News Reflections of Earth confirmed to be replaced by Harmonious

[Tony the Tigger]

With that said, what is wrong with being disappointed when a company that has proven that it can take what are fairly common elements and gone the extra mile to make them unique or creates experiences that other companies then try and copy shows a trend of no longer being innovators and of only delivering what is easiest, rather than what is best?

Agree. But we should also agree that "what is best" is arguably subjective and should not tell those who don't agree with what we think "is best" that they "should educate themselves."

IMO, New Fantasyland is kind of boring. It looks nice, but it's meh.

But then I ask myself: what was special about Snow White's Scary Adventures? Maybe just being a dark ride was innovative at some point, but other than that, it was about as simple as simple could be. As much as "the nostalgia factor" is an overused term, that has got to have something to do with why I'd prefer it to SDMT. But I don't tell those who prefer SDMT they are wrong or don't know what they're talking about because they've never been on SWSA. I'm guessing for those who have their first trip to WDW coming up next month, SDMT will be the same to them as SWSA was to me. Not thrilling or revolutionary, but an enjoyable moment forever tied to a memory.

What initially impressed me about WDW was that it wasn't just coasters and what not. I had very low and few expectations. All the theaters and such surprised me. It was more about the variety of experiences and the detail and sheer number of things to do vs. being so impressed by whether one attraction "fit" next to another or whether Donald Duck belonged in Mexico.

I also remember being a little surprised and disappointed, after walking through Mexico and Norway, that the rest of the countries didn't each have an attraction to "ride," and I thought the movies were lame cop-outs and/or advertisements instead of rides.

I guess to some people those films are my Snow White. I don't happen to care for them. I can watch that on PBS if I want to take a nap.

Back then, I also ate at Disney McDonald's (which I don't even eat anymore, ever) and couldn't afford a TS meal. So we all have our starting points and our journeys. Maybe in ten years I'll care about something I think is silly now.

So be disappointed if you are, but please don't diminish the rest of us who are going along for the ride.

 

[trainplane3]

I imagine these arguments are exactly what happen within TDO. Except no one's a high ranking executive here but are yelling at people over the internet instead of a conference room. And there's no large amounts of money in the balance.

 

[larryz]

View attachment 315006

Truth be told, I eat far more Spam than I do Boar's Head Roast Chicken Breast.

But when I'm paying for roast chicken, don't serve me Spam!

 

[larryz]

would an off-topic poll like this be considered spam?

It's not really off-topic, since the poster I'm replying to compared theme parks to lunch meat.

So, to flesh out the analogy, I don't want to go into Epcot expecting a roast chicken-quality show and wind up watching some generic canned meat kind of display*.

*Apologies to Hormel. I love Spam... I really do!

 

[disneyflush]

I imagine these arguments are exactly what happen within TDO. Except no one's a high ranking executive here but are yelling at people over the internet instead of a conference room. And there's no large amounts of money in the balance.

I imagine you were right 10 years ago. I doubt its an argument or discussion any longer.

 

[trainplane3]

I imagine you were right 10 years ago. I doubt its an argument or discussion any longer.

Well seeing as to how the Epcot spine is constantly bouncing between various directions according to @marni1971, I doubt it.

 

[disneyflush]

Well seeing as to how the Epcot spine is constantly bouncing between various directions according to @marni1971, I doubt it.

Can you expand on that? I just assumed the financial side always wins lately.

 

[trainplane3]

Can you expand on that? I just assumed the financial side always wins lately.

Apparently they're stuck between going away from traditional Epcot, blending old Epcot with new, and trying to keep old Epcot at all costs. Every so often Martin will chime in and say that they're going in direction X or Y. But it seems to change every other month. Which makes sense since there's been no progress at all with FW since they announced a overhaul was coming nearly 2 years ago.

Finance wins in the end but the need to choose a direction to go in before they can start slimming the budget on anything.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Wait... was this serious??

Oh, yes. And worth every bit of my response:

.

There are things I can say only in private lol.

