-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
What changes were made to "Journey into Imagination with Figment" during its rehab?
- Thread starter disneyphilip
- Start date
Main Street USA
Well-Known Member
Look how cute the innocent OLD Figment is! Same as above, MEMORIES are rushing back!
Thanks!
Thanks!BNCordeiro
New Member
I love the version 3.0, the Journey into Imagination with Figment. Is it the original? Absolutely not...that will forever be my absolute favorite Disney attraction. But it is Figment and it's pretty darn good if not the most awesome thing I've ever seen (see version 1.0 for that).
The highlight of my most recent vacation (June 13-15 in WDW and then a Disney Cruise) was being able to ride V.3.0 a total of 6 times...twice on the 13th and 4 times, in a row, just before closing on the 15th, which just happened to be my birthday so this was the best gift Disney could have given me. After years of protesting...writing, e-mailing, calling Disney to complain...they gave me back Figment!
The highlight of my most recent vacation (June 13-15 in WDW and then a Disney Cruise) was being able to ride V.3.0 a total of 6 times...twice on the 13th and 4 times, in a row, just before closing on the 15th, which just happened to be my birthday so this was the best gift Disney could have given me. After years of protesting...writing, e-mailing, calling Disney to complain...they gave me back Figment!
DigitalDisney
New Member
Well, the area upstairs is roped off, so you can't just walk up there, which is really too bad
Well, I cannot completely stand by my statement. I don't have access to any "official" statements or documents that confirm this.
I can only tell you that I spoke to a Kodack representative last year and she speciffically told me. "Many people don't know this but Figment does not belong to Disney...he is legaly OURS and so is "Dreamfinder." She then went on to explain some legal "disagreements" that Disney and Kodak have had over the years concerning Figment. She then began to "speculate" if this was the "real" cause of him being removed in V2.0...but that part, she wasn't sure about.
Being completly stuuned, I started asking around. I found two Disney castmembers that confirmed what the Kodak Rep told me. ( One in the Instatute and one over at Test Track. )
These three people is all I have to go by.
Can anyone else add this this?
CT : - )
MGM WDWFan
New Member
Man, it's really tough to watch a thread like this develop over the course of 4 or 5 pages of posts. I don't know why nobody has mentioned this, but the simple fact is that as long as HISTA remains really popular, people aren't even going to know that JII exists. The mass majority of people that visit WDW and Epcot especially are not aficionados like most of the people in these forums. The common visitor needs to use a map to get around Future World; any one of us could probably draw a map of Future World. Also, people are inexorably attracted to big crowds, and those form in front of HISTA. Image Works has now even become a point of reasonable interest with the common person. The sad fact is that nobody goes to JII because nobody knows it's there. And Disney doesn't funnel money into the attraction because nobody goes to it. It's a cycle. And it's not going to stop until some Imagineer decides to take a risk.
Thanks to Grizz for the pics--they're a delight to see again.
And Eric Idle is funny.
--MGM
Thanks to Grizz for the pics--they're a delight to see again.
And Eric Idle is funny.
--MGM
MKingdom25
New Member
From listening to people's comments on here, I think what causes people's ideas on this (good/bad) are part nostalgia and part quality.
I don't have a opinion on JII but I think in general, it can be a little bit of both.
But hey I will be going to WDW either way! :lol:
BNCordeiro
New Member
When I took a tour of the parks, I believe it was the Undiscovered Futureworld tour, I was told that while Disney created & owns Figment and the Dreamfinder it is in the contract with Kodak that the sponsor gets to decide how, and if, Figment & Dreamfinder are used.
I'm doing some "Tony Baxter" investigation on the web right now. It seems that he is the "creator" of Figment and Dreamfinder.
I'm trying to find the answer to all these legal ownership issues of Figment.
Does anyone know that Dreamfinders flying machine from the original ride is bolted to the wall inside the "Mouse Gear" store?
I never noticed this!!
CT : - )
I'm trying to find the answer to all these legal ownership issues of Figment.
Does anyone know that Dreamfinders flying machine from the original ride is bolted to the wall inside the "Mouse Gear" store?
I never noticed this!!
