its finaly comming down

[Another Voice]

But thankfully characters are starting to be more prominent in other ways such as in Living Seas or in the revamped Mexico pavillion,

Characters that are actually in shows - such as Dreamfinder and Buzzy from 'Cranium Command' - are fine and good. But the two examples you mentioned are cheap and crass merchandising attempts. Instead of enhancing the pavilions, they significantly dumbed-down both attractions to point where they are nothing but kiddie rides.

The entire point of EPCOT Center was to build a place for normal adults - the ones that don't need cartoon characters to have a good time - to enjoy themseleves. Exploring the wonders of the world is just as great as watching a bunch of rubber headed characters prance to recorded music; attractions can spark the imagination instead of churning one's stomach.

Eisner never got the "adult" part - mainly because he was interested in selling plush toys and never-ever believed that anyone with an I.Q. over 75 would step into a theme park. The Wand was an example of it - a crass man pandering to people amussed by sparkly lights.

 

[MasterShake]

Characters that are actually in shows - such as Dreamfinder and Buzzy from 'Cranium Command' - are fine and good. But the two examples you mentioned are cheap and crass merchandising attempts. Instead of enhancing the pavilions, they significantly dumbed-down both attractions to point where they are nothing but kiddie rides.

The entire point of EPCOT Center was to build a place for normal adults - the ones that don't need cartoon characters to have a good time - to enjoy themseleves. Exploring the wonders of the world is just as great as watching a bunch of rubber headed characters prance to recorded music; attractions can spark the imagination instead of churning one's stomach.

Eisner never got the "adult" part - mainly because he was interested in selling plush toys and never-ever believed that anyone with an I.Q. over 75 would step into a theme park. The Wand was an example of it - a crass man pandering to people amussed by sparkly lights.

Or maybe it was just a sign.

 

[MarkRG]

Hopefully Disney never evolves totally into your ideal form of entertainment, it would be a very sad day indeed. There is that small facet of childhood in all of us, and the Disney parks are the place I embrace that facet and let it breathe, I can be a boring, normal adult the rest of the time.

 

[ChrisFL]

There are some things to totally hate Eisner for, and I don't disagree on that hate.

The Millennium Celebration was not one of them. I horribly miss Tapestry, and I'm a little concerned about Illuminations. And now the last icon of that event is going away. That is what I'll miss. Sorcerer Mickey hearkens to something in all of us, or at least should. And the wand and hat are very prominent reminders of that.

Sorcerer Mickey never had a wand

 

[MarkRG]

Sorcerer Mickey never had a wand

In the original Fantasia? Nope. In representations since? Yes, though I will admit it's a lot of the older ones where he has one, the more recent ones he's just pointing his finger. Probably because a wand wouldn't have been safe for kids.

Here's a Pin with him having one, btw.

 

[thefirebuilds]

cool, maybe for my wedding i can have my picture taken without that blight

 

[YoHo]

Yes, but to use the most famous quote of all .. "It all started with a mouse."

And yes, let's focus on Walt's idea for second, for a city, not another theme park, so the reality of Epcot and Walt's vision of the city diverged long ago. And yes, the imagineers omitted the characters on purpose, then they had to scramble to come up with some as the giant little people were creeping people out.

And Epcot has always had a slightly more sterile, museum like quality, lacking. To see how the lack of characters can hurt all you have to do is read another thread on this forum, discussing when they removed two most beloved characters from the park, and one still isn't back, and people feel the lack, myself included. But thankfully characters are starting to be more prominent in other ways such as in Living Seas or in the revamped Mexico pavillion, so I do guess they'll make up for the lack in other ways going forward to try to integrate the foundation of the whole thing into the park more.

And, maybe that's the one thing I can't totally wrap my mind around in liking Walt but not the characters. For me, the characters are a direct extension of a facet of Walt's personality, avatars of him, if you will. I see Mickey, Donald and the rest, I'm seeing a part of Walt.

No offense, but if I'm to believe your Signature, you had a 20+ year gap between visits and didn't actually see Epcot till 1999. Is that true?
If I'm reading that right, then I have to question your ability to judge a place you've never seen. You've never ridden Horizons, or the original Imagination. Never seen communicore, or The Universe of Energy without Ellen. No World of motion. How can you make a judgment about what is and isn't Disney with so little to base it on?