 

[EvilChameleon]

The only way Frozen would look great in this show is if they have an Elsa animatronic that freezes the lagoon as she moves over it.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Someone else tried that once...

Oh, the humanity.

Ironically...I just rode past that site the other day

 

[DDLand]

Sad.

Perhaps this means Rivers of Light will stay as their one “art” show. If you’ve seen one projection castle show, you’ve seen them all. I would take time out of each trip to watch Wishes and Illuminations, but watching a best of hits from Disney movies is neither interesting or exciting to me.

I like fire and lasers! I like spectaculars! I don’t want to be huddled up with 20,000 other people watching a castle screen.

I do find World of Color delightful because of its liberal and playful use of fountains. They become a pretty neat medium to tell a story. Hopefully liberal use of fountains will be made at Epcot too, and of course pyrotechnics and lasers.

Nighttime spectaculars used to be a more visceral experience. Fire, lasers, lights, fireworks. I don’t need to see a 60 foot tall rat on projection screen.

Nighttime entertainment is getting worse.

 

[King Panda 77]

As part of the bored at home/work/anywhere brigade, I take umbrage at the Dis suggestion. If you want to talk about toxic waste, I'd rather swim in Long Island Sound.

You can't take Umbridge. She is working at the Theme parks up the road.

 

[marni1971]

the snobbery come in the fact that you are assuming that those who don't mind the changes some how like low standards or because some one who likes a particular area that equates to them not knowing "quality"

Sorry. Higher standards from the company, not what guests enjoy.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Perhaps this means Rivers of Light will stay as their one “art” show.

Actually, insider info from a previous thread said that the new show will be one part RoL.

 

[marni1971]

And I was looking for more free dialogue than seems to be happening elsewhere IMO.

Well, you certainly have that.

 

[flyerjab]

Agree. But we should also agree that "what is best" is arguably subjective and should not tell those who don't agree with what we think "is best" that they "should educate themselves."

IMO, New Fantasyland is kind of boring. It looks nice, but it's meh.

But then I ask myself: what was special about Snow White's Scary Adventures? Maybe just being a dark ride was innovative at some point, but other than that, it was about as simple as simple could be. As much as "the nostalgia factor" is an overused term, that has got to have something to do with why I'd prefer it to SDMT. But I don't tell those who prefer SDMT they are wrong or don't know what they're talking about because they've never been on SWSA. I'm guessing for those who have their first trip to WDW coming up next month, SDMT will be the same to them as SWSA was to me. Not thrilling or revolutionary, but an enjoyable moment forever tied to a memory.

What initially impressed me about WDW was that it wasn't just coasters and what not. I had very low and few expectations. All the theaters and such surprised me. It was more about the variety of experiences and the detail and sheer number of things to do vs. being so impressed by whether one attraction "fit" next to another or whether Donald Duck belonged in Mexico.

I also remember being a little surprised and disappointed, after walking through Mexico and Norway, that the rest of the countries didn't each have an attraction to "ride," and I thought the movies were lame cop-outs and/or advertisements instead of rides.

I guess to some people those films are my Snow White. I don't happen to care for them. I can watch that on PBS if I want to take a nap.

Back then, I also ate at Disney McDonald's (which I don't even eat anymore, ever) and couldn't afford a TS meal. So we all have our starting points and our journeys. Maybe in ten years I'll care about something I think is silly now.

So be disappointed if you are, but please don't diminish the rest of us who are going along for the ride.

Really like this comment as it is refreshing.

After posting here and reading other people's posts over the years, I have always known that big changes to Epcot would evoke very strong emotion to those that grew up with the original iteration. Many that post here appreciate how brave WDW leadership was at that time to create a park that was geared more to an "adult" crowd and was endowed with messages and attractions geared to more physical or metaphysical concepts (energy, communication, imagination, motion, etc.). Of course, the "adults" could then wander the paths of World Showcase, imbibe and spend some cash.

