Spaceship Earth Error

[fosse76]

After visiting Disney last week, I noticed a factual error that I had noticed in my previous trip from 2006. In the scene depicting Michelangelo painting the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, it shows him lying on his back on the scaffold and painting. However, historical records show, and the artists own statements prove, that he was standing while painting the ceiling. Has anyone else noticed, and how could Disney have overlooked this error?:veryconfu

 

[GameCocks11]

you are being too critical

 

[jt04]

After visiting Disney last week, I noticed a factual error that I had noticed in my previous trip from 2006. In the scene depicting Michelangelo painting the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, it shows him lying on his back on the scaffold and painting. However, historical records show, and the artists own statements prove, that he was standing while painting the ceiling. Has anyone else noticed, and how could Disney have overlooked this error?:veryconfu

 

[Phonedave]

you are being too critical

I don't think so. I think he has a valid point. They just re-did the whole attraction. It would have been the opportune point to show it correctly.

Nobody is comdemming SSE or stating it ruins the whole experence. Just stating a simple fact, and wondering why Disney choose to overlook it.


-dave

 

[fosse76]

I brought it up for two reasons:

1) They just re-did the ride

2) This is a famous work of art done by a famous sculpturer, and his method is easily verifiable

Considering how detailed Disney seems to be when it comes to its attractions, it just seemed rather surprising that this particular scene was completely wrong. I wasn't trying to be picky.

 

[GameCocks11]

I don't think so. I think he has a valid point. They just re-did the whole attraction. It would have been the opportune point to show it correctly.

Nobody is comdemming SSE or stating it ruins the whole experence. Just stating a simple fact, and wondering why Disney choose to overlook it.


-dave

they probably choose to overlook it because it really is not that big of a deal. 99.9% of the people who ride SE do not get off the ride and say "I wish that Michelangelo had been standing not lying down." And whoever does say that, probably like the person who started this thread, is being too critical.

 

[Fun2BFree]

Lying down looks more dramatic anyhow, and if realism gave way to drama, we'd have rides like the Tower of No Terror because ghosts have been disproved by new scientific evidence. Or the tower might not even be there because such a thing never existed. :lol:

 

[joel_maxwell]

to be honest.. i could care less if the man floated in air while painting it...

1) no matter how it was painted, it is breath taking (the original, obviously)
2) i think for a show element, it is better for the rider to go under the scaffolding, which probably wouldnt translate well if he were standing off to the side "standing" (the viewer naturally wants to look up at the painting) and we all know there isnt enough room for him to be standing
3) it might be noted that he did stand while painting, but i cant imagine that he didnt at least lay down occasionally.

not too critical. just not very important.

 

[jt04]

to be honest.. i could care less if the man floated in air while painting it...

1) no matter how it was painted, it is breath taking (the original, obviously)
2) i think for a show element, it is better for the rider to go under the scaffolding, which probably wouldnt translate well if he were standing off to the side "standing" (the viewer naturally wants to look up at the painting) and we all know there isnt enough room for him to be standing
3) it might be noted that he did stand while painting, but i cant imagine that he didnt at least lay down occasionally.

not too critical. just not very important.

Exactly! Me thinks the OP just wanted to demonstrate he or she is smarter than all those Imagineers. So I say once again .

 

[joel_maxwell]

Exactly! Me thinks the OP just wanted to demonstrate he or she is smarter than all those Imagineers. So I say once again .

well, if the OP didnt mean it like that, maybe it could have been stated like this,

"It has been documented that Michaelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel while standing. I wonder why the Imagineers made him laying down. Maybe for the show scene"

or maybe your right. like i said, not that important unless we have an imagineer to explain why.

 

[jt04]

^ ^I think tradition held he was laying down but recent discoveries (very recent) have changed that. Something rings disingenuous to me in the OP. But then I do like defending Disney against it's critics.....usually.

 

[KingStefan]

By what means do we know that he always stood? Wasn't he depicted as lying down at least some of the time in "The Agony and the Ecstacy"? I believe that this is where the well known image of M. lying down comes from, is it not? I don't know. I haven't read the book, but I remember the film, and I recall him lying at some points. Does anyone know better about the book, and what is the citation indicating that he stood?

 

[Master Yoda]

well, if the OP didnt mean it like that, maybe it could have been stated like this,

"It has been documented that Michaelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel while standing. I wonder why the Imagineers made him laying down. Maybe for the show scene"

or maybe your right. like i said, not that important unless we have an imagineer to explain why.

Well I am not an Imagineer but I will play one for a moment.

"If you were to ask the average person they would tell you that Michelangelo painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel lying on his back. There has always been a certain amount of evidence that points to the fact that this is not entirely true. However, this romanticized version of Michelangelo painting on his back has been so ingrained in the public's mind that it was decided that that would be version portrayed in Space Ship Earth.

We are also fairly confident that when Rome burned that it did not smell entirely like burnt BBQ."

 

[joel_maxwell]

Well I am not an Imagineer but I will play one for a moment.

"If you were to ask the average person they would tell you that Michelangelo painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel lying on his back. There has always been a certain amount of evidence that points to the fact that this is not entirely true. However, this romanticized version of Michelangelo painting on his back has been so ingrained in the public's mind that it was decided that that would be version portrayed in Space Ship Earth.

We are also fairly confident that when Rome burned that it did not smell entirely like burnt BBQ."

nor did anyone riding past Rome while it was burning say, "dang, i love that smell."

 

[primetime52]

New discoveries in science show that we don't have any evidence for the existence of trolls. Anyone have any idea why the imagineers would be irresponsible enough to display them in the Maelstrom? How could they overlook this error :veryconfu???

 

[brkgnews]

I always thought the smellitzer smelled like imitation bacon bits.


Oh, historical evidence also shows that Michelangelo was not a robot, but we let THAT slide during the show. :ROFLOL:

I keeed. I keeed.

 

[Tink's Favorite]

I am pretty sure that when Rome burned, it smelled at least a little bit like burnt BBQ. Surely a pig or two got caught up in there. Now if there was a cole slaw smell as well...well that would just be ridiculous.

 

[jt04]

I always thought the smellitzer smelled like imitation bacon bits.


Oh, historical evidence also shows that Michelangelo was not a robot, but we let THAT slide during the show. :ROFLOL:

I keeed. I keeed.

THAT is clever :sohappy:

 

[the-reason14]

I brought it up for two reasons:

1) They just re-did the ride

2) This is a famous work of art done by a famous sculpturer, and his method is easily verifiable

Considering how detailed Disney seems to be when it comes to its attractions, it just seemed rather surprising that this particular scene was completely wrong. I wasn't trying to be picky.

Its not that big a deal, honestly. But I doubt the op wanted to be nitpicky and stuff. Let the op say what he/she wants, I could care less because to me its nothing big, but everyone is different, so speak.

 

[JustPlainBill]

I'd write it up to Artistic License, not all stories we hear are factually portrayed as they really happened, even if we knew better. As humans we like to embellish a bit for the dramatic effect. I admit, I did not question the position of the painter, painting on his back was the image I had been exposed to as a student of art as a youngster. Who can really say without exception how details occured so long ago? We may have a good idea, or supposition. This wouldn't have been on my radar screen.