JIIM HILL MEDIA VISITORS - there are several more posts on this forum for you to search through.
I highly recommend this thread as it is several months more recent: http://forums.wdwmagic.com/showthread.php?t=45884
Thanks! - The General
====================================================
As most of us know, the construction of “Soarin’ of California” is now underway in Epcot’s Land pavilion. The attraction is a breathtaking look at California, as presented in the “E-Ticket” California Adventure hit. I am pleased to see this attraction make it to Epcot so that those of us on the east coast can enjoy this brand new marvel.
However, is there a hidden danger with “Soarin’”? Although the attraction is certainly a marvel, what is the dark side? No, these “cons” (which I am about to discuss) were not thought up out of a negative brainstorm session, but rather, these ideas have rooted in my head as a gradual awakening of what really may be going on in Future World West.
Case I: Food Rocks – replaced by a Gift Shop?
Food Rocks, Epcot’s 1994 “Benefit Concert for Good Nutrition,” shut down January 3rd, 2004 – exactly ten years after the closure of its predecessor, the Kitchen Kabaret. While Food Rocks may not have been as original or Disneyesque as the 1982 hit (its final show was presented to half an audience), it was still loved by many. And the destruction of the theatre ended more than tunes of “Pita Gabriel,” “Fud Wrapper,” and “The Milk Police.” It was the nutrition theatre that was destroyed. In other words, all future hopes for a better and more creative animatronics presentation at Epcot ended.
Internet users, including me, would easily agree that a “Soarin’” attraction would be far superior to Food Rocks. However, is it Soarin’ that replaced the Kabaret Theatre? In fact, it is a gigantic gift shop that is rumored to take site where the current Food Rocks entrance is.
As described over a year ago by an inspiring Disney intellectual, “[The] Land just has everything to lose. . . including its key nutritional focus as showcased in its downstairs theatre. Messages about healthy eating, after all, need to be heard today, more than ever! But rather than "cook up" a "tasteful" show, WDI seems to be taking the easier, unspirited approach. . . .”
The writer has a point. And, with Food Rocks essentially being replaced a gift shop, this key concept that has been an Epcot tradition in the Land (an idea that can become reinvented and reinvigorated) has ended up in the trash heap. So much for “makin’ it count in the Kitchen” with a brand new family-friendly animatronics hit.
But beyond Food Rocks and beyond January 3rd. Things seem to be getting much, much worse. . .
Case II: The Sunshine Season Food Fair – No more?
Recent rumors from reliable sources have indicated that, with the coming of Soarin’, the bottom floor of the Land may be totally altered. Specifically, this refers to the possible destruction of the Sunshine Season Food Fair, a series of popular and affordable food stands (although it was originally named “Famer’s Market” until the 1994 Land rehab.)
If the bottom floor of the Land is being altered, what would it be for? The reinvention of the Land to include air? (See Case IV.) Space to accommodate Soarin’s crowds?
In any case, the loss of the Sunshine Season Food Fair (especially if the area is replaced by something of less value to the Land, would be, in addition to the removal of the theatre, detrimental to the image of Epcot and the core vision of the pavilion itself.
If we lose the Food Fair, why is Nestlé sponsoring the Land?
Case III: Does Disney Hate Peace?
As it stands, the Land is one of the most vibrant, colorful, aesthetic, and inspiring areas of Epcot. A fountain dons the center of the Sunshine Season Food Faire with climate patterns symbolized above through hot-air balloons. While guests eat, peaceful atmosphere music (based on songs about the sun and the moon).
Recently, the trend of depleting Epcot of peaceful areas has escalated to unacceptable heights. The gorgeous and serene World of Motion is now site to the zooming Test Track pavilion while Mission Space is a fast trip “out of this world.” The final “peaceful” pavilion on Future World East, Wonders of Life, is now only open seasonally.
Meanwhile, on Future World West, a futuristic and an absolutely beautiful area fills the areas in and around The Land and the Living Seas. Although this departure from the zooming sounds and colors of Future World East is calm, the area is certainly filled with families, taking advantage of this excellent spot at Epcot.
The Land is part of this area. The sereneness of Mother Nature herself has been successfully mimicked by the creativity of Walt Disney Imagineering in both 1982 and in its 1994 reinvention. Yet, it remains with excellent attendance and is extremely well-loved.
If this “last chance” of Epcot’s serenity, a serenity futuristic in its own right, is destroyed by the hustle and bustle of “Soarin’,” what can we call futuristic? Where will be Epcot’s beauty? If the Land will be advertised as home to Epcot’s latest “Thrill Ride,” with advertisements of it plastered in everywhich way around the pavilion – if the beauty and serenity of the Land will be shattered – then Epcot has certainly lost its way.
Case IV: “Story” is no longer important
Buzzy989 once wrote, “A gift from Disneyland dropped onto Future World West just can't cut it.”
Buzzy is right. The film, which is planned to be a carbon copy of the same film at Disney’s California Adventure, will send Land visitors straight through the most symbiotically-engaging area on the face of the planet: California and Disneyland.
Alright, so the film has absolutely nothing to do with symbiosis. And therefore, the Land. What does the Golden Gate Bridge have to do with Epcot’s Land pavilion? Is the argument that the “Golden Gate Bridge is on the Land” enough to match Soarin’s story to the Land pavilion?
If we explore further, Soarin’ is described as "an exhilarating airborne adventure over the diverse wonders of the Golden State. Passengers will be introduced to the inspirational stories of aviation's heroes and legends, then board a state-of-the-art flying machine. . . drops, turns, swoops and lifts for the ultimate sensation in free flight.”
That sounds like a pretty fun ride to me. Doesn’t it sound great? I might even buy myself into Disney’s California Adventure just to experience this attraction.
The issue is not the attraction – the issue is how the attraction will fit into the Land. Reread the quote in blue, and compare it to what is printed just outside of the Land pavilion – the promise of what we’re about to see inside this volcanic greenhouse structure:
"Symbiotic relationships mean creative partnerships. The earth is to be seen neither as an ecosystem to be preserved unchanged nor as a quarry to be exploited for selfish and short-range economic reasons, but as a garden to be cultivated for the development of its own potentialities of the human adventure. The goal of this relationship is not the maintenance of the status quo, but the emergence of new phenomena and new values." - René Dubos
(Dubos, by the way, was a Bacteriologist who won the Pulitzer Prize.)
Thus, is Disney willing to sacrifice the story of the Land for a new attraction, weakening Epcot, and sending it further and further away from its meaning? (In case we’ve forgotten during the past ten years, the name stands for the Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow.)
Rumor now has it that the Land will now be based on the air. Aviation. Somehow tied to the Land. Well, sure, the air is part of nature. But this isn’t the air pavilion. If Disney is wishing to explore the greatness of air, there is plenty of space between the Land and the Living Seas to expand. This is more beneficial than suffocating the Land.
It seems as though Disney has tried any excuse to bring Soarin’ to the Land and that it is willing to change even the essence of the pavilion simply to mold it to this attraction. Could this be? Does management actually care about the value of this Epcot pavilion? I wouldn’t like to think so negatively about management, but it is certainly showing that it has lost its way.
Don’t believe me? Think of Future World – first the name, and now the place. If you’re envisioning Test Track and Journey into Imagination with Figment, you’re on the right track. The park is a place of discovery. But where is the future? And the future isn’t necessarily a blast into the worlds of tomorrow (as depicted through “Horizons,” “World of Motion,” and still being expressed in “Spaceship Earth”), but rather a concern of progress and an interconnectedness we share with human determination and the will to achieve. Both Test Track and Imagination no longer fulfill these visions, and thus rumor has it that Disney is even willing to change the park’s name to “Discoveryland.” The truth is that Future World didn’t outdate itself. In fact, Mission Space still has remnants of Horizon’s “If We Can Dream it, We Can Do It!” (besides the fact that it takes place just over thirty years from now).
