MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
I wonder what Spaceship Earth with IP will look life...
I wonder what Spaceship Earth with IP will look life...
Epcot's peak attendance was when out early something original and different. It started to decline as the classic attractions were replaced/updated to be made more 'relevant' with celebrities and character IPs. Attendance has been bolstered a little with the festivals, but Disney knows that isn't sustainable.I get it. Kind of agreeing and saying that they do a lousy job making them unique and making the guests understand it. They used to truly promote their parks and do specials ... I can understand them all blurring together for some, but how long did they spend telling us in ads that it's more or less one big mega park LOL. I mean watching some past ads for the parks you'd never know there were four parks, so I get the complaint they're all the same.
But what is Disney supposed to do? Just ignore their popular movies while guests whine at them? (And no, I don't agree they should shove them in anywhere "just because", either) Then they'd be criticized for not doing anything with a popular IP, so they kind of can't win here. I don't like that they feel they have to add a character/IP to everything but that's what they and Universal have conditioned their guests to expect.
@MisterPenguin should edit in Olaf in the corner somewhere.
Epcot's peak attendance was when out early something original and different. It started to decline as the classic attractions were replaced/updated to be made more 'relevant' with celebrities and character IPs. Attendance has been bolstered a little with the festivals, but Disney knows that isn't sustainable.
Summary: People aren't necessarily clamoring for more IPs in Epcot. They just know what is there now isn't satisfying, and they compare it with something that is (MK) and so they say Epcot needs to be more Disney. Yet history shows that Epcot at its best does attract crowds.
Nope , thats going adjacent to the mission space show buildingIsn’t this where the space themed restaurant is going?
No, it’s not fair when they’re going in the wrong park. They have two other parks for that very reason, one of which still needs more help.
But, it’s happening. Only a highly unlikely landslide change of management will stop it.
Everyone will think differently. It’s clear the two Bobs do too.But some of us don't feel like some of them are going in the wrong park..
Nicely put.EDIT: And respect goes both ways. I know there are some posters who lecture the Epcot purists on their inability to change, etc. (which isn't what it's about, it's not about "hating any change" and they don't seem to understand that). I also think those that can't understand and respect those who remember Epcot as it was need to do some research on what Epcot was. They'd realize what they missed out on and why you and others don't like the current direction.
And nobody worries about upsetting a droid.People don’t complain that Mickey Mouse isn’t in Frozen.
Although the changes made to Epcot, initially didn't help attendance I feel that the timeline is a bit off there. The classics were dying off before many of those change ever happened. There was more to the decline then just changes. I was and still am a major fan of EPCOT, but, even I was getting board with the classic rides and had started to re-experience them less and less. The lines out the doors of Imagination and Horizons had long since stopped happening. The only one that I didn't get sick of wasn't there long enough for me to get sick of and the was WoM. I don't know how anyone could think that Energy wasn't improved by the change to Ellen due to the fact that previous to that it was nothing more then a gigantic infomercial for Exxon. If one thinks that Ellen is a snooze fest then the original was more of a coma inducer.Epcot's peak attendance was when out early something original and different. It started to decline as the classic attractions were replaced/updated to be made more 'relevant' with celebrities and character IPs. Attendance has been bolstered a little with the festivals, but Disney knows that isn't sustainable.
Summary: People aren't necessarily clamoring for more IPs in Epcot. They just know what is there now isn't satisfying, and they compare it with something that is (MK) and so they say Epcot needs to be more Disney. Yet history shows that Epcot at its best does attract crowds.
This screams of someone fishing him.View attachment 267331Dunno if this was posted!
Ed Film created several fan made blueprints. Here's what he did for Epcot:It's pretty odd that you can find the blueprints for every FW pavilion on the internet except for WoL.
I think the approach to IPs in EPCOT should be, "if the movie doesn't exist could we sell this idea as a pitch for the park". I think I'd buy Ratatouille as a pitch for the France Pavilion, and Coco for the Mexico Pavilion. I'd buy Inside Out as a Cranium Command type attraction and even Mary Poppins in the UK.For me they’d use original IP specifically designed for the park and shove the movie tie ins into DHS.
But we know that won’t happen.
The quote was fantastic, not fantasy. That *could* be ok if interpreted correctly, although I don't think it will be.I think the approach to IPs in EPCOT should be, "if the movie doesn't exist could we sell this idea as a pitch for the park". I think I'd buy Ratatouille as a pitch for the France Pavilion, and Coco for the Mexico Pavilion. I'd buy Inside Out as a Cranium Command type attraction and even Mary Poppins in the UK.
What really bothers me is the publicly stated change from making the real into fantasy. At both the D23 Expo in Anaheim and in Japan, they said Epcot will be where the real becomes fantasy and the fantasy becomes real. The second part of that essentially defends Fantasyland being in Epcot.
As nice as those are, they seriously need upscaled. 1200x780 isn't exactly high res. And that surprises me since they were only posted in 2014.Ed Film created several fan made blueprints. Here's what he did for Epcot:
http://www.wdwthemeparks.com/news/2014/09/07/disney-blue-prints-epcot-part-1
http://www.wdwthemeparks.com/news/2014/09/07/disney-blue-prints-epcot-part-2
http://www.wdwthemeparks.com/news/2014/09/07/disney-blue-prints-epcot-part-3
The point is that something new does not and should not need to reference something existing to be considered Disney. Nothing in Frozen was Disney before they made it. If the public can accept a new original film as something Disney and beloved why couldn’t the same principle apply to a theme park land or attraction. Not everything should be self referential.
Mystic Manor?One wonders if anything original, massive and impressive like The Haunted Mansion or Pirates would ever be built in a Disney theme park today. The answer is probably "no". Bob Iger is focused on branding and merchandise. To him, the parks are just places to push those elements. Damn sad if you ask me.
Ed Film created several fan made blueprints. Here's what he did for Epcot:
http://www.wdwthemeparks.com/news/2014/09/07/disney-blue-prints-epcot-part-1
http://www.wdwthemeparks.com/news/2014/09/07/disney-blue-prints-epcot-part-2
http://www.wdwthemeparks.com/news/2014/09/07/disney-blue-prints-epcot-part-3
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.