CT : - )
General Grizz
New Member
My hunch is 5. I have seen this in SEVERAL diagrams, and mathematically, it's one of the only ways I can see the cars in synch constantly.
The MouseGear Dreamfinder prop seems WAY too small to be one of the originals.
"Excuse me, but your FIGMENT is eating my roses!"
The MouseGear Dreamfinder prop seems WAY too small to be one of the originals.
"Excuse me, but your FIGMENT is eating my roses!"
General Grizz
New Member
Originally posted by MicBat
Maybe it just looks small b/c it's so high up there.
It REALLY looks small. Remember, that blimp was MASSIVE. Plus, a lot of parts are in different "shapes" shall we say...
BNCordeiro
New Member
I did a quick search for Tony Baxter, Senior Vice President of Concept Development for Walt Disney Imagineering, and it appears that Figment would be a product of Walt Disney Imagineering.
Check out this 1995 interview with Mr. Baxter http://pizarro.net/didier/_private/interviu/baxter.html
The artistic creation seems entirely Disney. There is no mention of any involvement or ownership by Kodak although that doesn't necessarily mean that there is not a contractual reason.
Another web interview, dated to August 1998 with Disney Imagineer Bruce Gordon, says the following:
"Bruce Gordon says, 'I showed up about six months after Figment was created. Tony Baxter and Steve Kirk get the credit.'"
(http://game.emuck.com:3000/emuck/archive/nickeltour)
A much more recent article discussing Version 3.0 giving credit to Tony Baxter, mentioning JII as the "Kodak Pavillion ride" is http://www.orlandoweekly.com/news/eyedrive/archive.asp?eye=3119
Evidently Tony Baxter was also immortalized in the original version according to http://www.intercot.com/edc/Imagination/jiiscript1.html
"Figment is holding three blocks with letters on them. The letters spell "CAT" and a shadow of a cat is reflected on the full moon behind Figment. Figment then turns the "C" block over revealing a "B" which then spells "BAT." The shadow of the cat changes to the shadow of a bat. Laying around him are several other letter blocks including three set together to spell "WED" - referring to Walter Elias Disney and WED Enterprises, Walt Disney Imagineering's name when the ride was constructed, and "TB" for Imagineer Tony Baxter."
Speaking of Steve Kirk, "Figment was originally drawn by Steve Kirk and his look was developed by the ultra-cool X. Atencio" This was found at http://www.michaelcrawford.com/disney/epcot/jii_trivia.htm
Similarly, "Steve Kirk did the initial rough drawing of Figment and X. Atencio made it lovable "in a way that kids could relate to."
(http://www.intercot.com/edc/Imagination/jfacts.html)
Okay, sorry for the glut of info...I hope some of it was useful.
Check out this 1995 interview with Mr. Baxter http://pizarro.net/didier/_private/interviu/baxter.html
The artistic creation seems entirely Disney. There is no mention of any involvement or ownership by Kodak although that doesn't necessarily mean that there is not a contractual reason.
Another web interview, dated to August 1998 with Disney Imagineer Bruce Gordon, says the following:
"Bruce Gordon says, 'I showed up about six months after Figment was created. Tony Baxter and Steve Kirk get the credit.'"
(http://game.emuck.com:3000/emuck/archive/nickeltour)
A much more recent article discussing Version 3.0 giving credit to Tony Baxter, mentioning JII as the "Kodak Pavillion ride" is http://www.orlandoweekly.com/news/eyedrive/archive.asp?eye=3119
Evidently Tony Baxter was also immortalized in the original version according to http://www.intercot.com/edc/Imagination/jiiscript1.html
"Figment is holding three blocks with letters on them. The letters spell "CAT" and a shadow of a cat is reflected on the full moon behind Figment. Figment then turns the "C" block over revealing a "B" which then spells "BAT." The shadow of the cat changes to the shadow of a bat. Laying around him are several other letter blocks including three set together to spell "WED" - referring to Walter Elias Disney and WED Enterprises, Walt Disney Imagineering's name when the ride was constructed, and "TB" for Imagineer Tony Baxter."