But because management has been willing to sacrifice the Epcot story – the Epcot name – for specific attractions, it has created a disjointed group of pavilions which now have little to do with each other thematically. Unfortunately, Soarin’ may just be another one of these disjointed attractions which add more “Discoveryland” and less inspiration.
After all, what does Soarin’ over CALIFORNIA have anything to do with Epcot’s Land pavilion?
Where is this all leading to? What is the solution? Would it be better to strengthen the Future World name or make the park more disjointed?
There is an answer.
What If. . . “Soarin’” was actually made to *fit in* to the Land’s message? The idea of looking at the world’s ecosystems overhead fits perfectly into the pavilion. As expressed by an enthusiast, "Soarin' Over, for instance, could still convey the central values of conservation and respect for the land, yet also present entire new vistas of our planet's terrain and incorporate more innovative technologies (and even a few thrilling moments).”
To further quote Buzzy989, “As a community in which the line between entertainment complex and a creative laboratory has been constantly blurred, EPCOT should host an attraction which features the same focus and technology, but with a distinct, progressive EPCOT dimension. As an experience within The Land, "Soarin'" should complement the pavilion as a whole; a replica of the Disneyland attraction, although undeniably less costly to produce, would seem awkward in a park which has thrived without "importing" attractions. All former EPCOT attractions have been uniquely tailored to enhance the park's purpose and vision. . . and I truly hope to see the EPCOT stamp on this exciting upcoming ride.”
I don’t think anyone is against Soarin’. I’m not. And in fact, there is no harm done yet. However, if Walt Disney Imagineering decides to retheme the Land to incorporate themes irrelevant (from gliding over California as simply a “gift” from Disneyland) and destroy the peacefulness and foundation of the Land, Disney will have run itself into its own hole.
Even our fourteen-year-old friend SirNim has shared in this concern: “The Land has had special aura all these many years... Will it finally be destroyed, for the sake of a cloned attraction (albeit it the wonderfully executed Soarin') ?
I hope not... yet I fear so... ”
Please, Disney. Don’t make me hate Soarin’. I was really, really looking forward to it.
I highly recommend this thread as it is several months more recent: http://forums.wdwmagic.com/showthread.php?t=45884
Thanks! - The General
====================================================
As most of us know, the construction of “Soarin’ of California” is now underway in Epcot’s Land pavilion. The attraction is a breathtaking look at California, as presented in the “E-Ticket” California Adventure hit. I am pleased to see this attraction make it to Epcot so that those of us on the east coast can enjoy this brand new marvel.
However, is there a hidden danger with “Soarin’”? Although the attraction is certainly a marvel, what is the dark side? No, these “cons” (which I am about to discuss) were not thought up out of a negative brainstorm session, but rather, these ideas have rooted in my head as a gradual awakening of what really may be going on in Future World West.
Case I: Food Rocks – replaced by a Gift Shop?
Food Rocks, Epcot’s 1994 “Benefit Concert for Good Nutrition,” shut down January 3rd, 2004 – exactly ten years after the closure of its predecessor, the Kitchen Kabaret. While Food Rocks may not have been as original or Disneyesque as the 1982 hit (its final show was presented to half an audience), it was still loved by many. And the destruction of the theatre ended more than tunes of “Pita Gabriel,” “Fud Wrapper,” and “The Milk Police.” It was the nutrition theatre that was destroyed. In other words, all future hopes for a better and more creative animatronics presentation at Epcot ended.
Internet users, including me, would easily agree that a “Soarin’” attraction would be far superior to Food Rocks. However, is it Soarin’ that replaced the Kabaret Theatre? In fact, it is a gigantic gift shop that is rumored to take site where the current Food Rocks entrance is.
As described over a year ago by an inspiring Disney intellectual, “[The] Land just has everything to lose. . . including its key nutritional focus as showcased in its downstairs theatre. Messages about healthy eating, after all, need to be heard today, more than ever! But rather than "cook up" a "tasteful" show, WDI seems to be taking the easier, unspirited approach. . . .”
