News Remy's Ratatouille Adventure coming to Epcot

smile

Well-Known Member
LWOM498760.jpg


ah, that beautiful steel wheel - shining as if just off the lot :happy:... least it should :cautious:
a wonderful structure in itself, still standing quite proudly approaching forty years; many of those spent having to endure the racket attached to it and gaudy who-knows-what thrown out front while still attempting to maintain dignity ;)

it's always perfectly complimented fw and, as such, as much as fw ever does/has with ws, so far - also, so far, attempts have largely included desire to use existing structures when practical, with one notable exception.

personally, i could have stood to see it horizon'd when tt took over, because after years it still reminds me of what it used to enclose and i don't particularly appreciate that considering wom was almost my spiritual animal or something :p
- like the horizons building if m:s had been wedged in... would that have been preferred?

most importantly, let's not forget the same company who built the thing is still the tenant... while their culpability in woms demise is in question, i grudgingly give them a pass for being lone survivors :cool:
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
It's themed as the Motion Pavilion. The way you're talking suggests the building is somehow finished on that side, which is simply untrue. It's finished all the way around the way it is finished when viewed from the front of the building (minus the lousy canopy that blocks much of that finish from the front).

Whether you think it fits the theming of World Showcase or not is your opinion, but like all Future World Pavilions it was designed to be seen from World Showcase, much the way there is a grand vista into World Showcase from Future World. There was never any meaningful attempt at masking FW Pavilions from WS or vice versa, so it seems unfair to single out the WOM building for its visibility. FW and WS Pavilions are not meant to share the same architectural language, but they were meant to live harmoniously in one park.

Your mileage may vary on whether that's a good idea, or successfully implemented, it seems.

Finished or not, doesn't mean someone has to like the look of it from anywhere in the park, right?
 

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
Finished or not, doesn't mean someone has to like the look of it from anywhere in the park, right?

Correct, as I stated in my post. He doesn't have to like it just because it is themed, but it doesn't have to to fit the look from World Showcase to BE themed.

Some people dislike the idea of a European Castle at the end of Main Street USA. They're welcome to feel that way, but the juxtaposition was part of the point. It does not break or lack theme.
 

sedati

Well-Known Member
So, we don't know what the finish will be, but aren't most of you just being shape-ists?
I've said it before- Circles and triangles are great, but a cube is an atrocity?

By adding a square, EPCOT would be filling out it's incomplete presentation of the basic shapes of design.

Here's some more beautiful boxy buildings:
2560px-%E5%9B%BD%E5%AE%B6%E6%B8%B8%E6%B3%B3%E4%B8%AD%E5%BF%83%E5%A4%9C%E6%99%AF.jpg

d17887cb4d49a5437c2e9b47870c1966.jpg

CDragomir_MONOLIT_011.jpg


To be consistent with the style of Epcot all you apparently need is a basic shape dressed in a single material. Glass Pyramids. Alucobond Sphere, Stainless Steel Cylinder. The mistake would be theming the new Cube. To be consistent the Cube should be dressed in a simple but elegant material in a visibly pleasing pattern.
 
Last edited:

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Theme is not the application of “stuff” onto a surface. Nor is it certain materials such as ornamental woodwork or scenic cement plaster. Themed entertainment is a storytelling medium and like all other storytelling mediums the themes are messages that are conveyed, and in the case of themed entertainment those messages are conveyed through built space. Built space is a large set of tools and methods, from form, space and order, to scale and mass, to light and shadow, to sound, to materials, textures and tectonics and so much more. In all of these ways space is shaped to convey an idea.

Facades are just one tool and when discussed even they are often reduced in their application to the stuff on the wall. Well crafted facades have variety in their forms and massing that also relates to their interiors, all of the spaces that are “on stage” are shaped and work together in a choreography of spaces to tell a story. Theme parks are a collection of these stories and spaces so they inevitably interact with each other. How these stories interact with one another should compliment each other, designed to work in harmony and not have one story ignore or disregard another.

The castle at the end of Main Street, USA is not a disregard for the story of Main Street. It is a play on typology. Main Streets were organized around an important civic structure and the castle occupies this position of importance. It is a signifier of distinction that also conforms. The scale is similar and fitting. The style is not Medieval but romantic revival of the street’s time period. Even the materials of heavy stone, while contrasting with the mostly wood construction of the street proper, is fitting of an important structure and is complimented by the brick of Main Street Station.

