World Showcase Culture

[FlightlessDuck]

Now it's gonna be one with a bad Paul pressler era Disney store...is that better?

They should tear it all down and replace it with more rides. That would be better.

 

[kbelle8995]

So the central argument here seems to be either:

1. The parks shouldnt change

OR

2. The parks shouldnt remove something "cultural" for something "commercial


Lets look at the history of the true Disney story. Disneyland. Walt changed huge segments of the park over and over, removing rides, changing things, and ADAPTING. He embraced corporate sponsorship.

People need to accept that the parks will change. And the fact that probably 9/10 people will be excited for this change.

Actually no for me it's not about that at all. Change is needed at Epcot. Future World needs to be updated badly

I would be fine if they were changing the Norway ride to update so it better reflects today's Norway or Anna and Elsa introduce you to the "real" Arendelle. But no It's a ride about Arendelle and the Movie Frozen or at least that's how it sounds from the description.

It's more the idea Disney is putting this ride in an area where thematically it doesn't make sense.

 

[Andrew015]

I just don't get why the pro-Frozen crowd isn't as angry as those who are pro-Norway. They're getting just as short-changed by Disney.

Instead of a new attraction which Frozen arguably deserves, they're getting a refurb of old boat-driven technology being force-fed into the one area of WDW least themed for it

No net new ride and capacity for either group of guests.

If they looked at what was planned for Frozen overseas, they should be furious

THIS hits the nail on the head perfectly. Not much else needs to be said about this.

 

[LaidBackDad]

While not a regular viewer of the of ABC's sitcom "The Middle" I caught the season finale re-run which aired last night. I thought that episode which was filmed in WDW was hilarious and perfectly illustrated the core of this discussion. The writers and producers of the episode did a marvelous job poking fun at many of the annoyances involved with a trip to WDW like long lines, extensive planning and research required and the proliferation of gift shops. In the Episode husband / father (Mike) laments that all he wanted to do on his trip to WDW was to go to Epcot so he could have a romantic dinner with his wife (Frankie) in fake Paris. While having dinner in fake Paris Mike and Frankie fantasize about a romantic life without kids in the most metropolitan city in the world. I get it, that is what WS is about. Grown up fantasy. It is not a valid argument to say WS is "more real" just because the pavilions are based on real places rather than fictional ones. It is still all fantasy, just different.

As in almost every case, the devil is in the details. Will the corporate suits allow the Imagineers enough leeway to tastefully blend child fantasy into the adult fantasy in the WS without destroying the fabric of the WS? The "naysayers" are more than justified in their skepticism. IMO it can be done, I just have my fingers crossed that it is done well on what appears to be an accelerated time frame. Towards the end of the episode Frankie reflects on her time at WDW and says "we will always have fake Paris". The WS isn't going change with the introduction of Frozen. I hope the "naysayers" don't allow it to change their fantasies either.

 

[surferdave]

I just don't get why the pro-Frozen crowd isn't as angry as those who are pro-Norway. They're getting just as short-changed by Disney.

Instead of a new attraction which Frozen arguably deserves, they're getting a refurb of old boat-driven technology being force-fed into the one area of WDW least themed for it

No net new ride and capacity for either group of guests.

If they looked at what was planned for Frozen overseas, they should be furious

Yep. Frozen deserves better than a converted Maelstrom ride. Epcot deserves better than a Disney character makeover for every neglected attraction.

 

[Andrew015]

So the central argument here seems to be either:

1. The parks shouldnt change

OR

2. The parks shouldnt remove something "cultural" for something "commercial


Lets look at the history of the true Disney story. Disneyland. Walt changed huge segments of the park over and over, removing rides, changing things, and ADAPTING. He embraced corporate sponsorship.

People need to accept that the parks will change. And the fact that probably 9/10 people will be excited for this change.

Your perception of the argument at hand is not anywhere close to being accurate. I can understand how it could appear that way on the surface, from say 100,000 feet, but your perception is fundamentally incorrect.

Even those of us who loved Maelstrom probably wouldn't argue that the ride was dated. I don't think anyone of us, at least those of us "pro-Maelstrom" folks within this thread, would have minded a "refresh". Nor do I think any of us have an issue with Disney building a new Frozen ride... if it were being built in a more appropriate place.

As Steve so eloquently pointed out, EVERYONE on both sides of this argument should be mad as hell at what Disney has pitched to us. It's a gross example of Disney trying to fit a round peg into a square hole in order to make a "quick buck" while spending AS LITTLE AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE in the process. It is so perfectly clear, to those of us who aren't wearing rose-colored glasses, that Disney management has no long-term strategy for EPCOT, as areas that are in such desperate need of development continue to sit empty or limp along with "walk-on" level occupancy. Maelstrom was NOT one such area, but it is being torn down because the vultures wearing pinstripe suits are worried about 2016 revenue reports. They're not worried about 2020 or 2025 figures, because they know darn well they won't be around for that. If they were, you'd see this being done the right way - in the appropriate park with the appropriate financial resources to build something truly innovative - not on a shoe-string budget which is essentially going to allow the Imagineers to put lipstick on a pig.

