-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
What do you think of the EPCOT Central Spine redesign?
- Thread starter EpcotMark
- Start date
Daveeeeed
Well-Known Member
I hope so. Those things are so ugly, vacant, or outdated.
Fantasmicguy
Well-Known Member
Ive always been fond of mouse gears for some reason but I'm definitely cool with it leaving. I'm mean GEARS in future world is just kinda lame. Also I'd probably be sad if Art of Disney closes I have some pretty fond memories of that place as well harkening back to my first trip.
Prototype82
Well-Known Member
Future World used to be dazzling white with green lawns and trees. It's so cringingly paved over with 90s concrete and tarps and garish lights and paint. If the final version looks anything like this artist's rendering, we'll be blessed. Trees, lawns, scultures and miniature shops and pavilions of steel and glass look very timeless, futuristic and CLEAN. I hope the final version looks just like this rendering. It looks so bold and new. I think my favorite part of the D23 conference were the gasps coming out of people's mouths when this concept art hit the screen.
I would be shocked if the "Communicore" Buildings are totally demolished. There is a whole substructure underneath those buildings. Tunnels, kitchens, just like the Magic Kingdom tunnel system. A lot of that would have to be taken out or reconfigured. And then to move the Fountain more towards the world showcase, seriously? The expense of all that sounds preposterous.
Kman101
Well-Known Member
Exactly. But people seem to still be clinging to what they once were decades ago. I get it, but the park as it once was has been dead a long time.
And now we may get more greenery, more open space, more water features and that still doesn't make some people happy. Instead we get passive aggresssive snark about hot dog vendors and ODV carts ...
We can disagree with cosmetics, but vacancy issues have been a management decision not to expend funding or resources to put something in there. It's a similar reason why WOL remains abandoned. Management has written off these areas because they are not profitable and unless there is a large capex planned to redo these areas, they have no incentive to do anything which would increase opex. Vicious cycle compounded by Epcot getting away (willingly or unwillingly) from the sponsorship model.
Daveeeeed
Well-Known Member
It's cool to hear they have ambitious plans for the area instead of putting something in that has to be confined to space. Nothing inherently wrong with that, but something that allows for more creative freedom; ironically different than the overuse of IPs.
DisneyGentlemanV2.0
Well-Known Member
I'd say it's spineless.
gonnichi
Well-Known Member
I agree with you, My opinion is that this art is meant to show us that changes could one day happen to Epcot's spine. IMO I don't see much happening anytime soon. TDO has a lot of good ideas but rarely implements them. I see this as something like or similar to Hyperion Warf, something they want to do but they don't know if they really want to spend money on this if they don't have to. So maybe they will just wait and see if it is really needed in the future or not. I only see the spine changing drastically if attendance slips a lot because of Universal and their future offerings. I feel the innovention buildings will stay underutilized for many years to come. Just my opinion.
I do like a lot about the new redesign, can't wait to see some positive changes, I just dont see it happening anytime soon. I hope I'm wrong!
Last edited:
ThemeParkJunkee
Well-Known Member
It does seem to indicate a larger amount of smaller vendor locations, more greenspace and water features, and a lack of ginormous retail opportunities. This may, or may not be a bad thing. I like MouseGear but if the same merchandise is available in a new venue, does it matter? The store has already been relocated. Meet and Greets can have well themed other areas. Maybe even more specifically designed.
I kind of like the plan so far.
I kind of like the plan so far.
Rudyard Kipling
Member
Sorry to be lame for a second here, but I've been reading this forum for years and I still don't understand the context of the term "blue sky". Can somebody give me a history lesson or at the very least tell me where it came from? Thanks!
deWild
Well-Known Member
How has the prospect of having online shopping not been brought up before now? This is strictly my opinion, but the last I checked, Amazon and online shopping are becoming the norm. Why would Disney want to waste a chunk of space on a gift shop when the same products can be found online? I understand buying items in the moment. There's something to be said about physically holding product before purchasing it. But if the Communicore buildings are getting axed, I feel that space can be used better for something else.
Also, in regards to the two story shop that was there before the Millennium celebration: why hasn't Disney considered more buildings with 2+ stories? It would leave them with more room on the ground.
Also, in regards to the two story shop that was there before the Millennium celebration: why hasn't Disney considered more buildings with 2+ stories? It would leave them with more room on the ground.
deWild
Well-Known Member
You ever sat outside and looked up at the sky on a clear day, when there are a few clouds rolling by, and then you start to BS about life's possibilities? That's a blue sky concept.
trainplane3
Well-Known Member
Basically what @deWild said. As a pure example: the FutureWorld concept art they showed is what they are shooting for, but in reality we might only get some more trees, fountains, water features, and half of CC demo'd with the other half repainted. Might be more or less than what the art showed. Sometimes used to hype up the crowd as well.
Cmdr_Crimson
Well-Known Member
Sam Magic
Well-Known Member
I could see them renovating the innoventions buildings into sleek all glass and steel buildings to modernize them. Additionally, I do not think it is unlikely that they could try and split the buildings up into smaller ones so that they can create more green space.
I'm tempted to say it is just unfeasible to completely dismantle the buildings and their surrounding infrastructure. The only problem with keeping them 'as is' would be answering the question of what to fill the buildings with. A shop and restaurant, sure, but there would still be significant space left behind. What might have worked as filler in the 1980s and '90s will not work in our day and age.
I'm tempted to say it is just unfeasible to completely dismantle the buildings and their surrounding infrastructure. The only problem with keeping them 'as is' would be answering the question of what to fill the buildings with. A shop and restaurant, sure, but there would still be significant space left behind. What might have worked as filler in the 1980s and '90s will not work in our day and age.
Movielover
Well-Known Member
Shhhh, You're referring to something from 1982 EPCOT Center in a very slightly non loving negative impacting way...
They kill people on here for that sort of thing!