What would Walt Disney think of the present day Magic Kingdom?

[Can we go yet?]

"It's very nice, Roy. Not sure about all of these gift shops, and maybe we could build more rides quicker- so every time you came to Disney World there would sure to a whole bunch of new, exciting things, and not look at these walls. Now, to the real attraction- Epcot! Boy I am excited. Wait- what's wrong?"

 

[lazyboy97o]

To be honest, compared to the dark rides at Disneyland in His day, Walt would like The Little Mermaid.

Pirates of the Caribbean was nearing completion when Walt Disney died.

 

[Dgeek]

Yes, but all of the rest of them were basically cardboard cut outs, so seeing a ride with fully functioning audioanimatronics would be wonderful for Him.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Yes, but all of the rest of them were basically cardboard cut outs, so seeing a ride with fully functioning audioanimatronics would be wonderful for Him.

The ride is mostly static figures spinning or animated figures with very limited motion. There are many more fully functioning figures in Pirates of the Caribbean, which he saw.

 

[rob0519]

These what would Walt think threads are ridiculous. How can anyone, even for a second pretend to know what a man who built his company in the 30s, 40s and 50s would think about today's MK and what it takes to sustain such a complex corporation?

 

[EnergyKing]

Disney magic. That's how.

 

[EnergyKing]

It's not a bad ride.

It's not only bad, but redundant. There is already a Little Mermaid ride in Disney World. And that one told the same story much much better.

 

[WondersOfLife]

It's not only bad, but redundant. There is already a Little Mermaid ride in Disney World. And that one told the same story much much better.

Well I enjoy the ride... Just because you don't like it doesn't make it bad. And the other isn't a ride. It's a show.. And it still exists.

 

[Walt Disney1955]

I am wondering how Walt would react to the Splash/Thunder/Space Mountains. He had to be convinced to put the Matterhorn in Disneyland, but eventually came to love it. He just didn't want rollercoasters at his park. Space and Thunder are definitely of the rollercoaster quality. Splash not so much but you have to wonder if he'd like the coasters or not.

 

[Victor Kelly]

Walt was an innovator, as were the Imagineers. Everyone knows that Walt knew the parks would never be finished. While driving around with my wife last week I came to a realization. Walt has gotten his EPCOT. Look at the Disney property, 4 Theme parks, numerous resorts, places for non theme park entertainment, Golden Oaks, Celebration, the infrastructure of roads, power, sewer, water, bridges, gas stations. We see EPCOT now. And what we see and have now is always changing. Walt may not have liked everything, but in the long run he would approve.

 

[EnergyKing]

Well I enjoy the ride... Just because you don't like it doesn't make it bad. And the other isn't a ride. It's a show.. And it still exists.

There are rides I don't particularly enjoy but appreciate them for what they are and represent. Like Dumbo, or It's A Small World, or Enchanted Tiki Birds. Not only do I find the Mermaid ride aesthetically displeasing (although it has a nice queue area), but it's uninspired and doesn't even attempt to offer any kind of twist to the story. There are so many sources to draw upon in the Disney artistic universe, why would a 2nd Mermaid "attraction" be even necessary in the first place? I don't even know why the new Snow White coaster had to be built when they already had a classic dark ride (although I prefer the terrifying original Snow White's Adventures over its renovation). The New Fantasyland is a missed opportunity, in my opinion of course. They cancelled a classic ride to make way for a mediocre coaster using the same source material, and built an unimaginative, by-the-numbers dark ride for a Movie that already has its own ride in another park. Excuse me, "attraction." They call themselves imagineers. Why not think outside the box? What about a Sleepy Hollow coaster instead of Snow White? Or a Pinnochio themed ride. Or make something up? How about a new story? It is "fantasyland" after all, right?

(pauses to fill out an Imagineering application)

Obviously I'm not trying to convince you to hate something you enjoy. Just explaining myself.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I am wondering how Walt would react to the Splash/Thunder/Space Mountains. He had to be convinced to put the Matterhorn in Disneyland, but eventually came to love it. He just didn't want rollercoasters at his park. Space and Thunder are definitely of the rollercoaster quality. Splash not so much but you have to wonder if he'd like the coasters or not.

Space Mountain comes from a Walt-era concept for Disneyland, the Space Port.

Walt was an innovator, as were the Imagineers. Everyone knows that Walt knew the parks would never be finished. While driving around with my wife last week I came to a realization. Walt has gotten his EPCOT. Look at the Disney property, 4 Theme parks, numerous resorts, places for non theme park entertainment, Golden Oaks, Celebration, the infrastructure of roads, power, sewer, water, bridges, gas stations. We see EPCOT now. And what we see and have now is always changing. Walt may not have liked everything, but in the long run he would approve.