This isn't about being either "Pro-Maelstrom" or "Pro-Frozen". This, for me anyways, is about Disney's current management philosophy vs. Walt's vision, of which the latter is clearly being sent "back, back over the falls" by the trolls...

 

[manning]

Bingo...

And there no restriction on mom and dads wallets anymore...

And that is a big difference. No limits on frivolous spending...dictated by kids.

The best example is the popularity of the bibbiddi bobbity boutique...$200 for glitter and ribbon with a 5 hour lifespan.
It doesn't matter how much money you want to burn...this just doesn't make sense on any level.

Unlimited spending. Kind of have to wonder what the parents retirement plan looks like.

 

[Reddog1134]

I would be fine if they were changing the Norway ride to update so it better reflects today's Norway or Anna and Elsa introduce you to the "real" Arendelle. But no It's a ride about Arendelle and the Movie Frozen or at least that's how it sounds from the description.

Jim Hill is saying that the ride entrance and exit are being switched. (I know, it's Jim Hill. Take everything he says with a brick of salt). So, what if, they gut the theater at the end (which would now be the entrance) to make the ride queue but still keep the movie screen? And on that screen, they show how the real Norway inspired the designs in the movie.

 

[ArwenMarie]

It is a valid argument to say that WS is more "real" than let's say Fantasyland. It's based on real places that actually exist. Not fairy tales or movies.

Regardless, I personally think there is no way in heck that this ride will be well-done. Unless they are bulldozing the building, the ride is going to be too short. The timeframe in which they are going to do this conversion is also too short, in Disney-time, to make it anything other than an overlay of some sort. Can Disney even make an animatronic in a little over a year? Is it just going to be a bunch of screens? I know they can be made, but can/will Disney?

I predict it ends up being a disappointment no matter what side of the aisle you are on. Frozen deserved a real attraction and WS's purpose deserves to be maintained as much as possible.

 

[Reddog1134]

Unless they are bulldozing the building, the ride is going to be too short.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-h...the_b_5835170.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000024

Mind you, WDI plans on leaving Maelstrom's boat-and-trough ride system in place. Which is what will then allow Walt Disney World to get its Frozen-inspired attraction (which will make use of dimensional sets, animatronic figures and film footage to recreate memorable scenes and characters from that Chris Buck/Jennifer Lee film) open by late 2015/early 2016. And by swapping this ride's entrance and exit and then removing some of Maelstrom's post-show elements, the Imagineers even plan on lengthening the trough that these boats travel in. Which will then allow them to fold in a few more show scenes featuring Anna, Elsa, Kristoff and Olaf.

 

[Planogirl]

Why be divisive and dismissive of people who do not agree with you? By that same argument... one could say the usual Debbie Downer suspects are here complaining endlessly about how the WDW of today sucks.

That comment was only directed at the individual who made mention of the usual suspects being present. I shouldn't have responded.

 

[LaidBackDad]

It is a valid argument to say that WS is more "real" than let's say Fantasyland. It's based on real places that actually exist. Not fairy tales or movies.

I would suspect there may be a serious flaw in any type of rational that would attempt to argue that one type of fantasy is more real than another type of fantasy. If anything, following the "real place" fantasy rational justifies placing Frozen in Norway even more since that is what Arendelle is based off of.

I also must disagree that all fictional fantasy must go in the MK. That would ultimately result in an enormous MK and the rest of the parks would be 1/2 niche parks. I would rather see balance throughout the parks for all ages and interest.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

THIS hits the nail on the head perfectly. Not much else needs to be said about this.

Not too
Shockingly...

I concur 100%

 

[Reddog1134]

If they looked at what was planned for Frozen overseas, they should be furious

If that's the way things worked, anyone that's seen Tokyo Disneyland would never set foot in WDW again.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

While not a regular viewer of the of ABC's sitcom "The Middle" I caught the season finale re-run which aired last night. I thought that episode which was filmed in WDW was hilarious and perfectly illustrated the core of this discussion. The writers and producers of the episode did a marvelous job poking fun at many of the annoyances involved with a trip to WDW like long lines, extensive planning and research required and the proliferation of gift shops. In the Episode husband / father (Mike) laments that all he wanted to do on his trip to WDW was to go to Epcot so he could have a romantic dinner with his wife (Frankie) in fake Paris. While having dinner in fake Paris Mike and Frankie fantasize about a romantic life without kids in the most metropolitan city in the world. I get it, that is what WS is about. Grown up fantasy. It is not a valid argument to say WS is "more real" just because the pavilions are based on real places rather than fictional ones. It is still all fantasy, just different.