 

[MarkRG]

No offense, but if I'm to believe your Signature, you had a 20+ year gap between visits and didn't actually see Epcot till 1999. Is that true?
If I'm reading that right, then I have to question your ability to judge a place you've never seen. You've never ridden Horizons, or the original Imagination. Never seen communicore, or The Universe of Energy without Ellen. No World of motion. How can you make a judgment about what is and isn't Disney with so little to base it on?

None taken Yup, you're reading my sig wrong, those are my first years, as it says. I've been to the locations listed starting with that year, at least once a year, sometimes more. I remember Horizons and 'the oranges', which to this day I use a lot of orange/citrus products for that orange smell around the house because of it.

As an aside- you want that smell to the nth degree? Hunt down a Yankee Candle under the line Aromatherapy Spa called True Bliss(oh, that is right!) Tangerine and Vanilla.

I remember the moldy smelling swamp that was the Universe of Energy, I used to laugh at the scary t-rex. I remember when the only thing on WDW property was the Poly, Contemporary and the MK, and was there for the zoo that was the first spring break after the opening of Epcot. I make my statements based on 31 years of visiting WDW with all its changes thru the years.

 

[thefirebuilds]

And Epcot has always had a slightly more sterile, museum like quality, lacking.

You are really off base now...

 

[MarkRG]

You are really off base now...

For World Showcase, not so much, although early on they didn't have a lot of content in the countries that were open, but that improved, but even there, do I have to start singing Canada to you? There's three movies telling you the history of the country they're representing. China also seems to end up with a rotating exhibit that any museum would be envious to have, the last time I was in there, it was artifacts from an emperor's burial plot. Future World though seems to have the bigger share.

Lets start out right with the big icon, that is the focus of this discussion, Spaceship Earth. A technological marvel, containing a ride that has, in the past(which I don't know if the new sponsor is just updating or replacing, I hope updating) presented the history of communication, museum info.

The Land, teaches you all about botany, and some of the different ways to cultivate plants. In a way it's lost some of that with the deletion of Food Rocks! to make room for Soarin', but the other Lion King based show which is fun, is still an educational thing. I actually liked it with the really old food court with the Kitchen Kabaret(sp? wrong name maybe?).

There was Horizons, which also taught about the possibilities for the future.

The original GM exhibit, the World of Motion with the doombuggy like vehicles taught the history of the automobile.

Now, the one thing that was common to these rides, is to me the displays themselves bring on a very museum-like feel, the only difference is they're animatronics. And even there, the museum of Milwaukee has on the second floor a display of an Indian pow-wow where the moving Indian figures dance around the fire to the drum beats and song. Yes, it's an animatronic, in a museum.

Now for the most museum like, just go into Innoventions(or Communicore for the older crowd) east or west. Most of the displays are exhibits that people aimlessly wander thru just like in any museum I've ever been in. The only cool addition they've made in a long time is the all day Segway test drive to supplement the early morning one you can do as a guided tour.

That atmosphere has been there all along. it's been removed some by the additions of TT, Soarin, Mission Space and such, but it still does have that feel in certain parts.

And don't get me wrong, none of this is outright bad, just.. lacking. If any of you have been on DCL, you might understand what I mean more. The Magic and the Wonder have a subtle Disney touch that is prevalent everywhere without beating you over the head with characters.

 

[Another Voice]

Since as was posted here before - more people go to the Smithsonian than go to WDW. So maybe people like learning things even in a "museum setting". Normal adults don't have to have signing dolls, Stitch spewing "chili breath" in their face, or to be spun until they puke to have fun. Saying that EPCOT is a "failure" because it's not exactly like the Magic Kingdom utterly misses the point.

EPCOT was susposed to be a different experience. It's not "wrong" because it lacked characters, it's not "bad" because it lacked a roller coaster. There's nothing wrong with adults for having a place that entertains grown-ups, but there is something wrong with grown-ups demanding only childish diversions.

 

[MarkRG]

Since as was posted here before - more people go to the Smithsonian than go to WDW. So maybe people like learning things even in a "museum setting". Normal adults don't have to have signing dolls, Stitch spewing "chili breath" in their face, or to be spun until they puke to have fun. Saying that EPCOT is a "failure" because it's not exactly like the Magic Kingdom utterly misses the point.

