eliza61nyc
Well-Known Member
100%
There is no IP that is ever going to make the purist happy except maybe in Magic Kingdom. The fact that it is IP from a movie and not an original idea is the real problem with folks.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Was Moana placed in the right park?
- Thread starter WondersOfLife
- Start date
There is no IP that is ever going to make the purist happy except maybe in Magic Kingdom. The fact that it is IP from a movie and not an original idea is the real problem with folks.
eliza61nyc
Well-Known Member
I think one of the disconnects is the people who care are a dying bred. I highly doubt if most of the newcomers even know about Epcot's "original" goal. It seems most are happy that their kids see familiar stuff no matter where it's placed.
LOL imo it's like old people constantly complaining about kids playing endless video games. for good or bad, video games are here to stay, no going back.
Now as you pointed out Disney is creating new Ip, Yes, Epcot was not designed for this but that does not mean it can't change, I for one don't understand the obsession for the "old" Epcot (yes I know everyone here feels it was the greatest thing walt ever did) I never experienced it so I don't have anything to compare it too. I have looked at old videos but I think it may be one of those things where you had to experience it to appreciate it
I don't think previous poster meant to dismiss it, more like as the original poster admitted her or himself, it's basically the 99,000 time we've discussed it, we can essentially have a poll for every ride because people have a complaint for just about every one.
I think we got it. movie IP in the parks is bad, Movie IP in Epcot is right up there with short-sheeting the pope.
I think many people have skipped over the part of not using IP correctly.
Like I stated in the original post... Nemo was executed very well. It could go a step further by imitating the aquarium in the sequel... And by making the ride a bit better.
Frozen Ever After was not executed very well. It replaced an attraction that was unique and fitting for Epcot while being true to the country it resides in. Frozen is just another Magic Kingdom attraction that should have gone in magic kingdom... Or just make a frozen land in HS since that is where HS is going these days.
The Lion King was well executed for its environmental film that used to be in the land.
Rat feels like a studios attraction (ironically being copied from an overseas studios park), but is not as controversial because it didn't replace anything and was essentially shoved out of site in the back corner of the park.
Beauty & the Beast sing-along is the biggest evidence of how messed up Disney is treating Epcot. Which I hope everyone can agree upon that.
Guardians just flat out doesn't work and completely ruined the aesthetic of the park on that side with a big ugly box. Guardians is one of those "at least it KIND of works" arguments...
An example of IP working to fit a park's overall purpose that is NOT in magic kingdom... Original Hollywood Studios. Never seen so much IP in my life! Great Movie Ride in and of itself had a ridiculous amount of IP! Muppets showcasing their 3D technology. Indiana Jones being used to showcase how stunt films were made. Even Rockin Roller Coaster worked to the theme of a band doing a tour in Hollywood as a big record label. If they weren't showing how films were made, they blended it in with the rest of the park such as Tower of Terror, or Star Tours queue looking like a movie set...
Animal Kingdom, for instance...... Bugs Life is a great example of using IP to present a parks message, with it explaining to guests how important bugs are in the animal world too. Joe Rhode made it possible for Avatarland to actually work in AK by showing us how nature will always take back what was once there, the possibilities of life on other planets, and the thrill of discovering new worlds. That, in and of itself, is it's own beastly kingdom.
Chester & Hester was a mistake, but if you looked at the original plans for dinoland, you'd see that the excavation sight and everything planned for that space would have given us insight on how we deal with fossils, and dinosaur in and of itself literally takes us back in time during one of the biggest natural events on earth.
...Epcot??? Frozen, plop it down. No thematic reasoning. Rat, plop it down. No thematic reasoning (other than France.) Guardians, plop it down. No thematic reasoning. Wreck it Ralph meet n greet in Imagination, plop it down. No thematic reasoning. Moana, plop it down. No thematic reasoning.
At least I can find a reason for Nemo being in Living Seas... Heck... It would make even more sense to build a new living seas in AK and just put that next to the nemo theater and have an aquatics section of the park... But alas... It's fine...
The whole meaning behind Moana's water exhibit could have easily been done with a new water exhibit outside of imagination. It was unnecessary. We have up better projects for this.