Cinderella Castle introduced a height factor that pushed out into other lands but one of the biggest differences in the design of lands between Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom is the verticality of their design. The lands of the Magic Kingdom reach upward in a way not seen at Disneyland, a reaching that reduces the visual impact of Cinderella Castle on their landscapes. Despite that effort there are areas with a less than stellar execution and those areas are often critized, namely the backside of Main Street, USA being visible near the Tomorrowland Terrace or the abrupt jump from Tomorrowland to Fantasyland. Design is described as practice because it is just that, practice. Their should be a building upon past work, not justify new lapses with old mistakes.

Future World eschewed the facade oriented, space making object design of Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom in favor of a design language rooted in objects in space. The story of Future World is also more abstract, not being rooted in any specific place or places. As objects in space, the pavilions take on larger forms that are part of their story but they are specific imitations of any singular object or place. This is a contrast to World Showcase, that is rooted in specific places and makes extensive use of facades. Despite this difference in approach, the two lands are part of a larger story celebrating human achievement and progress, it is the contrast of past and present in one larger narrative. The pavilions are visible from each other because they are part of that story, to be visually isolated would contradict the park’s message of togetherness.

The Transportation Pavilion and Soarin’ showbuilding may have somewhat similar material exteriors (metal) they are differ in their purpose and relationship to their context. The issue is not their materials. “Theming” is not just scenic cement plaster with applied props and ornament. Both the large polished panels of the Transportation Building and the prefabricated insulated metal panels of Soarin’ are valid materials for a themed environment, but that have to be used as part of telling a story. The metal exterior of the Transportation Pavilion was chosen as part of its expression of its story and then utilized in a manner related to its context, it’s massing is in line with the other pavilions of the park. Mexico’s pyramid is not supposed to be an dominating pyramid, it’s mass and scale is in line with the other World Showcase pavilions so it is not made more diminutive by the similar massing of the Transportation Pavilion. Soarin’s materials were chosen for utility, not to convey a message, and it then contradicts the Canada Pavilion in not just its mass, but also it’s corrugated finish that gives scale to that mass.

Michael Graves is probably the architect most identified with Postmodernism, and even when they were being developed the Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin were anticipated works. Like the Soarin’ showbuilding, the massing and scale betray those of World Showcase, and are then themselves contrasted by the large sculptures. Why this contrast ultimately exists is even more problematic. Graves conceived a narrative behind the towering forms of the Swan and Dolphin, but that narrative is in many ways a commentary of the lack of context. Graves is responding to the nothingness of the hotel site. World Showcase is not being contrasted with as part of building or intertwining different stories but because it is not worth actually considering. How the Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin relate to World Showcase is itself a highlight of Postmodernism’s fundamental theoretical flaw, learning from Las Vegas does not mean respecting Las Vegas. This lack of respect undermines the semiotic basis of Postmodernism and almost demands for it to be deconstructed.

Mass and scale are exactly what will make the north and east sides of the Ratatouille showbuilding so problematic. The size of the back wall compared to the Morocco Pavilion is already plainly visible. That contrast in mass will then be furthered by the clear demonstration that the mass is only four stories tall when stairs are added to this exterior. These stairs can be seen in the Paris showbuilding and the aerial photos show the same door openings in the girts that will support the exterior walls. Morocco’s minaret will not just be backdropped by a large surface, but also a clear visual identifier that the mass is only a four story building.
 
Last edited:

Mike S

Well-Known Member
Theme is not the application of “stuff” onto a surface. Nor is it certain materials such as ornamental woodwork or scenic cement plaster. Themed entertainment is a storytelling medium and like all other storytelling mediums the themes are messages that are conveyed, and in the case of themed entertainment those messages are conveyed through built space. Built space is a large set of tools and methods, from form, space and order, to scale and mass, to light and shadow, to sound, to materials, textures and tectonics and so much more. In all of these ways space is shaped to convey an idea.

Facades are just one tool and when discussed even they are often reduced in their application to the stuff on the wall. Well crafted facades have variety in their forms and massing that also relates to their interiors, all of the spaces that are “on stage” are shaped and work together in a choreography of spaces to tell a story. Theme parks are a collection of these stories and spaces so they inevitably interact with each other. How these stories interact with one another should compliment each other, designed to work in harmony and not have one story ignore or disregard another.