EPCOT was susposed to be a different experience. It's not "wrong" because it lacked characters, it's not "bad" because it lacked a roller coaster. There's nothing wrong with adults for having a place that entertains grown-ups, but there is something wrong with grown-ups demanding only childish diversions.

Please feel free to quote me where I have said anyplace in this thread, other than in this exact reply, my using the words the words bad, wrong, or failure to describe Epcot. Don't put words I'm not writing, thanks.

It's not a failure, and no I don't expect something exactly like the MK. I just don't agree with your view of what would constitute Disney entertainment, and I don't put the label adult only on any of their parks, neither did Walt. He wanted family entertainment, and that is what I go there for.

 

[MasterShake]

Since as was posted here before - more people go to the Smithsonian than go to WDW. So maybe people like learning things even in a "museum setting". Normal adults don't have to have signing dolls, Stitch spewing "chili breath" in their face, or to be spun until they puke to have fun. Saying that EPCOT is a "failure" because it's not exactly like the Magic Kingdom utterly misses the point.

EPCOT was susposed to be a different experience. It's not "wrong" because it lacked characters, it's not "bad" because it lacked a roller coaster. There's nothing wrong with adults for having a place that entertains grown-ups, but there is something wrong with grown-ups demanding only childish diversions.

Not sure if I'm looking at the information wrong, but according to the following links more people visited Disney World by far then the Smithsonian Museums + National Zoo in 2006:

19 Smithsonian Museums - 23.2 Million
National Zoo - 2.6 Million

http://www.si.edu/about/

Magic Kingdom - 16.6 Million
Epcot - 10.4 Million
MGM - 9.1 Million
Animal Kingdom - 8.9 Million

http://www.coastergrotto.com/theme-park-attendance.jsp

What you are saying is true, many people do like museums. I've visited the Smithsonian complex's several times and I had a great time. However, I don't want Epcot void of any Thrill Rides/Childish Diversions.

 

[EUROPACL]

Not sure if I'm looking at the information wrong, but according to the following links more people visited Disney World by far then the Smithsonian Museums + National Zoo in 2006:

So I'm gussing that you don't see the flaw in your logic by posting those numbers uh? I don't want to spoil it for you but think really hard about it.

 

[YoHo]

I never was devoid of those things. Or at least, not after the Wonders of Life opened.

Futureworld is in many respects like a much bigger version of tomorrowland. We can discuss exactly how much changed between Walt's vision for EPCOT and what we got, but EPCOT CENTER is very much a part of everything Walt was interested in. And, it's the second most popular park to the Magic Kingdom. MGM and AK have not ever surpassed it. Not even back in the early to mid 90s before Epcot started to get changed.
That says to me that the conceit that people don't want that experience is quite wrong.

And of course, it convient that the insults pop culture hurls at Epcot really started after years and years of neglect. At the point where the formerly unique and interesting exhibts were overdue for a replacement. And when they finally scrounged up the money, they abandoned the old plan, because of the ridicule that their inaction caused (and because they never "Got" it)

 

[MasterShake]

So I'm gussing that you don't see the flaw in your logic by posting those numbers uh? I don't want to spoil it for you but think really hard about it.

Shirley you must be joking.....
I won't make any claims to being all knowing, why don't you enlighten me.

 

[MasterShake]

I never was devoid of those things. Or at least, not after the Wonders of Life opened.

Futureworld is in many respects like a much bigger version of tomorrowland. We can discuss exactly how much changed between Walt's vision for EPCOT and what we got, but EPCOT CENTER is very much a part of everything Walt was interested in. And, it's the second most popular park to the Magic Kingdom. MGM and AK have not ever surpassed it. Not even back in the early to mid 90s before Epcot started to get changed.
That says to me that the conceit that people don't want that experience is quite wrong.

And of course, it convient that the insults pop culture hurls at Epcot really started after years and years of neglect. At the point where the formerly unique and interesting exhibts were overdue for a replacement. And when they finally scrounged up the money, they abandoned the old plan, because of the ridicule that their inaction caused (and because they never "Got" it)

I agree with a lot of what your saying.....