Even what COULD have happened... PLAY! Pavilion. Plop as many IPs down in world discovery inside one building as possible... No thematic sense.
At least things are starting to make sense in Hollywood Studios. As mentioned before, it's slowly migrating into an islands of adventure style park with fully immersive land. "step inside the movies" park. SLOWLY... but surely.
Epcot? A mess mess mess.
Like I stated in the original post... Nemo was executed very well. It could go a step further by imitating the aquarium in the sequel... And by making the ride a bit better.
Frozen Ever After was not executed very well. It replaced an attraction that was unique and fitting for Epcot while being true to the country it resides in. Frozen is just another Magic Kingdom attraction that should have gone in magic kingdom... Or just make a frozen land in HS since that is where HS is going these days.
The Lion King was well executed for its environmental film that used to be in the land.
Rat feels like a studios attraction (ironically being copied from an overseas studios park), but is not as controversial because it didn't replace anything and was essentially shoved out of site in the back corner of the park.
Beauty & the Beast sing-along is the biggest evidence of how messed up Disney is treating Epcot. Which I hope everyone can agree upon that.
Guardians just flat out doesn't work and completely ruined the aesthetic of the park on that side with a big ugly box. Guardians is one of those "at least it KIND of works" arguments...
An example of IP working to fit a park's overall purpose that is NOT in magic kingdom... Original Hollywood Studios. Never seen so much IP in my life! Great Movie Ride in and of itself had a ridiculous amount of IP! Muppets showcasing their 3D technology. Indiana Jones being used to showcase how stunt films were made. Even Rockin Roller Coaster worked to the theme of a band doing a tour in Hollywood as a big record label. If they weren't showing how films were made, they blended it in with the rest of the park such as Tower of Terror, or Star Tours queue looking like a movie set...
Animal Kingdom, for instance...... Bugs Life is a great example of using IP to present a parks message, with it explaining to guests how important bugs are in the animal world too. Joe Rhode made it possible for Avatarland to actually work in AK by showing us how nature will always take back what was once there, the possibilities of life on other planets, and the thrill of discovering new worlds. That, in and of itself, is it's own beastly kingdom.
Chester & Hester was a mistake, but if you looked at the original plans for dinoland, you'd see that the excavation sight and everything planned for that space would have given us insight on how we deal with fossils, and dinosaur in and of itself literally takes us back in time during one of the biggest natural events on earth.
...Epcot??? Frozen, plop it down. No thematic reasoning. Rat, plop it down. No thematic reasoning (other than France.) Guardians, plop it down. No thematic reasoning. Wreck it Ralph meet n greet in Imagination, plop it down. No thematic reasoning. Moana, plop it down. No thematic reasoning.
At least I can find a reason for Nemo being in Living Seas... Heck... It would make even more sense to build a new living seas in AK and just put that next to the nemo theater and have an aquatics section of the park... But alas... It's fine...
The whole meaning behind Moana's water exhibit could have easily been done with a new water exhibit outside of imagination. It was unnecessary. We have up better projects for this.
Even what COULD have happened... PLAY! Pavilion. Plop as many IPs down in world discovery inside one building as possible... No thematic sense.
At least things are starting to make sense in Hollywood Studios. As mentioned before, it's slowly migrating into an islands of adventure style park with fully immersive land. "step inside the movies" park. SLOWLY... but surely.
Epcot? A mess mess mess.
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
I broadly agree with many points about placement and prioritization, but I am still not swayed by any of the arguments made about why Moana doesn’t fit when Nemo, Lion King, and others do. There’s just a vague assertion that she doesn’t “feel” right to you, with a subtle implication that the princesses need to stick to their niche in the Magic Kingdom.
Why is Moana locked to one location when the other examples you gave have appeared in multiple parks? What does she lack that prevents her from effectively hosting this attraction?
Why is Moana locked to one location when the other examples you gave have appeared in multiple parks? What does she lack that prevents her from effectively hosting this attraction?
networkpro
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
How do you explain how Disneyland or Magic Kingdom makes sense in your worldview? Walt Disney himself stated that he thought Disneyland should never be completed. Times and people change... that's the only constant
The World you have entered was created by The Walt Disney Company and is dedicated to Hollywood—not a place on a map, but a state of mind that exists wherever people dream and wonder and imagine, a place where illusion and reality are fused by technological magic. We welcome you to a Hollywood that never was—and always will be
To all who come to this place of joy, hope and friendship, welcome.
Epcot is inspired by Walt Disney's creative vision. Here, human achievements are celebrated through imagination, wonders of enterprise and concepts of a future that promises new and exciting benefits for all.
May EPCOT Center entertain, inform and inspire and above all, may it instill a new sense of belief and pride in man's ability to shape a world that offers hope to people everywhere.
"Welcome to a kingdom of animals... real, ancient, and imagined: a kingdom ruled by lions, dinosaurs, and dragons; a kingdom of balance, harmony, and survival; a kingdom we enter to share in the wonder, gaze at the beauty, thrill at the drama, and learn."
“Walt Disney World is a tribute to the philosophy and life of Walter Elias Disney … and to the talents, the dedication, and the loyalty of the entire Disney organization that made Walt Disney’s dream come true. May Walt Disney World bring joy and inspiration and New Knowledge to all who come to this happy place … a Magic Kingdom where the young at heart of all ages can laugh and play and learn – together.”
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Journey of Water is certainly in the right park. Whether it is appropriate to have a Moana theme is a seperate issue and certainly less ideal, but I don’t see a better place for a walkthrough about the water cycle.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
On that note, I actually feel like Moana as a representation of Polynesia culture (and the movie was very much embracing the culture) fits better in Epcot than most Disney IPs. Obviously would be more sensible somewhere purpose designed in WS though. That being said, the ideas in the film regarding exploration and wondering kids does harken to old FW - though I don’t think JoW will be focused on that.
"El Gran Magnifico"
Mr Flibble is Very Cross.
Personally, I think it'd have been a great fit in Volcano Bay. But whadda I know?
Centauri Space Station
Well-Known Member
Yes it fits Epcot, edutainment educating the water cycle, adds nice greenery and water features to the area. Probably the most appropriate after Space 220 in the overhaul.
Centauri Space Station
Well-Known Member
Not really, the park still uses its plot devices pretty well. Other than GOTG I would say everything fits to an extent, and even guardians has some source of education it’s just that it’s for a fictional planet unlike the rest being about real world
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
This is where I would disagree with you and agree with OP to an extent. To me, Moana works because the topic and content are EPCOT-appropriate, with IP as the window dressing (again, from what we can see so far). Cosmic Rewind, Frozen Ever After, and Ratatouille, on the other hand, focus on the circumstances of the characters’ films and utilize EPCOT itself as the window dressing. Cosmic Rewind is not interested in teaching us anything or even getting us excited about the Big Bang. The entire Galaxarium and pre-show are a ruse to get us to the “fun part” of being in a Marvel film. Likewise, Frozen Ever After and Ratatouille are not interested in exploring the Norwegian and French cultures that inspire and host them. They just exist in those spaces because they happen to be geographically related.
Centauri Space Station
Well-Known Member
I was speaking of the pavilions as a whole. Norway still has the stave Church and culture found through the pavilion. France is far more than just the Rat area. Guardians is more a standalone
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
Hmmm... well my friend, I'll let you in on a secret: I wasn't even alive for "old EPCOT." And yet, I still care. The YouTuber Poseidon Entertainment, who has brought more awareness to the subjects both of IP in the parks and the de-evolution of EPCOT Center.... is (presumably, I don't know his actual age) too young to have experienced it either.
So I think you're underestimating the longevity of these issues. There will ALWAYS be people to care about this sort of thing
Another secret. "Old" EPCOT didn't exist. It's the same park. I know that seems obvious, but I say this to make sure that we all understand, change is not bad. It would be one thing if EPCOT simply chose a new direction and stuck to it. But that isn't what the park is doing. The same themes and ideas that defined EPCOT Center are still present in EPCOT today. The park simply lacks direction altogether.