The castle at the end of Main Street, USA is not a disregard for the story of Main Street. It is a play on typology. Main Streets were organized around an important civic structure and the castle occupies this position of importance. It is a signifier of distinction that also conforms. The scale is similar and fitting. The style is not Medieval but romantic revival of the street’s time period. Even the materials of heavy stone, while contrasting with the mostly wood construction of the street proper, is fitting of an important structure and is complimented by the brick of Main Street Station.

Cinderella Castle introduced a height factor that pushed out into other lands but one of the biggest differences in the design of lands between Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom is the verticality of their design. The lands of the Magic Kingdom reach upward in a way not seen at Disneyland, a reaching that reduces the visual impact of Cinderella Castle on their landscapes. Despite that effort there are areas with a less than stellar execution and those areas are often critized, namely the backside of Main Street, USA being visible near the Tomorrowland Terrace or the abrupt jump from Tomorrowland to Fantasyland. Design is described as practice because it is just that, practice. Their should be a building upon past work, not justify new lapses with old mistakes.

Future World eschewed the facade oriented, space making object design of Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom in favor of a design language rooted in objects in space. The story of Future World is also more abstract, not being rooted in any specific place or places. As objects in space, the pavilions take on larger forms that are part of their story but they are specific imitations of any singular object or place. This is a contrast to World Showcase, that is rooted in specific places and makes extensive use of facades. Despite this difference in approach, the two lands are part of a larger story celebrating human achievement and progress, it is the contrast of past and present in one larger narrative. The pavilions are visible from each other because they are part of that story, to be visually isolated would contradict the park’s message of togetherness.

The Transportation Pavilion and Soarin’ showbuilding may have somewhat similar material exteriors (metal) they are differ in their purpose and relationship to their context. The issue is not their materials. “Theming” is not just scenic cement plaster with applied props and ornament. Both the large polished panels of the Transportation Building and the prefabricated insulated metal panels of Soarin’ are valid materials for a themed environment, but that have to be used as part of telling a story. The metal exterior of the Transportation Pavilion was chosen as part of its expression of its story and then utilized in a manner related to its context, it’s massing is in line with the other pavilions of the park. Mexico’s pyramid is not supposed to be an dominating pyramid, it’s mass and scale is in line with the other World Showcase pavilions so it is not made more diminutive by the similar massing of the Transportation Pavilion. Soarin’s materials were chosen for utility, not to convey a message, and it then contradicts the Canada Pavilion in not just its mass, but also it’s corrugated finish that gives scale to that mass.

Michael Graves is probably the architect most identified with Postmodernism, and even when they were being developed the Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin were anticipated works. Like the Soarin’ showbuilding, the massing and scale betray those of World Showcase, and are then themselves contrasted by the large sculptures. Why this contrast ultimately exists is even more problematic. Graves conceived a narrative behind the towering forms of the Swan and Dolphin, but that narrative is in many ways a commentary of the lack of context. Graves is responding to the nothingness of the hotel site. World Showcase is not being contrasted with as part of building or intertwining different stories but because it is not worth actually considering. How the Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin relate to World Showcase is itself a highlight of Postmodernism’s fundamental theoretical flaw, learning from Las Vegas does not mean respecting Las Vegas. This lack of respect undermines the semiotic basis of Postmodernism and almost demands for it to be deconstructed.

Mass and scale are exactly what will make the north and east sides of the Ratatouille showbuilding so problematic. The size of the back wall compared to the Morocco Pavilion is already plainly visible. That contrast in mass will then be furthered by the clear demonstration that the mass is only four stories tall when stairs are added to this exterior. These stairs can be seen in the Paris showbuilding and the aerial photos show the same door openings in the girts that will support the exterior walls. Morocco’s minaret will not just be backdropped by a large surface, but also a clear visual identifier that the mass is only a four story building.
Do you work in themed entertainment for a living?
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
The castle at the end of Main Street, USA is not a disregard for the story of Main Street. It is a play on typology. Main Streets were organized around an important civic structure and the castle occupies this position of importance. It is a signifier of distinction that also conforms. The scale is similar and fitting. The style is not Medieval but romantic revival of the street’s time period. Even the materials of heavy stone, while contrasting with the mostly wood construction of the street proper, is fitting of an important structure and is complimented by the brick of Main Street Station.

