slide between studio projects or different productions studios, and don't consider themed entertainment as something they want to do or is a step back.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I also point to the experience with different media as well. Movies and theme parks are different, but having movie backgrounds gave the original Imagineers the experience to naturally build a scene, and populate it in a way that really spoke to consumers. I've long though Emile Kuri was an underrated contributor to the success of Disneyland. Theme parks haven't really seen that sort of thing again until Stuart Craig and Alan Gilmore's contributions to the WWoHP. Innate skills that people who only design themed entertainment may not have honed.

We talk about the financial / creative pairings at the CEO level leads to success, and not so much about how a pairing between a movie production + theme park operations could be likewise beneficial. I don't know how much of a door goes between studio ops to WDI, but I would like to see what would happen if there were more of that again. But the good studio people might prefer to slide between studio projects or different productions studios, and don't consider themed entertainment as something they want to do or is a step back.

The problem now is that so much of movie sets are digital that you can have the movie people insisting on something they didn’t really do.

It wasn’t just set designers. Disneyland also had a lot of architects who worked more directly on it in a way that does not really happen any more. Mid-century Los Angeles was also like a perfect moment in time to get architects who could do themed entertainment. Modernism was ascendant but the Bauhaus teaching model was still nascent, so many of those working still had a more traditional Beaux-Arts education. Many architects in the area did double duty as set designers and many set designers had architectural training. The eclecticism of Hollywood also extended into the built environment with a variety of homes and businesses being built as proto-themed spaces. So you had all of these people who understood how things get built and the traditional principles of building.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

Getting rid of people is meaningless if you don’t change processes, especially when you no longer have people with experience to know which process is critical and which is not.

Again, projects at the Disneyland Resort were not better managed. Does being in Florida really that meaningfully closer to Paris? What you describe would be more like returning to the older model where each resort was more separate from the others.

Let’s see what processes they change. Personnel is policy.

 

[bcoachable]

Let’s see what processes they change. Personnel is policy.

The process is everything is now outsourced- only the name remains…