Rock work and bad forced perspective?

[tirian]

I'm thrilled about the new lands coming to WDW.

Excited.

Enthusiastic.

Elated.

I can't wait for Star Wars; and Pandora and Toy Story should be great.

But I have to ask...Does anyone else feel like WDI is relying too much on earth tones and rock work in its new projects? New FL, Pandora, Toy Story, Star Wars, Cars Land—they're predominantly brown and tan.

While we're on the subject, am I the only person who questions WDI's command of forced perspective? From Cars Land to New FL, the scales seem "off" on these newer projects. The doll house castle above BOG is an obvious oversight, yet Prince Eric's castle and the antlers throughout Gaston's Tavern are equally skewed.

Maybe the homogenization of design is why Tony Baxter recently said he is relieved that Disney put a European creative director in charge of the Norway additions at Epcot. Baxter believes the director's personal background will maintain the pavilion's integrity instead of tooning it up. (This is all relative to the idea of shoehorning Frozen into Norway.)

Any thoughts on this?

 

[Tom]

I think the rock work in Cars Land is phenomenal. When we posted pics of ourselves on Facebook, people thought we were really in Utah/Nevada/Wherever Else.

I think the rockwork in New Fantasyland looks equally great. Yes, the Beast's castle is a screw up, but otherwise, everything looks great.

And all the themescaping is done in "earth tones" because it's meant to resemble natural wonders of the Earth. So, I'm not sure why you're concerned with everything being brown and tan. That's what those things look like in real life.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Rockwork, while technically complex, is definitely an easy means of hiding a large show building. There is no need to be concerned with scale or nightlines because it ultimately has no frames of reference to be correct. This then gets into the issue of forced perspective. Because there is so little concern with real precedents there is nothing to properly gauge the perspective. It is all based in imagery that is itself distorted to fit its medium. Main Street, USA is not based on Lady and the Tramp but actual American streets and architecture, there is a specific image being referenced and therefore a specific scale. This same basis is the case for every other land in the parks only up until the past few years. The emphasis on franchises is also an emphasis on the fake; the attitude being that since it is fake and the only references are fake, that there is no proper sense of scale to align with.

 

[ItlngrlBella]

The Beast's Castle is a hot mess but they will really be put to the test with Pandora.

 

[DSquared]

Speaking of Pandora, do we know how the islands will 'float'?

 

[ItlngrlBella]

On one of the early artwork designs it looked like it was a giant arch-like structure.

 

[kap91]

I think generally speaking they get forced perspective right. Beasts castle is an anomaly.

I do agree that imagineering is relying an awful lot on hiding show buildings with rock work instead of other previously used techniques (putting behind berm and trees, putting shop space in the front) but on the other hand it just so happens that most of the attractions they've been adding take place in the natural world. You look at something like mystic manor or The remy ride and they did use other techniques.

Also, at least in the case of the Florida parks there is a dearth of natural landscape like features in 3 of the 4 parks so in some cases it's being done intentionally. I'd like to see some more forestation hiding approaches though with smaller facades - as that always seemed a bit more magical and pretty.

There's no denying though that massive rock work is impressive as hell. And with the size and in particular height of some show buildings these days (thinking specifically of avatar) it's especially difficult to hide them in other ways.

 

[tirian]

I think the rock work in Cars Land is phenomenal. When we posted pics of ourselves on Facebook, people thought we were really in Utah/Nevada/Wherever Else.

I think the rockwork in New Fantasyland looks equally great. Yes, the Beast's castle is a screw up, but otherwise, everything looks great.

And all the themescaping is done in "earth tones" because it's meant to resemble natural wonders of the Earth. So, I'm not sure why you're concerned with everything being brown and tan. That's what those things look like in real life.

I agree the rock work looks great—Cars Land looks REAL — but I question if everything needs to be earthtones and rocks in almost every recent project. Just trying to spur conversation.

 

[Doodlyday]

I remember Beast's castle forced-perspective worked on me once. The first time I saw it, it was nighttime. I looked up at it and I thought; "How do people walk up to Be Our Guest?" Looking back on it, it was pretty funny.

 

[Tom]

I agree the rock work looks great—Cars Land looks REAL — but I question if everything needs to be earthtones and rocks in almost every recent project. Just trying to spur conversation.

I see. Well, I guess the answer is no. They can still wrap show buildings in faux architectural facades, bury them with earth, or hide them behind landscaping.

But, I predict they'd be accused of going cheap if they didn't put $50M in rockwork in front of something, because that is the most expensive way to hide a show building. If they went back to the classic (and well-done) methods of skinning a warehouse with commercial architectural facades (a la most of MK), there'd be an uproar.

As long as they integrate the faux themescaping into both the current environment of the park AND the period most appropriate to the attraction (which I feel they accomplished with flying colors with BatB and Mermaid), I'm fine with all the earth mimicking they care to do. That's as "real" as you can get.