Cinderella Castle introduced a height factor that pushed out into other lands but one of the biggest differences in the design of lands between Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom is the verticality of their design. The lands of the Magic Kingdom reach upward in a way not seen at Disneyland, a reaching that reduces the visual impact of Cinderella Castle on their landscapes.

Thank-you for putting your thoughts on what is and isn't theming down. It was sometimes hard to fathom what you thought was appropriate theming when you would only point out what's not "theming." ;)

When you tell the story of Disneyland and the MK, you make it sound like Walt had these highly refined thematic first principles in mind and intentionally adhered to them. That's something I doubt was the case. He had great ideas for clumping attractions into loosely themed lands that existed, neighboring one another. Going through Main Street was the only clear geographic story telling device used, and then it was, bam!, Fantasyland castle... and the other lands.

In what I quoted from you above, you start out by explaining how Main Street and the Castle are really intentionally thematically playing off one another. And then I lose your train of thought about how you make that case. You say it's a play on typology: U.S. civic structure v. Romantic castle; wood v. stone... and then what? Is this a statement of democracy v. monarchy? Of temporality v. permanence?

You point out how the MK tried the same thing and failed in some specific ways. And you never really get back to the thesis that Main Street and the Castle in view of one another is an intentional application of the correct type of theming.


Walt had great ideas and great instincts. And then he put a giant Alpine mountain in the middle of it. "Theme-breaking sightlines" was something that Walt wasn't too concerned about.

However, later imagineers can draw principles from what worked and what didn't work. They abstracted the idea of immersion. And it took a long time for "complete immersion" to take hold as the pure ideal in the form of Cars Land, WWoHP, and Pandora. Up until then... that wasn't too big of a concern. It wasn't a concern much for Walt. It wasn't much of a concern for Eisner and the committee that built Epcot.

And that's not even getting to the evaluation of whether the attempt at implementing the correct type of theming was successful... or wanted. DinoRama is fully themed by the first principles of modern imagineering, but it produced a mini-land a lot of people didn't 'get', and even those who got it, didn't like it. The World of Motion is nicely circular (like a wheel!) for anyone who walks around it. Did the imagineers consider that it looks just like a box from across Showcase Lagoon? Oops. People can have the right intentions but get the implementation wrong.
 

raymusiccity

Well-Known Member
Theme is not the application of “stuff” onto a surface. Nor is it certain materials such as ornamental woodwork or scenic cement plaster. Themed entertainment is a storytelling medium and like all other storytelling mediums the themes are messages that are conveyed, and in the case of themed entertainment those messages are conveyed through built space. Built space is a large set of tools and methods, from form, space and order, to scale and mass, to light and shadow, to sound, to materials, textures and tectonics and so much more. In all of these ways space is shaped to convey an idea.

Facades are just one tool and when discussed even they are often reduced in their application to the stuff on the wall. Well crafted facades have variety in their forms and massing that also relates to their interiors, all of the spaces that are “on stage” are shaped and work together in a choreography of spaces to tell a story. Theme parks are a collection of these stories and spaces so they inevitably interact with each other. How these stories interact with one another should compliment each other, designed to work in harmony and not have one story ignore or disregard another.

The castle at the end of Main Street, USA is not a disregard for the story of Main Street. It is a play on typology. Main Streets were organized around an important civic structure and the castle occupies this position of importance. It is a signifier of distinction that also conforms. The scale is similar and fitting. The style is not Medieval but romantic revival of the street’s time period. Even the materials of heavy stone, while contrasting with the mostly wood construction of the street proper, is fitting of an important structure and is complimented by the brick of Main Street Station.

Cinderella Castle introduced a height factor that pushed out into other lands but one of the biggest differences in the design of lands between Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom is the verticality of their design. The lands of the Magic Kingdom reach upward in a way not seen at Disneyland, a reaching that reduces the visual impact of Cinderella Castle on their landscapes. Despite that effort there are areas with a less than stellar execution and those areas are often critized, namely the backside of Main Street, USA being visible near the Tomorrowland Terrace or the abrupt jump from Tomorrowland to Fantasyland. Design is described as practice because it is just that, practice. Their should be a building upon past work, not justify new lapses with old mistakes.