I have NO issues with opinions from others on this site. We appreciate things the way our brains are wired. Some folks admire the original intent of Epcot and want those in charge to continue to adhere to that vision. Others - many others - like to go to Epcot because they have fun going there, and could really care less about the "big picture". Some want IP there and know that it won't hurt their impression of what that park "means to them". I don't think that anyone is wrong in their own right. I think that martin's videos of original Epcot attractions are amazingly well done. But to be honest, I wouldn't like that version of the park. For me, way too many long dark rides and not enough variety for me. But that is my opinion, and I don't begrudge the opinions of other people here.

There are some here that take this too seriously though. I don't post here as much anymore because these forums make me feel like my opinion for appreciating WDW or the direction it is headed, or the food, or use of IP, etc., is idiotic. There is a lot of passive agressive posts at times (and some that are pointedly direct). And it is a shame because I have really enjoyed these forums. They are some of the best available. I guess the overt negativity I read on here finally got to me.

I will most likely love the new nighttime show at Epcot. I loved the transformation of Disney Springs. I LOVE Pandora and think it is the best land at any park right now. My wife and I had a ton of fun at TSL on our last 2 trips. But these are my feelings and my opinions that I can give without diminishing (or in some cases personally attacking) the opinions and feelings of others.

Peace out.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Sorry. Higher standards from the company, not what guests enjoy.

Yeah...that’s obvious to anyone not playing the fool (I sure do hope ...jeez)

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

You have been talking about see the same slant on forums like these for years but you only joined 2 weeks ago. With this many strong opinions how were you able to hold off on joining and posting for all those years?

Ohhhh....I know the answer to this one!!! Pick me! Pick me!

 

[RobbinsDad]

Really like this comment as it is refreshing.

After posting here and reading other people's posts over the years, I have always known that big changes to Epcot would evoke very strong emotion to those that grew up with the original iteration. Many that post here appreciate how brave WDW leadership was at that time to create a park that was geared more to an "adult" crowd and was endowed with messages and attractions geared to more physical or metaphysical concepts (energy, communication, imagination, motion, etc.). Of course, the "adults" could then wander the paths of World Showcase, imbibe and spend some cash.

I have NO issues with opinions from others on this site. We appreciate things the way our brains are wired. Some folks admire the original intent of Epcot and want those in charge to continue to adhere to that vision. Others - many others - like to go to Epcot because they have fun going there, and could really care less about the "big picture". Some want IP there and know that it won't hurt their impression of what that park "means to them". I don't think that anyone is wrong in their own right. I think that martin's videos of original Epcot attractions are amazingly well done. But to be honest, I wouldn't like that version of the park. For me, way too many long dark rides and not enough variety for me. But that is my opinion, and I don't begrudge the opinions of other people here.

There are some here that take this too seriously though. I don't post here as much anymore because these forums make me feel like my opinion for appreciating WDW or the direction it is headed, or the food, or use of IP, etc., is idiotic. There is a lot of passive agressive posts at times (and some that are pointedly direct). And it is a shame because I have really enjoyed these forums. They are some of the best available. I guess the overt negativity I read on here finally got to me.

I will most likely love the new nighttime show at Epcot. I loved the transformation of Disney Springs. I LOVE Pandora and think it is the best land at any park right now. My wife and I had a ton of fun at TSL on our last 2 trips. But these are my feelings and my opinions that I can give without diminishing (or in some cases personally attacking) the opinions and feelings of others.

Peace out.

Why is our society so afraid of critical evaluation? I think it's because we are rapidly moving toward a time when every issue is only allowed two diametrically-opposing sides with no middle-ground. We are all required to pick a side, and all criticism levied against our side is viewed as a personal attack. Trivial as it may be, the future of WDW and its individual parts is a prime example. Some posters either A) have strong feelings that all executive decisions made at the Florida parks are bad, or B) they are cornered into expressing their unwavering devotion to TWDC in order to defend their continued decisions to visit.

Everything you say here makes sense. Some of which I agree with, some of which I don't, but a reasonable person can see the critical analysis behind your opinions. In the words of Harlan Ellison, "You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant."