Soarin' and The Land changes - what is your opinion?

Are you impressed with the changes made to The Land?

  • Yes, I think the addition of Soarin' and changes to the Land are a good thing

    Votes: 197 78.8%
  • No, I would prefer to have left the Land unchanged

    Votes: 8 3.2%
  • I have no preference

    Votes: 10 4.0%
  • I agree with the addition of Soarin', but I do not like the changes to the rest of The Land

    Votes: 35 14.0%

  • Total voters
    250

SirNim

Well-Known Member
As I wrote to Grizz this morning:

I like how the decor of the atrium was not completely "superseeded" for an airport/travel agency theme. The incorporation of the element of the seasons (balloons, seating "pods," food court) I think is a good attempt at the recreation of a coherent theme. It's bright and airy. The "forest" they built down there is kind of odd too. But it really did, at first, strike me as being very reminiscent of vintage EPCOT for some reason.

Of course, about "progression" of story, etc. I think it took a bit of a hit with the addition of Soarin' and with the subsequent decor/theme changes. All I can really say is that the essence of The Land, based on the photos, was slightly diluted. There's still substance, but just proportionally less.

I really can't remark further until I see it in person May 10th or 11th.

That's what I think... ;)
 

Wckd Queen

New Member
Epcot82Guy said:
I think that was kind of my point. Today's audience doesn't go for what Epcot envisioned. Therefore, it had to change. However, to completely abandon the original concept WHEN IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE may be a step too far.
I think you just contradicted yourself.

If audiences were not going for the original concept of Epcot, and therefore changes had to be made, then why would they retain the original concept that wasn't working with the audience in the first place? That would defeat the purpose of trying to fix what was wrong, wouldn't it?
 

MicBat

Well-Known Member
I'm not going to make any judgements until I'm down there to see it in person next month. But... Looking at pictures, I'd say they did an amazing job in updating the land. They fixed a lot of problematic areas and gave the building the breath of life it has needed for a long time now. Theming the building to keep with the times and welcome in soarin all while keeping the main idea the imagineers originally went for was a tough job. But they did it well.

As for Soarin' fitting in with the Land, I think it fits MUCH better than Food Rocks or Kitchen Kabaret ever did! According to what is being said here (I personally never gained this interpretation, but I'll take your word for it), Soarin' fits perfectly with the Land's theme of "symbiosis" and "living in togetherness with the earth" theme. Soarin' shows guests parts of the earth and it's natural wonders while Food Rocks dealt with nutrition.
 

General Grizz

New Member
Buzzy989 said:
You're exactly right! Not everyone felt that the old Land featured the best design possible, and, after ten years of that design, I was ready for some fresh changes, too. There are a lot of great things that are coming with the new pavilion, and I think that The Land still has a promising future - - and most of you have expressed this view quite well.

What I've tried to do is point out some key, meaningful elements of the traditional pavilion that have been lost. This does not mean that the new pavilion is inherently bad - - I'm sure that the Imagineers referred back to the threads of symbiosis as they redesigned the pavilion. Many of us have found some significant, interesting elements in the new pavilion. But many of us, also, have enjoyed some elements of the old pavilion that will be missing from the new one. Elements that have always defined the Land experience for many Epcot fans.

What I mean by "Food Fair" is that sense of earthy celebration and joy, which the food court used to show in its spirit and decor, yet no longer does. I encourage you to read through the original posts on The Land, when we weren't sure exactly what the rehab would be like - - and you'll receive that sense of common consensus regarding the warm, vibrant, original, spirited celebration of symbiosis. I am also a writer for D-Troops, and I can say (with much gratitude) that the Imagineers may have taken some cues from Disney fans in keeping the balloons, in keeping a lot of the earthy elements of the pavilion instead of overhauling everything. Our messages have circulated around the creative teams, and they care about long-time guests and Cast Members who have come to know and understand the pavilion and its messages (since the designers of the '82 pavilion are not the same designers of the new one).

Our only concern (and I'm speaking for those who can identify with what has been lost from the pavilion) is that the spirit of life and celebration represented by the balloons is no longer a unifying factor for the pavilion. Sunshine Seasons, now, is practically carbon copy of what we may find at one of the All-Star resorts, not installed in a spirit of originality, but rather in a spirit of functionality.

Our concern is that Epcot may become too random, no longer presenting its themed pavilions with that spirit of optimistic, creative unity. Remember those old Epcot symbols? They were a way of uniting all of the pavilions, and they were featured throughout the Future World decor. The pavilions were all united in purpose, and their themes were interconnected. They spoke about "big ideas" and general ideas and industries; in essence, there was a symbiosis to the entire park.

But note that the Land symbol has been removed from the pavilion, replaced with a just a coat of white paint. Future World West (the side with The Land) has become increasingly (to borrow a word of one of our WDWMagic posters) schizophrenic. We have a pavilion defined by the human senses, a pavilion defined by the experience of Soarin' (the lower level of The Land was designed to resemble an airport terminal to match Soarin'), and a pavilion that will be defined by Finding Nemo (HINT: in the not-too-distant future, the story of The Living Seas and the hydrolators will likely be completely changed into an exploration of Nemo's habitat!).

The areas of Epcot are becoming more and more narrow and strained in their approach to their themes, and now big "disconnections" are happening among the pavilions. They just don't flow together as well, and what we see happening in The Land - - with the disjointedness between the old aspects and the new aspects - - is a small-scale representation of what's happening in the big picture.

Some members of my family recently made a visit to Epcot, and spoke with some Cast Members who we have befriended over the years. Many long-time Cast Members, who have worked at Epcot for years and have known the older incarnations of The Land, do not like the new changes. If you ask some of them, they won't even feel like talking to you about the new Land. They identify with what has been lost, with what I have been trying to point out in my posts. Several feel embarrassed about the new Sunshine Seasons restaurant and its lack of theming. Other Cast Members have reacted without such displeasure, but rather with acceptance: they see the idea of Epcot as slowly dissolving, and have accepted some recent and impending changes as a sign of what's inevitable. I (and many other fans, including those who run D-Troops) have the hope that some of these traditions may continue.

Not all of you necessarily care about this dimension of Epcot (and it is a dimension of Epcot that was purposefully crafted by its creators. For you, what I am writing must seem like propaganda - - but it's not. Each of you has wonderful, strong, important opinions - - and Disney created The Land for you. . . you are its audience. What you think and have to say is important, and Disney is interested to hear it. Many of you don't mind losing some of the traditional show aspects of The Land, and that's fine! But there are others of us who see it as a problem.

I am wanting to point out, overall, that there are many important dimensions of The Land that have been lost, and this will significantly change the experience for many of us. We're all excited about the new Land, but not all of us are excited about all of it. For many of us, it's a symptom of a wider change occurring around Epcot - - for some of us, it's a change for the better. For others of us, it's an uninspired change.

I hope this clarifies any misunderstanding. But there's one important thing: we each are concerned about The Land and it's role in Epcot's best interest. The Land has been reopened, and it's a cause for celebration! So let's continue to share our opinions with civility, and let's each enjoy whatever strikes us deepest, whatever moves our heartstrings, and whatever lifts our spirit in the great pavilion that is The Land!

Captain Buzzy

Very fair. I agree that the biggest problem is the "big picture" -- how a few of the new elements of the redesigned Land pavilion add to the general scheme of disorder. I am also not surprised to hear about these Cast Members.

There CAN be a balance of theme and budget, care and quick thrill - and that's what has always made the Disney parks so unique.
 

DarkMeasures

New Member
Epcot82Guy said:
My statement was too broad. I should have said that the business of Disney under Walt took more of an artistic approach. He did not look necessarily to bottom lines or "norms" but instead to making something that was truly special. That was his business and it worked because of quality. This is still present, but the business business side of it all is now more apparent than ever. And that is not unique to Disney. We live in an advertisement-driven, appease the masses because trends die faster than flowers in winter (to make a Land reference), world. Disney has to keep up or fold OR find a new creative way to mesh the old and new together. Finding people to do that is very difficult, and keeping them is even more difficult. Longsight is a DANGEROUS game in today's business world without spreadsheets and figures. So, in short, I stand corrected that I should have said artistically minded, not pure "artist."

May I remind you that both Eisner and Iger both see company as artistically minded and storytellers. And also, staying on the "What would Walt Do?" agenda is probably the most dangerous thing that can be done. Look at Ron Miller. A man who almost destroying Disney running on that idea. Funny thing too, the man who made Epcot what is was almost destroyed Disney. Doesn't that say something about the old design of Epcot?

Epcot82Guy said:
Anyway, I appologize for the thread drift here. Something I have been thinking about that would be a simple fix. I really think the "problem" people are having with the lower floor/atrium is the content moreso than material. It is the fact that the modern, sleek things are just pretty, modern, sleek things. What if plants were added in, be them real or artistic? I could actually see metal sculptures attached along the edge of each seating area that represent plants/trees in each season (i.e. ones somewhat withered with "frost"; opened for summer; buds in winter; colors in fall)? What if planters were suspended on modern art "branches" off the "trunks"? It seems like this could be a VERY fast and inexpensive addition that would make a dramatic change and tie in with the whole synthesis theme?

Because that would ruin the art. Same way Spaceship Earth was ruined. Same way say the Mona Lisa would be ruined if you changed something in that picture because you did not like it.

But on a note. A person was comparing the old and new pics of The Land. I happened to like the new pics much more. And to that note. Farming is over-themed to the old Land. I mean there was the restaurant, the fast food area, a gift shop, and a boat ride all themed to farming. If anything, I would not call that symbiosis. If anything, farming has destroyed the natural beauty of the land and something needs to be done to make it where farm fields take up less land than before so more land can lead to its natural beauty. (about cities, I expect the one invention that will solve that problem to come within 250 years. Read 3001 for a good idea on what I am talking about)

But now, the attraction remaining themed to farming is "Living with the Land". Now this attraction is the true heart of everything Epcot is about (and wasn't even ment to be as grand as it is now). But unlike the other farm theming, Living with the Land showcased not only the symbiosis everybody is talking about but about the future problems of farming and solutions to solve these problems. (funny though because not much has changed and yet this attraction is still the most up-to-date and long lasting attraction.

Now, the current food area. Well not showing as much ... well actually shows more nature. I wouldn't consider a farm nature. In fact, the serving areas may be bare and such but these trees and carpet are themed more to nature and fit in more to the Land than a fountain would or umbrellas. (I know there was heavy meaning but come on, who is going to try to interpret something so hidden in the condition of being in the theme park. It is best to actually keeps things more straitforward and simple just so the meaining isn't lost in the few minutes the guest is in that area).

But those trees. They showcase modern steel and design intermingling with nature. Basically what I have been wanting out of the Land since I was a little kid. The future does not lay in concrete buildings or barren techno-cities with no vegetation (Blade Runner). What actually is in the future is Nature and the Land. The Land does not showcase to the bond Technology will have with Nature.

Eventually, it will be more than just factories and skyscrapers with grass and tree laden roofs. Soon, hundreds of buildings will be made with Eco-friendly roofing. Parking lots have started a change too. City planners and other people are designing parking lots designed to allow rainwater and other materials to be able to reach the soil. New light technology also allows sunlight to filter through to office buildings where Fluerescent lighting would normally be at. Water recycling has allowed many desert communities to be thriving with recreational lakes and other such items and that recycled water is even safe enough to drink again. Fuel Cells in cars allow zero-emmission technology and the same technology has already put its foot in the door of producing mass power in power plants.

There are many more technologies that will make this modern look blend in more with nature than a county fair look does and in the end, the new look will represent symbiosis better than the county fair look. (there are better ways to represent but allow the new technology to mature, then wait for it to show up in the Land).
 

General Grizz

New Member
DarkMeasures said:
But on a note. A person was comparing the old and new pics of The Land. I happened to like the new pics much more. And to that note.

I will say that I DEFINITELY enjoy the new roof color scheme more (blue/yellow), and the balloons are much more vibrant and interesting to look at.

Sames goes for the exterior. These factors are better-than-ever.

DarkMeasures said:
Now, the current food area. Well not showing as much ... well actually shows more nature. I wouldn't consider a farm nature. In fact, the serving areas may be bare and such but these trees and carpet are themed more to nature and fit in more to the Land than a fountain would or umbrellas. (I know there was heavy meaning but come on, who is going to try to interpret something so hidden in the condition of being in the theme park. It is best to actually keeps things more straitforward and simple just so the meaining isn't lost in the few minutes the guest is in that area).

I don't think people have so much concern over the seating area, but rather over the design and lesser emphasis on theming and story of the actual Seasons area itself.
 

DarkMeasures

New Member
General Grizz said:
I don't think people have so much concern over the seating area, but rather over the design and lesser emphasis on theming and story of the actual Seasons area itself.


Well the question is, where will guests spend more time at? In line or eating at a table?
 

General Grizz

New Member
DarkMeasures said:
Well the question is, where will guests spend more time at? In line or eating at a table?
No matter what, guests will be in this area. But the issue of timing has never come into my mind...

My point of view: looking at a story that has delighted guests for years and seeing how Disney is changing that story over the years. Efficiency and improved food are definitely major goals that will be accomplished (great news!), but if we look at our Keys to the Kingdom, show is a definite factor that should always be considered:

(In importance):

1. Safety
2. Courtesy
3. Show
4. Efficiency

When all of these factors are put into play in improving an area, then we get great progress on all levels.