The writer has a point. And, with Food Rocks essentially being replaced a gift shop, this key concept that has been an Epcot tradition in the Land (an idea that can become reinvented and reinvigorated) has ended up in the trash heap. So much for “makin’ it count in the Kitchen” with a brand new family-friendly animatronics hit.
But beyond Food Rocks and beyond January 3rd. Things seem to be getting much, much worse. . .
Case II: The Sunshine Season Food Fair – No more?
Recent rumors from reliable sources have indicated that, with the coming of Soarin’, the bottom floor of the Land may be totally altered. Specifically, this refers to the possible destruction of the Sunshine Season Food Fair, a series of popular and affordable food stands (although it was originally named “Famer’s Market” until the 1994 Land rehab.)
If the bottom floor of the Land is being altered, what would it be for? The reinvention of the Land to include air? (See Case IV.) Space to accommodate Soarin’s crowds?
In any case, the loss of the Sunshine Season Food Fair (especially if the area is replaced by something of less value to the Land, would be, in addition to the removal of the theatre, detrimental to the image of Epcot and the core vision of the pavilion itself.
If we lose the Food Fair, why is Nestlé sponsoring the Land?
Case III: Does Disney Hate Peace?
As it stands, the Land is one of the most vibrant, colorful, aesthetic, and inspiring areas of Epcot. A fountain dons the center of the Sunshine Season Food Faire with climate patterns symbolized above through hot-air balloons. While guests eat, peaceful atmosphere music (based on songs about the sun and the moon).
Recently, the trend of depleting Epcot of peaceful areas has escalated to unacceptable heights. The gorgeous and serene World of Motion is now site to the zooming Test Track pavilion while Mission Space is a fast trip “out of this world.” The final “peaceful” pavilion on Future World East, Wonders of Life, is now only open seasonally.
Meanwhile, on Future World West, a futuristic and an absolutely beautiful area fills the areas in and around The Land and the Living Seas. Although this departure from the zooming sounds and colors of Future World East is calm, the area is certainly filled with families, taking advantage of this excellent spot at Epcot.
The Land is part of this area. The sereneness of Mother Nature herself has been successfully mimicked by the creativity of Walt Disney Imagineering in both 1982 and in its 1994 reinvention. Yet, it remains with excellent attendance and is extremely well-loved.
If this “last chance” of Epcot’s serenity, a serenity futuristic in its own right, is destroyed by the hustle and bustle of “Soarin’,” what can we call futuristic? Where will be Epcot’s beauty? If the Land will be advertised as home to Epcot’s latest “Thrill Ride,” with advertisements of it plastered in everywhich way around the pavilion – if the beauty and serenity of the Land will be shattered – then Epcot has certainly lost its way.
Case IV: “Story” is no longer important
Buzzy989 once wrote, “A gift from Disneyland dropped onto Future World West just can't cut it.”
Buzzy is right. The film, which is planned to be a carbon copy of the same film at Disney’s California Adventure, will send Land visitors straight through the most symbiotically-engaging area on the face of the planet: California and Disneyland.
Alright, so the film has absolutely nothing to do with symbiosis. And therefore, the Land. What does the Golden Gate Bridge have to do with Epcot’s Land pavilion? Is the argument that the “Golden Gate Bridge is on the Land” enough to match Soarin’s story to the Land pavilion?
If we explore further, Soarin’ is described as "an exhilarating airborne adventure over the diverse wonders of the Golden State. Passengers will be introduced to the inspirational stories of aviation's heroes and legends, then board a state-of-the-art flying machine. . . drops, turns, swoops and lifts for the ultimate sensation in free flight.”
That sounds like a pretty fun ride to me. Doesn’t it sound great? I might even buy myself into Disney’s California Adventure just to experience this attraction.
