would an ip free Epcot survive in this day and age ? I look at my own kids as an example, and I genuinely think they would be board out of their minds with the majority of the rides Epcot had to offer back then outside of journey into your imagination.
The real answer is no, but I know that’s hard pill to swallow. I’m a major EPCOT fan, wish more than anything that I got to experience most of the original stuff, but the truth is that we don’t get any element of the park’s core ideas and themes, even fleeting ones, without the inclusion of IP.
That’s not even necessarily all Disney’s choice. The guests actively want that. The percentage of people hungry for OLDCOT style attractions with no IP and such is far dwarfed by the percentage of people who aren’t.
But beyond that, time just caught up to EPCOT in the same way it did Tomorrowland. The future gets here eventually and it just isn’t workable to come in and redo attractions every 10 or 15 years when the world catches up to their views of tomorrow. All of the muses of tomorrow of those classic EPCOT rides have been passed.
The original ones that remain either rooted themselves mostly in the past (SSE, though it does touch on tomorrow, it is mainly a look back) or deal with ideas relevant to today (LWtL).
That combined with the demands of I’d say a solid 95-97% of the guests visiting these parks is what has changed EPCOT.
The original EPCOT was wonderful. Iconic. But no, it would not survive in 2024. In some other timeline maybe but the world we live in showed that the future EPCOT looked to just was never going to come to fruition and it would make those attractions seem very out of place these days.
It’s hard to remember now but there was a time when EPCOT was viewed as a dying place and that was right when they began this almost 25 year cycle now of tinkering with it. Had they just let it sit any longer I honestly think EPCOT would look even less like it’s original self today.
What the audiences want changed. We cannot sit here and say “it worked then” and still blindly believe it would now. It wouldn’t. The audience of 1981 and the audience of 2024 are not the same. Time changes all cultures. What the people who participate in that culture, especially pop culture, want changes.
Disney fans, and EPCOT fans in general; just have to remember that they are but a small drop of water in a large sea. Disney cannot, and should not, cater just to us. If they did, these parks would one day cease to exist because what we want is not always (in fact rarely) is not going to align with what the majority wants.
Disney parks are parks for the majority. They always have been, that was Walt’s whole point. He didn’t anticipate the parks picking up a dedicated fandom, and you know I doubt he’d be playing right to them even he became aware of one had he lived to see it.
I understand Disney Adults are attached to these places and their memories of them. That’s what makes us Disney Adults.
But we cannot be selfish, and demanding they stay as whatever they were when we were kids getting to experience them is the most selfish thing we as fans can do. We have to accept the change because, well, these parks are for other people to come in and make their own memories now. We can either choose to come along for that, or be the curmudgeons sitting around with a frown saying “well back in my day.”
I would much rather be the former than the latter.
IP based attractions are not the only problem plaguing EPCOT right now. The issue is that Disney is learning the wrong lessons from their mistakes. There are plenty of IP based additions that can and will work for EPCOT now and in the future. The problem is one of integration and quality.
To be clear, since there's always somebody that has to chime in with this comment. When I refer to IP based additions, I'm largely referring to movie based (or other non-theme park original) IP.
When you introduce anything new to an existing area you run the risk of diluting the previously established themes of that area. This has been EPCOT's problem since the mid-90s. At that point in time, the park was largely free of IP with the exception of many classic characters appearing in various Futuristic or Culturally "appropriate" costumes throughout the park.
Disney has tried on several occasions to build a non castle park without significant character representation and the masses generally reject the idea in some capacity. Like it or not, EPCOT was no different and the character additions happened rather quickly.
The first evolution of EPCOT wasn't an IP evolution. It was a modernizing of the park and a push towards thrill attractions. At the time, that was what was perceived as the weakness and that's what fueled the push for the original Test Track, Mission: SPACE and Soarin'. By all accounts, I think it's safe to say that Disney was 2 for 3 with those changes. Some may disagree, but the changes didn't fundamentally dilute the themes of the park while addressing the need for thrills.
The problems came with the non-thrill changes like Figment and Nemo. Figment saw a loose IP tie in with the accompanying show being more of the IP driven show and Nemo was flat out an overlay to an existing attraction. Nemo was the biggest theme dilution of anything, but I'd argue that Turtle Talk with Crush absolutely works as an EPCOT attraction.
Once The Seas with Nemo and Friends were added, the willingness to push IP into EPCOT was a lot easier. The mental gymnastics to explain the choices became more convoluted and the park drifted further away from it's original goals. The fundamental issue I have is how they've used the IPs.
IP usage is designed to play up familiarity, but I strongly believe the true attendance boost is nothing more than a year one marketing push. We would joke on our podcast when mentioning attraction ideas, "Did I just do a synergy"? It really seems that short sighted. The reason why EPCOT currently feels disjointed is because it is. The front part, while aesthetically more interesting than the previous iteration has no connective tissue. There is no non-linear story telling that brings it all together.
I, as well as others have been writing and complaining about this type of thing for quite some time. I really believe the issue is that current Disney leadership has learned the wrong lessons over the years about what makes an attraction great. Fortunately, there's still enough creative talent that they're still able to produce great things, but I don't believe the IP mandate has made things any more or less successful than when there was a healthy mixture of original attractions and IP based attractions.
For reference, this is what Bob Iger said shortly before the last big attraction building push at Disney World:
As we spend money at the parks on new attractions that are based on known intellectual property and brands, the likelihood of their success is greater. So when we increase Toy Story’s presence or other Pixar presence, when we put Frozen in the parks, when we grow Star Wars presence, which we will do significantly, when we do it with Princess, for instance, you’re going to see, I think, basically better bets being made that pay off, that are more likely to pay off for us than some of the bets that were made in the past. – Bob Iger,
Quarter 3, Fiscal Year 2014 Earnings Call