Give the people everything you can give them. . . I think they're convinced and I think they'll hang on ... if ... as you say ... well, after Disney! - Walt Disney
 

Lee

Adventurer
speck76 said:
Buzzy....you do realize the Epcot is a Theme Park.....and for 99.999999% of the visitors to Epcot, it is ONLY a theme park.


It is not about the message.

It is not about the spirit.

It is about spending $60 and being entertained.

Thank you, Speck. My sentiments exactly.
:wave:
 

wdwmagic

Administrator
Moderator
Premium Member
Original Poster
MicBat said:
As for Soarin' fitting in with the Land, I think it fits MUCH better than Food Rocks or Kitchen Kabaret ever did! .

The fans of the previous Land like to skip over the parts that didnt work. Much like the way I see people talking about exposed lighting and speaker systems as if this has never happened before. Spaceship Earth has speakers and fixtures visible all over the place, yet that attraction isn't criticised for such things. It's almost like for some people there are rules for some attractions and rules for another, and anything new is viewed harshly, regardless of how well it is done.
 

Epcot82Guy

Well-Known Member
wdwmagic said:
The fans of the previous Land like to skip over the parts that didnt work. Much like the way I see people talking about exposed lighting and speaker systems as if this has never happened before. Spaceship Earth has speakers and fixtures visible all over the place, yet that attraction isn't criticised for such things. It's almost like for some people there are rules for some attractions and rules for another, and anything new is viewed harshly, regardless of how well it is done.

I would just like to go on record as saying the exposed lights on SSE are VERY bad show IMHO. If they rehab it and they leave this alone, I think that is a big opportunity missed. However, again, 99% of people will not notice this, so it should not be done if it means sacrificing the budget on a new show element.

Also, going back to some posts in regards to my original comment. First, I don't think I contradicted myself because the problems with EPCOT came in acceptance more so than design. EPCOT Center certainly gave the message it intended to, but people didn't respond well to it. It was boring, especially after the novelty began to wear off. Therefore, it needed to be changed very quickly. However, this has become the complete overhaul of the place which I think might be too much (for example. I would challenge anyone here to logically argue that the money put into JII versions 2.0 and 3.0 would not have been MUCH better spent renovating and restoring the ride ala Small World even if a new building or area needed to be made for the Image Works).

Second, my comments have been meant to compare the Land before and the Land now. it is what the Land is now. I completely agree that everything they changed needed to be changed. The pavilion before worked, but certainly no better than it does now, and it lacked the visual excitement the new scheme and decor has. However, it is STILL missing that connection in a small way.

I am an EPCOT purist in every way. I love having to go through an attraction, pavilion, etc. and have to look at every detail to find stories that may or may not have been intentional. It's intellectually challenging, and that is great entertainment for me. Apparently, that is not true for the vast majority of the public, and I can accept that. You can have the most beautiful pieces of art, but you can't run a gallery if they don't sell. However, unlike a painting, these "pieces" can be redone. When they are and IMPROVED, it works great. You will rarely see me on here complaining about Toad, Horizons, and Dreamflight with anything but an "I miss these attractions" attitude because the business move was right. People didn't respond well to them, and they were replaced with much more popular attractions that serve a different audience. When, however, they close something or MISS an opportunity to make it better than before, that is when I have a problem. This is not a major problem in that category. The pavilion looks great. I just would have liked to have seen a few more details that soften the transition. That's pretty good compared with what they could have done or, more importantly, NOT done. I will miss the old Land out of nostalgia, but this is a welcome newcomer. It just didn't get the 100% mark, but neither did the old one (hence the reason it went away).

OK. I've said my peace now. Sorry for all the long posts. I think we can all agree that the pavilion is a great success compared with some of the recent changes, especially the one next door. We did not lose a beloved place for a shortened version very on the cheap. This is definite progress with only minor issues to address, IMHO.
 

wannab@dis

Well-Known Member
wdwmagic said:
I think the point you may be missing, is that these "fixes" are not thought neccessary by the vast majority of people. 80% of the people in this limited poll are pleased with the new look land, and do not want to see it thrown back to parts of the previous pavilion.

As said before, design is a subjective thing, and it seems that you do not like the current design trend of WDI. The fact that you do not like the design, does not mean that it should be "fixed" to the way you would like.

One point about your poll. More than likely, close to 100% of the people taking your poll are Disney Enthusiests. If 80% of us like the looks of the new pavilion, think how much higher that percentage would be if the same question was asked to a "normal" tourist.

I'm sorry, but most of the posts that talk about the symbiosis or horizons or (you name whatever the troops are upset about) is lost on the masses of visitors to the world. I'm all for keeping WDI on task of building a better and brighter future. I understand the dissapointment over SGE. However, you can't fight every detail because in the end, you will only lose and look bad doing so.
 

DarkMeasures

New Member
wdwmagic said:
The fans of the previous Land like to skip over the parts that didnt work. Much like the way I see people talking about exposed lighting and speaker systems as if this has never happened before. Spaceship Earth has speakers and fixtures visible all over the place, yet that attraction isn't criticised for such things. It's almost like for some people there are rules for some attractions and rules for another, and anything new is viewed harshly, regardless of how well it is done.


I have been making this point for a very long time now. I am glad other people are now making it. I tend to look up a lot on Spaceship Earth.... I definitly think the old Epcot buildings have much worse bad show elements than the new buildings.
 

CTXRover

Well-Known Member
wannab@dis said:
One point about your poll. More than likely, close to 100% of the people taking your poll are Disney Enthusiests. If 80% of us like the looks of the new pavilion, think how much higher that percentage would be if the same question was asked to a "normal" tourist.

I'm sorry, but most of the posts that talk about the symbiosis or horizons or (you name whatever the troops are upset about) is lost on the masses of visitors to the world. I'm all for keeping WDI on task of building a better and brighter future.

Very well said. The Disney fans here, especially the APs and DVC members who have actually SEEN the pavilion in person, are some of the most hard to please folks when it comes to new attractions, shows, rehabs, you name it. Even though not everybody polled in this thread has probably seen it in person yet, the fact that a solid majority here seem to endorse and favor the new look over the old is a pretty good indicator of what the general reaction of the typical WDW guest will be.

I never once heard anybody in the Land with its former look remark how nice it looked to other family members. I overheard that several times though with the new look so far. Probably because its new, but probably just as likely because it it just looks better.

The old pavilion's "theme" was never as apparent to me as the few here have said it did. I'm not even sure if the WDI team who did the '94 rehab even worked all that out. In the end, it was dark and dreary, especially compared to the new look which so much brighter and modern. WDI deserves a lot of credit on this one. Maybe I just want eye candy and not some deep hidden message that only a few understand. Given what I've seen them do here, I know not to buy into the "sky is falling" stories in the future when there is the possibility of a pavilion rehab.
 

nicholas

New Member
Too bad there aren't causes and issues facing mankind today that are much more important and pressing than whether or not the redesign of a building in a theme park conveys the message of symbiosis. It'd be a shame to spend our energy on those sorts of things.
 

wannab@dis

Well-Known Member
CTXRover said:
The old pavilion's "theme" was never as apparent to me as the few here have said it did. I'm not even sure if the WDI team who did the '94 rehab even worked all that out. In the end, it was dark and dreary, especially compared to the new look which so much brighter and modern. WDI deserves a lot of credit on this one. Maybe I just want eye candy and not some deep hidden message that only a few understand. Given what I've seen them do here, I know not to buy into the "sky is falling" stories in the future when there is the possibility of a pavilion rehab.

So true!

It's a shame that positive aspects can't be talked about as much as the contrived negatives. The new look is a major improvement in my opinion and I believe a large percentage of visitors will really like the new look. I'm SO looking foward to seeing it and Soarin!
 

dxwwf3

Well-Known Member
CTXRover said:
Given what I've seen them do here, I know not to buy into the "sky is falling" stories in the future when there is the possibility of a pavilion rehab.

Well up until this point, Disney had given us plenty of good reasons to buy the Chicken Little theory :lol:. Let's hope that rehabs of this caliber turn out to be the rule and not the exception.

And I guess one thing I forgot to mention throughout this whole discussion is the fact that I'm so glad Disney didn't TOTALLY go for the airport terminal theme for the entire pavilion. That one really scared me, but it seems to have been tastefully done. I'll admit that with all things considered, I think Disney did a much better job on this changeover than I expected and Guest Services will definately know about it on my next visit. Just because I STILL prefer the old Land better doesn't mean I can't apprecaite and like the new look.
 

General Grizz

New Member
dxwwf3 said:
Well up until this point, Disney had given us plenty of good reasons to buy the Chicken Little theory :lol:. Let's hope that rehabs of this caliber turn out to be the rule and not the exception.

And I guess one thing I forgot to mention throughout this whole discussion is the fact that I'm so glad Disney didn't TOTALLY go for the airport terminal theme for the entire pavilion. That one really scared me, but it seems to have been tastefully done. I'll admit that with all things considered, I think Disney did a much better job on this changeover than I expected and Guest Services will definately know about it on my next visit. Just because I STILL prefer the old Land better doesn't mean I can't apprecaite and like the new look.
Very true. :)
 

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

Back
Top Bottom