EPCOT was a lot more than just a bunch of stuff built around vacationing. Celebration pulled from similar ideas but has nothing to do with Disney. Golden Oak is exactly what EPCOT was against.

 

[EnergyKing]

Was Walt really against roller coasters? If he ever said that, or something close to that, I'd assume he meant ordinary carnival coasters, whereas I'd like to believe he'd be thrilled with something like Thunder Mountain.

 

[Victor Kelly]

Space Mountain comes from a Walt-era concept for Disneyland, the Space Port.


EPCOT was a lot more than just a bunch of stuff built around vacationing. Celebration pulled from similar ideas but has nothing to do with Disney. Golden Oak is exactly what EPCOT was against.

Celebration is owned by Disney, the land was shaved from the original Disney property though I believe. Golden Oaks can be argued about being in EPCOT. Logically there would have been an area such as that in EPCOT, if not originally, then in the years to come. Personally, I don't agree with the whole Golden Oaks thing, but that is just me.

EPCOTs vision has been taken from a concept city to the entire property. You just have to look past the original vision. Walt's death changed everything, to the point that the Florida Project was almost not built. Many of us have to look past the original concepts, and even the orignal stuff that started out in 1971. I know I do. Let me compare the current incarnation to a concept that is years old, the planned community. It has many of the features, the living space which are hotels, resorts, and campgrounds. The activities and shopping which would be theme parks, water parks, golfing, water sports, Disney Springs. Then we come to infrastructure and I will include fire departments, hospital (celebration), refuse, recycling, water, roads, transportation, power. You have government in Reedy Creek, and even TDO. The entire property is just like a planned community instead of a eyesore jumble that an actual town or city is.

We should also keep in mind that concepts change over time, they evolve many many times. Walt wanted a place where people could work, live and play. Granted the living is temporary, work as in all cities involves commuting, and playing, well yes it happens on Disney property by guests, locals and employees alike.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Celebration is owned by Disney, the land was shaved from the original Disney property though I believe. Golden Oaks can be argued about being in EPCOT. Logically there would have been an area such as that in EPCOT, if not originally, then in the years to come. Personally, I don't agree with the whole Golden Oaks thing, but that is just me.

EPCOTs vision has been taken from a concept city to the entire property. You just have to look past the original vision. Walt's death changed everything, to the point that the Florida Project was almost not built. Many of us have to look past the original concepts, and even the orignal stuff that started out in 1971. I know I do. Let me compare the current incarnation to a concept that is years old, the planned community. It has many of the features, the living space which are hotels, resorts, and campgrounds. The activities and shopping which would be theme parks, water parks, golfing, water sports, Disney Springs. Then we come to infrastructure and I will include fire departments, hospital (celebration), refuse, recycling, water, roads, transportation, power. You have government in Reedy Creek, and even TDO. The entire property is just like a planned community instead of a eyesore jumble that an actual town or city is.

We should also keep in mind that concepts change over time, they evolve many many times. Walt wanted a place where people could work, live and play. Granted the living is temporary, work as in all cities involves commuting, and playing, well yes it happens on Disney property by guests, locals and employees alike.

Disney's only current involvement with Celebration is rented office space.

EPCOT never would have had a Golden Oak because it was a reaction against that sort of development pattern. Having walking trails does not make a housing development into pedestrian-oriented design, and Golden Oak is most certainly not transit-oriented design.

Programmatic similarities between what is now EPCOT kills the entire concept of EPCOT, as every city is EPCOT. The hallmark of EPCOT was a very specific radial, transit-oriented urban plan that is not at all present in the urban plan of Walt Disney World.

 

[Victor Kelly]

You do realize concepts change right? Augmented, rethought, reimagined? Would never have had a Golden Oaks? Are your sure about that with all that is on the Disney property currently that was not in the original concept scheme? That radial plan was also concept. Do you know of any concept that was introduced that has never been changed? I can certainly point to the concept artwork for additional countries in World Showcase for one. Changes to Seven Dwarfs mine train as a second. Monorail service to the Disney Village as a third. The changes to and shelving of hotels around Bay Lake and Seven Seas Lagoon as fourth. The non-use of trasportation options property wide instead being pushed aside for busses as fifth. The change from POP to AoA as sixth. The change of PI to enlargement of the Market Place as sixth. There are more, but I won't go on.