Speaking of Steve Kirk, "Figment was originally drawn by Steve Kirk and his look was developed by the ultra-cool X. Atencio" This was found at http://www.michaelcrawford.com/disney/epcot/jii_trivia.htm
Similarly, "Steve Kirk did the initial rough drawing of Figment and X. Atencio made it lovable "in a way that kids could relate to."
(http://www.intercot.com/edc/Imagination/jfacts.html)
Okay, sorry for the glut of info...I hope some of it was useful.
Yup, this is great stuff. I found the same info too.
So, I'm wondering what happened? Is this rumor of Figment "belonging" to KodaK completely untrue?
I don't get it. Is is just a coinsidence that three seperate people told me this on the same day?
Could it have been "sold" to Kodak at one time? Was it created for them? Is that why Kodak has the "say" as to how he will be used? Could he have been created by WDI ... AND be owned by Kodak at the same time?
Dunno, I guess that sounds pretty wierd.
Are the Tony Baxter interviews 100% of the story?
Wierd.
Ct : - )
So, I'm wondering what happened? Is this rumor of Figment "belonging" to KodaK completely untrue?
I don't get it. Is is just a coinsidence that three seperate people told me this on the same day?
Could it have been "sold" to Kodak at one time? Was it created for them? Is that why Kodak has the "say" as to how he will be used? Could he have been created by WDI ... AND be owned by Kodak at the same time?
Dunno, I guess that sounds pretty wierd.
Are the Tony Baxter interviews 100% of the story?
Wierd.
Ct : - )
Originally posted by Main Street USA
Look how cute the innocent OLD Figment is! Same as above, MEMORIES are rushing back!
As I previously stated...
THERE IS NO "OLD" FIGMENT!
It'd be nicer if you people would instead say "Figment's old personality" something like "Look at how cute and innocent Figment used to be".
Face the facts! The Figment in JII Ver. 3.0 is still the same character as in the past. He's just older and he behaves differently (due to things like different writers, different voice-casting, etc.), but his character DOES still posess cuteness and innocence...even merchandise items say so!
Also, the things Figment says/does (telling Dr. Channing that he has a wonderful imagination, doing all those creative things in the finale, etc.) at the end of the ride show off his original personality.
Besides, I also personally feel that the creative staff had to "develop" Figment's character for the updated attraction.
Even though Figgy was the "main attraction" in the original JII ride, Dreamfinder was pretty much the lead character in that version. Figment was more..."along for the ride".
Look on the bright side...he seems to be smarter in the new ride, due to the things he says throughout the ride ("It's about listening with your imagination", "Imagination is the brain's open house", etc.). Dreamfinder would've said such things, but Figment had to because Dreamfinder is MIA and Dr. Channing doesn't "get it" when it comes to imagination until the end.
If they hadn't developed Figgy's character, he probably would've ended up being dull, boring and not too entertaining...at least a number of people would've ended up deeming him as such a character.
I understand what some of you feel about the labs. However, keep in mind that the ride gets better towards the end and that the final scenes (Figment's house, the awesome Figment-infested finale, etc.) are the best and most colorful parts of the ride.
I hope that at least some of you will now have a better understanding of all this now.
BNCordeiro
New Member
Between what I remember from asking the question on a tour and some educated guesses, I think that Figment is owned by Disney but contractually Kodak gets to decide when and if he is used (ditto with the Dreamfinder) since they are the sponsors of the pavillion.
I don't exactly know if they were created "for" Kodak, but evidently Kodak has great latitude in deciding what is done. That is why it was crucial to call and write letters of protest to Kodak as it was to Disney.
I remember speaking with the "manager" from Kodak who's office is in the backside of the pavillion back in 2000 and even then she told me that they were going to fix the problem (which is what you see today) and that she thought Figment fans like myself would be pleased (which, for one...I am!)
I don't exactly know if they were created "for" Kodak, but evidently Kodak has great latitude in deciding what is done. That is why it was crucial to call and write letters of protest to Kodak as it was to Disney.
I remember speaking with the "manager" from Kodak who's office is in the backside of the pavillion back in 2000 and even then she told me that they were going to fix the problem (which is what you see today) and that she thought Figment fans like myself would be pleased (which, for one...I am!)