So. The question isn't, is change good. Change is not inherently good or bad...it's neutral. The question is whether the specific changes Disney is implementing are good or bad. I would argue, it's a mixed bag. The parks have more quality attractions now than they did 10 years ago. That's a good thing. However, it has come at the cost of certain creative elements and themes...which IS bad... quality does matter. I want Disney to be more than just an amusement park. I want it to be a true theme park, a park with underlying themes and vision guiding its design. Arguably, EPCOT isn't that anymore, and that's why people don't just still care, but I'd argue that (because of the internet, sites like this, YouTube, etc.) they care more now than ever before. And always will.
Brer Panther
Well-Known Member
Are you sure there isn't any space for Moana in the already Polynesian-themed Adventureland?
Tony the Tigger
Well-Known Member
Everything is where it belongs, because that’s where the Imagineers put it, and it’s their company, their jobs, their decision.
It’s so obnoxious to think message board fanboys and fangirls have thought of these things as if they weren’t discussed during the planning stages? Obviously these thematic questions were all considered and the practical applications outweighed those considerations.
If you let the perfect be the enemy of the good, you’ll end up with a lot less.
And it’s a very different experience to build a new park from the ground up than to replace one attraction at a time over 50 years. A perfectly themed substitute is tricky at best unless you replace the old thing with the same thing.
It’s so obnoxious to think message board fanboys and fangirls have thought of these things as if they weren’t discussed during the planning stages? Obviously these thematic questions were all considered and the practical applications outweighed those considerations.
If you let the perfect be the enemy of the good, you’ll end up with a lot less.
And it’s a very different experience to build a new park from the ground up than to replace one attraction at a time over 50 years. A perfectly themed substitute is tricky at best unless you replace the old thing with the same thing.
Tony the Tigger
Well-Known Member
…which demonstrates the weakness and frivolity of that POV.
Take something as boring and basic as the life cycle of water and dress it up with a character kids like and that’s…omg…edutainment!
The idea that it would be nerdier or more authentic or educational with an unnamed character is nitpicky nonsense and silly snobbery.
Boring is boring. Maybe a lot of you were ultra-nerdlings, or maybe being at WDW was enough to trick you into liking classroom vacations, but insisting kids today are as bored as you were just to stand on some imaginary principle is really unfair.
You can always stay home and watch National Geographic or Google “life cycle of water.”
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
So basically...
Multiple users on this board: *fair criticism of Disney's treatment of IP*
You: *blatant insults*
iamgroot61
Active Member
- In the Parks
- No
Without having read all of the comments on thread, and having voted "I don't care," here are my thoughts on this...
EPCOT (the Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow) has NEVER been what it was originally intended to be. I'm sure no one reading this needs to hear that, but the perspective of the OP appears to be that it once was. IMHO, EPCOT is utterly mis-named. As a theme park, it is a mish-mash of "stuff" that is largely good, but doesn't fit together. If I had my druthers, EPCOT would be called something different that is more aligned with the global "community" aspect of the international pavilions. It could be a more adult-focused park with appropriate attractions for that audience. Walt's EPCOT was virtually a lost cause from conception and what has happened with it has managed to work. There is tremendous potential for what I am suggesting. It could be argued that the Moana attraction "fits" as a Hawaiian (as yet unrepresented) cultural attraction (like Frozen). That's my .02. =]
EPCOT (the Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow) has NEVER been what it was originally intended to be. I'm sure no one reading this needs to hear that, but the perspective of the OP appears to be that it once was. IMHO, EPCOT is utterly mis-named. As a theme park, it is a mish-mash of "stuff" that is largely good, but doesn't fit together. If I had my druthers, EPCOT would be called something different that is more aligned with the global "community" aspect of the international pavilions. It could be a more adult-focused park with appropriate attractions for that audience. Walt's EPCOT was virtually a lost cause from conception and what has happened with it has managed to work. There is tremendous potential for what I am suggesting. It could be argued that the Moana attraction "fits" as a Hawaiian (as yet unrepresented) cultural attraction (like Frozen). That's my .02. =]