The local planned community of Columbia Md may have sidewalks but they are very rarely used, yet it is a planned community. Please prove beyond reasonable doubt that Walt himself would not have allowed Golden Oaks. There are many things Walt changed his mind on over the years. Many things that he himself conceptualized and changed. Walt was in the business of making money, and if adding an upscale area to the Epcot concept made the company money he would have done it. The man was a genius, his group of managers were as well, and his imagineers were also the best.

 

[lazyboy97o]

You do realize concepts change right? Augmented, rethought, reimagined? Would never have had a Golden Oaks? Are your sure about that with all that is on the Disney property currently that was not in the original concept scheme? That radial plan was also concept. Do you know of any concept that was introduced that has never been changed? I can certainly point to the concept artwork for additional countries in World Showcase for one. Changes to Seven Dwarfs mine train as a second. Monorail service to the Disney Village as a third. The changes to and shelving of hotels around Bay Lake and Seven Seas Lagoon as fourth. The non-use of trasportation options property wide instead being pushed aside for busses as fifth. The change from POP to AoA as sixth. The change of PI to enlargement of the Market Place as sixth. There are more, but I won't go on.

The local planned community of Columbia Md may have sidewalks but they are very rarely used, yet it is a planned community. Please prove beyond reasonable doubt that Walt himself would not have allowed Golden Oaks. There are many things Walt changed his mind on over the years. Many things that he himself conceptualized and changed. Walt was in the business of making money, and if adding an upscale area to the Epcot concept made the company money he would have done it. The man was a genius, his group of managers were as well, and his imagineers were also the best.

EPCOT was not some vague, feel good concept. It was an urban plan drawn heavily from Victor Gruen's The Heart of Our Cities, itself pulling greatly from Ebenezer Howard's Garden Cities of To-Morrow. Garden Cities such as Radburn, NJ were built and they do not look like Howard's diagrams, but they are also clearly Garden Cities based on their planning. Celebration is clearly a work of New Urbanism, but it doesn't align exactly with any of Andreas Duany's diagrams. What you are suggesting is a complete ditching of the entire set of principles and organizational scheme. That is not a concept naturally evolving, but rejection and starting over.

Golden Oak is an automobile-oriented housing development based around functional zoning. It is the very sort of development pattern that was advocated in the 1960s right when Gruen and Disney were saying that development patterns were wrong and needed to be fixed with new urban centers. Being "upscale" is not the issue as plenty of very expensive places are more closely aligned with the EPCOT plan than Golden Oak. Celebration is not a cheap place to live and, moreso in its initial phases, is far closer to EPCOT by aiming for a complete urban development with mixed uses where the "pedestrian is king." A person living in EPCOT would have walked or taken transit to work, social activies, cultural activities, daily errands, etc. Walt emphatically states that those living in EPCOT must also be employed in EPCOT or the industrial park. Excluding working from home, one can live and work in Celebration and walk between the two. One cannot live and work in a Golden Oak nor can one walk or ride transit from Golden Oak to work.

 

[George]

When will they let me retire?

I think he would've moved past retire several decades ago and would have recently started thinking, "When will they let this re-animated corpse fall into that hole I've been digging in my backyard and finally pass into blissful slumber for all eternity? Like I really give a about whether or not IaSW has characters at this stage in my life."

 

[THEMEPARKPIONEER]

He would say " at least it's not as bad as Epcot"

 

[WondersOfLife]

There are rides I don't particularly enjoy but appreciate them for what they are and represent. Like Dumbo, or It's A Small World, or Enchanted Tiki Birds. Not only do I find the Mermaid ride aesthetically displeasing (although it has a nice queue area), but it's uninspired and doesn't even attempt to offer any kind of twist to the story. There are so many sources to draw upon in the Disney artistic universe, why would a 2nd Mermaid "attraction" be even necessary in the first place? I don't even know why the new Snow White coaster had to be built when they already had a classic dark ride (although I prefer the terrifying original Snow White's Adventures over its renovation). The New Fantasyland is a missed opportunity, in my opinion of course. They cancelled a classic ride to make way for a mediocre coaster using the same source material, and built an unimaginative, by-the-numbers dark ride for a Movie that already has its own ride in another park. Excuse me, "attraction." They call themselves imagineers. Why not think outside the box? What about a Sleepy Hollow coaster instead of Snow White? Or a Pinnochio themed ride. Or make something up? How about a new story? It is "fantasyland" after all, right?

(pauses to fill out an Imagineering application)

Obviously I'm not trying to convince you to hate something you enjoy. Just explaining myself.

I respect your opinion. I disagree with it, but I respect it.