The issue is not the attraction – the issue is how the attraction will fit into the Land. Reread the quote in blue, and compare it to what is printed just outside of the Land pavilion – the promise of what we’re about to see inside this volcanic greenhouse structure:
"Symbiotic relationships mean creative partnerships. The earth is to be seen neither as an ecosystem to be preserved unchanged nor as a quarry to be exploited for selfish and short-range economic reasons, but as a garden to be cultivated for the development of its own potentialities of the human adventure. The goal of this relationship is not the maintenance of the status quo, but the emergence of new phenomena and new values." - René Dubos
(Dubos, by the way, was a Bacteriologist who won the Pulitzer Prize.)
Thus, is Disney willing to sacrifice the story of the Land for a new attraction, weakening Epcot, and sending it further and further away from its meaning? (In case we’ve forgotten during the past ten years, the name stands for the Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow.)
Rumor now has it that the Land will now be based on the air. Aviation. Somehow tied to the Land. Well, sure, the air is part of nature. But this isn’t the air pavilion. If Disney is wishing to explore the greatness of air, there is plenty of space between the Land and the Living Seas to expand. This is more beneficial than suffocating the Land.
It seems as though Disney has tried any excuse to bring Soarin’ to the Land and that it is willing to change even the essence of the pavilion simply to mold it to this attraction. Could this be? Does management actually care about the value of this Epcot pavilion? I wouldn’t like to think so negatively about management, but it is certainly showing that it has lost its way.
Don’t believe me? Think of Future World – first the name, and now the place. If you’re envisioning Test Track and Journey into Imagination with Figment, you’re on the right track. The park is a place of discovery. But where is the future? And the future isn’t necessarily a blast into the worlds of tomorrow (as depicted through “Horizons,” “World of Motion,” and still being expressed in “Spaceship Earth”), but rather a concern of progress and an interconnectedness we share with human determination and the will to achieve. Both Test Track and Imagination no longer fulfill these visions, and thus rumor has it that Disney is even willing to change the park’s name to “Discoveryland.” The truth is that Future World didn’t outdate itself. In fact, Mission Space still has remnants of Horizon’s “If We Can Dream it, We Can Do It!” (besides the fact that it takes place just over thirty years from now).
But because management has been willing to sacrifice the Epcot story – the Epcot name – for specific attractions, it has created a disjointed group of pavilions which now have little to do with each other thematically. Unfortunately, Soarin’ may just be another one of these disjointed attractions which add more “Discoveryland” and less inspiration.
After all, what does Soarin’ over CALIFORNIA have anything to do with Epcot’s Land pavilion?
Where is this all leading to? What is the solution? Would it be better to strengthen the Future World name or make the park more disjointed?
There is an answer.
What If. . . “Soarin’” was actually made to *fit in* to the Land’s message? The idea of looking at the world’s ecosystems overhead fits perfectly into the pavilion. As expressed by an enthusiast, "Soarin' Over, for instance, could still convey the central values of conservation and respect for the land, yet also present entire new vistas of our planet's terrain and incorporate more innovative technologies (and even a few thrilling moments).”
To further quote Buzzy989, “As a community in which the line between entertainment complex and a creative laboratory has been constantly blurred, EPCOT should host an attraction which features the same focus and technology, but with a distinct, progressive EPCOT dimension. As an experience within The Land, "Soarin'" should complement the pavilion as a whole; a replica of the Disneyland attraction, although undeniably less costly to produce, would seem awkward in a park which has thrived without "importing" attractions. All former EPCOT attractions have been uniquely tailored to enhance the park's purpose and vision. . . and I truly hope to see the EPCOT stamp on this exciting upcoming ride.”
I don’t think anyone is against Soarin’. I’m not. And in fact, there is no harm done yet. However, if Walt Disney Imagineering decides to retheme the Land to incorporate themes irrelevant (from gliding over California as simply a “gift” from Disneyland) and destroy the peacefulness and foundation of the Land, Disney will have run itself into its own hole.
Even our fourteen-year-old friend SirNim has shared in this concern: “The Land has had special aura all these many years... Will it finally be destroyed, for the sake of a cloned attraction (albeit it the wonderfully executed Soarin') ?
I hope not... yet I fear so... ”Please, Disney. Don’t make me hate Soarin’. I was really, really looking forward to it.