Future World eschewed the facade oriented, space making object design of Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom in favor of a design language rooted in objects in space. The story of Future World is also more abstract, not being rooted in any specific place or places. As objects in space, the pavilions take on larger forms that are part of their story but they are specific imitations of any singular object or place. This is a contrast to World Showcase, that is rooted in specific places and makes extensive use of facades. Despite this difference in approach, the two lands are part of a larger story celebrating human achievement and progress, it is the contrast of past and present in one larger narrative. The pavilions are visible from each other because they are part of that story, to be visually isolated would contradict the park’s message of togetherness.

The Transportation Pavilion and Soarin’ showbuilding may have somewhat similar material exteriors (metal) they are differ in their purpose and relationship to their context. The issue is not their materials. “Theming” is not just scenic cement plaster with applied props and ornament. Both the large polished panels of the Transportation Building and the prefabricated insulated metal panels of Soarin’ are valid materials for a themed environment, but that have to be used as part of telling a story. The metal exterior of the Transportation Pavilion was chosen as part of its expression of its story and then utilized in a manner related to its context, it’s massing is in line with the other pavilions of the park. Mexico’s pyramid is not supposed to be an dominating pyramid, it’s mass and scale is in line with the other World Showcase pavilions so it is not made more diminutive by the similar massing of the Transportation Pavilion. Soarin’s materials were chosen for utility, not to convey a message, and it then contradicts the Canada Pavilion in not just its mass, but also it’s corrugated finish that gives scale to that mass.

Michael Graves is probably the architect most identified with Postmodernism, and even when they were being developed the Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin were anticipated works. Like the Soarin’ showbuilding, the massing and scale betray those of World Showcase, and are then themselves contrasted by the large sculptures. Why this contrast ultimately exists is even more problematic. Graves conceived a narrative behind the towering forms of the Swan and Dolphin, but that narrative is in many ways a commentary of the lack of context. Graves is responding to the nothingness of the hotel site. World Showcase is not being contrasted with as part of building or intertwining different stories but because it is not worth actually considering. How the Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin relate to World Showcase is itself a highlight of Postmodernism’s fundamental theoretical flaw, learning from Las Vegas does not mean respecting Las Vegas. This lack of respect undermines the semiotic basis of Postmodernism and almost demands for it to be deconstructed.

Mass and scale are exactly what will make the north and east sides of the Ratatouille showbuilding so problematic. The size of the back wall compared to the Morocco Pavilion is already plainly visible. That contrast in mass will then be furthered by the clear demonstration that the mass is only four stories tall when stairs are added to this exterior. These stairs can be seen in the Paris showbuilding and the aerial photos show the same door openings in the girts that will support the exterior walls. Morocco’s minaret will not just be backdropped by a large surface, but also a clear visual identifier that the mass is only a four story building.

Instead of reading this post, I think I'll just wait for the movie !
 

Missing20K

Well-Known Member
How will this affect the force perspective of the Eiffel Tower? Am I the only one that can't see how this will work while maintaining the perspective?

Yeah I believe it will look a bit strange from the courtyard leading up to Rat. At least I'm of the opinion that it will. You will be far too close to it, practically underneath it, with nothing really in your foreground to contrast the diminutive tower to make it appear larger than it is. But no one will really care anymore, it will just be a "quaint, cute" little replica of the real thing. :(
 

Spash007

Well-Known Member
Yeah I believe it will look a bit strange from the courtyard leading up to Rat. At least I'm of the opinion that it will. You will be far too close to it, practically underneath it, with nothing really in your foreground to contrast the diminutive tower to make it appear larger than it is. But no one will really care anymore, it will just be a "quaint, cute" little replica of the real thing. :(

Since the Skyliner will also mess with the perspective, I wonder if they will move the Eiffel Tower to be further back/along the Morocco/France border. I feel like that is the prime example of forced perspective being done correctly, so it would be extremely disappointing to lose it.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
I disagree. I think it looks like a wheel from wherever you are looking at it from. But I will say that it is probably my least favorite pavilion looks wise.

It's not even about 'personal taste' though. We all have things that bother us, things that don't bother anyone else. But back to Rat, there's a lot of hand-wringing over what may or may not be themed. And seeing a small part of the building. Again, trees grow and the job isn't done. People panic. I get it, but sometimes relax and wait for the job to be done (not towards you, just in general)
 

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

Back
Top Bottom