As in almost every case, the devil is in the details. Will the corporate suits allow the Imagineers enough leeway to tastefully blend child fantasy into the adult fantasy in the WS without destroying the fabric of the WS? The "naysayers" are more than justified in their skepticism. IMO it can be done, I just have my fingers crossed that it is done well on what appears to be an accelerated time frame. Towards the end of the episode Frankie reflects on her time at WDW and says "we will always have fake Paris". The WS isn't going change with the introduction of Frozen. I hope the "naysayers" don't allow it to change their fantasies either.

That's a great post...but with all do respect, EPCOT is not the magic kingdom, or Tokyo, or euro.

It was never intended to be a showcase of Disney product...it was their attempt to portray things with more depth in their style.

Arrendale (which they could have just set it in Norway or Sweden...but turtled up as always to avoid "alienating a buyer" or to protect the piggybank from the courts)...is not themeaticlaly correct.

Te nemo overlay is close To the line...but the movie was in Australia...not some mythical place. And though steeped in humor and Pixar/ Disney "isms"...the movie Was beautifully drawn to showcase the oceans and had an element of education to it. It's passable.

They had their chance at a mythos development...in animal kingdom...but chose
To keep the cash. Now they're taking another run at it with a wealthy egomaniac. (No...not michael Eisner).

The middle, an abc show, used that episode to "poke fun" at Disney for effect, no doubt. But the portrayal of EPCOT as an adult fantasy is inline with a shift in corporate agenda that I don't agree
With (opinion). Mike basically says (if I recall) that he wants to take the wife there because they'll never get to France. Which -while true...does a disservice to the epcot idea.

It was proposed as an urban utopia...a space age/gene Roddenberry esque idea that people will put aside ( or limit) inherent greed and ambition and live and work in symbiosis. Many -such as advisor ray Bradbury - believed that human civilization would have to get there to survive - or go dinosaur and cease. (20 years ago I agreed...now I'm wavering).

It was economically not feasible...but ten years later, the president took a huge, risky bold step to pour money into it to do what they thought they could achieve and support based on technology and finances.

The "permanent world showcase" idea was a natural result, but it was done in an impressive way...the "Disney way". And it is far from a failure...the unsaid "reverse course" approach that is being rolled out will permanently delete that concept over time. And that is not "better" for any of us.

A week with the princesses? That's the "upside, positive"?
I know I'm not gonna change anybody's mind...but I'm saying this to at least acknowledge this is not some little detail in the footnotes of WDW. I hope I'm wrong and this is no big deal... But I don't want it to happen when I'm blind to the possibilities.

So with all due respect to the middle, the idea of the French pavilion is not to make a "fantasy replacement" for France. It's to give you a taste and make you want to go there. And the idea that "I'll never be able to afford it" is anti Walt and pro profiteer...and against US idealism in many ways.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Yep. Frozen deserves better than a converted Maelstrom ride. Epcot deserves better than a Disney character makeover for every neglected attraction.

Simple and pointed.
Nothing further here.

 

[MakiraMarlena]

Three reasons why the World Showcase is magical:

1.) It offers EVERYONE a taste of the world: whether it is the seasoned traveler or someone who will never be able to travel to one or all of the countries. Everyone has the opportunity to be immersed in the culture of our world.

2.) The immersion itself: Visitors can sample delicious food and treats from around the world; visit exhibits that showcase the history; see the architecture that can be found in each country, and understand the countries that inspired their favorite Disney films.

3.) Inspiration: The showcase is inspiring and I think it helps foster a love for the world beyond our own beautiful country and an interest beyond our countries borders.

They are going to say they will still do #1.

As for #2, guests weren't interested. The food had to be Americanized before enough persons would buy it, and they had to add a bunch of stuff for kids because the kids were "bored."

#3 they will say that many many people are inspired by Frozen. They want to see Frozen. So WDW will give them Frozen.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Unlimited spending. Kind of have to wonder what the parents retirement plan looks like.

For the Xers and Yers...
It's a coffin.

Disney knows that and will cater to the frivolous spend.

And that can be done with low quality and little infrastructure investment...and "third party" planning such as being pushed around with excavators at both downtown and animal kingdom right now

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Jim Hill is saying that the ride entrance and exit are being switched. (I know, it's Jim Hill. Take everything he says with a brick of salt). So, what if, they gut the theater at the end (which would now be the entrance) to make the ride queue but still keep the movie screen? And on that screen, they show how the real Norway inspired the designs in the movie.

Part of the reason that imagination was destroyed was because they were more worried about expanding the queue and destroyed the place that was previously occupied by the ride systems.

So the fact "queue" was brought up this early...even by the myth spinners...is an agida inspiring turn.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

If that's the way things worked, anyone that's seen Tokyo Disneyland would never set foot in WDW again.

I personally prefer EURO to mk.

Every traveler to wdw should get a trip to one of the other places in comparison.

The board would NEVER neglect Orlando again.

You know what really doesn't have an equal in Florida??

Yep...the ball