 

[raidermatt]

Not sure if I'm looking at the information wrong, but according to the following links more people visited Disney World by far then the Smithsonian Museums + National Zoo in 2006:

19 Smithsonian Museums - 23.2 Million
National Zoo - 2.6 Million

http://www.si.edu/about/

Magic Kingdom - 16.6 Million
Epcot - 10.4 Million
MGM - 9.1 Million
Animal Kingdom - 8.9 Million

http://www.coastergrotto.com/theme-park-attendance.jsp

Actually, in order to get a true answer you have to know how many of the people in those numbers are being counted multiple times. I suspect that more of the WDW visitors fall into that category. I would think that the average visitor to WDW spends more days in the parks than the average visitor to DC spends in the Smithsonian.

It would also be interesting to see what the numbers would look like if you reversed the marketing budgets.

Regardless, point is, as you acknowledged, there are still lots of people out there willing to be educated.

I just don't agree with your view of what would constitute Disney entertainment, and I don't put the label adult only on any of their parks, neither did Walt. He wanted family entertainment, and that is what I go there for.

What is there at Epcot, or more to the point what has there EVER been at Epcot, that would not have been considered family entertainment?

If you're just saying that YOU want more charcters in Epcot and every other park that Disney builds, that's fine. Everybody has their own personal preferences.

But if you look at the history of Disney entertainment, in the parks, on film and on TV, you'll find that there is lots of stuff that is not cartoon based, and in fact has elements of education in it.

Say you don't like it, fine, but you can't reasonably say it wasn't "Disney". Further, all personal preferences aside, Epcot has always out-performed the two newer parks, even after years of stagnation.

As far as what Epcot should be now and in the future, I would think that with 4 theme parks it might make sense to skew one to a slightly older, but still family, crowd. The cartoon character crowd is already coming to WDW no matter what. Provide something a little different at Epcot and maybe it won't be quite as hard to convince the "stick in the mud" faction to come back more frequently.

 

[EUROPACL]

Shirley you must be joking.....
I won't make any claims to being all knowing, why don't you enlighten me.

I'm not joking and don't call me Shirley....


but If I go to Magic Kingdom on Mon, Epcot on Tues, MGM on Wed, Ak on Thur how many people went to WDW? 1 or 4 ?

 

[MarkRG]

What is there at Epcot, or more to the point what has there EVER been at Epcot, that would not have been considered family entertainment?

That's a hard one. But I'm not the one who's looking for the adult only aspect. What was said a few posts back sums up what I'd not like to see Epcot take a direction of if that helps answer you.

However, I don't want Epcot void of any Thrill Rides/Childish Diversions.

I'd like to see a good balance remain, more or less where it is now.

If you're just saying that YOU want more charcters in Epcot and every other park that Disney builds, that's fine. Everybody has their own personal preferences.

But if you look at the history of Disney entertainment, in the parks, on film and on TV, you'll find that there is lots of stuff that is not cartoon based, and in fact has elements of education in it.

Say you don't like it, fine, but you can't reasonably say it wasn't "Disney". Further, all personal preferences aside, Epcot has always out-performed the two newer parks, even after years of stagnation.

As far as what Epcot should be now and in the future, I would think that with 4 theme parks it might make sense to skew one to a slightly older, but still family, crowd. The cartoon character crowd is already coming to WDW no matter what. Provide something a little different at Epcot and maybe it won't be quite as hard to convince the "stick in the mud" faction to come back more frequently.

Now, not *just* characters but more... influence of the other aspects of Disney? You're really making me work hard to define this. Need to be more awake, it's been a long day. Again I have to fall back to the Cruiseline, as they really worked hard to bring an elegent but a definite Disney presence that is nigh palpable. In a million small detail ways that are all subtle but there if you look for them, but doesn't begin to be intrusive. About the best I can do. As an example one of the fun subtle things I've seen in Future World has been the sidewalks outside Innoventions at night, with the fiberoptics built into them, it doesn't have to be all about characters.

And I definitely know the history, grew up on the original Walt hosted Wonderful World of Disney shows, which did strike a great balance.

And it's not that I dislike Epcot, quite the opposite actually. And it's getting better, just early on, especially Future World had a very... sterile?..70's futuristic? I don't know how to describe it other than being such a far step outside what I would think of as Disney. And with the changes they've already made it is reasonable to say Disney was aware they needed to take steps too. For me the educational aspect is good, and perhaps going to a slightly higher age group is good as long as they try to keep adding in the direction I've already tried to describe.