Originally Posted By Kusin_It Horizons and World of Motion are gone now Not cool to mess with a good thing!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip It's all about the money. With World of Motion GM, after fulfilling two long-term contracts with Disney, would only sign additional one-year contracts. GM wanted Disney to develop an attraction that would feature only automobiles, not all forms of transportation. I don't know the story behind Horizons, but I would imagine it is similar. GE ends sponsorship, Horizons continues without sponsorship for a few years. Compaq/HP comes along and offers sponsorship, but wants a new attraction. It is unfortunate that Disney is so dependent on attractions being sponsored, and it is too bad that companies don't want a prior company's sloppy seconds... even if they are classic. It is all about the money.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn I wish they at least waited until HD video camera technology was available. At least we have both on YouTube.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Yep, it's all about what the sponsors wanted, and what Disney thought the guests wanted. After having a glut of mega-sized omnimovers in Future World, they wanted to move toward more unique thrill rides that appealed to the on-the-go X-Treme 90's crowds, and the sponsors seemed to agree In addition to the rides mentioned above, the various Imagination redos/fiascos were also a result of their partnership with Kodak, which required a new attraction after a certain number of years (the subsequent redo was because the first redo was so poorly received)
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>I wish they at least waited until HD video camera technology was available. At least we have both on YouTube.<< I have to imagine that Disney has some pretty good footage of the attractions in their archives. When an attraction is built, they record all sorts of things, from fabric samples to lighting and sound levels, so that they know what to use as a baseline when they do refurbishments on it in the future. Although it would be tough for an average guest to record the ride on a film camera, I fully expect that Disney did that so they know what they were supposed to match Just because it's not on YouTube doesn't mean that it doesn't exist!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I kind of wonder why so many sponsors included stipulations that attractions be changed after a certain number of years. is it because when Epcot was new Disney expected Future World would be a constantly evolving showcase of cutting edge technology? If so, I can understand a sponsor not wanting to be stuck with an "old" attraction.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I would assume that was the reason. When Epcot was being built, it was going to be a dazzling beacon of futurism; the advertising slogan "The 21st Century Begins October 1982" seemed to really be taken to heart in the early years. In that framework, it's understandable to see why companies might think that their 15-20 year old attraction was no longer the best way to represent themselves to the park-going public But when they ordered up the replacements, I suspect that they assumed that they would be as captivating as the originals that they replaced. I think the companies expected that the new versions would continue the tradition of an epic scale and cutting edge technology; instead we got the lackluster Imagination 2.0 (which I still contend is better than the current version), unreliable TestTrack, and the PR-nightmare of Mission:Space. Knowing what Epcot could be (and has been) makes its current state that much more depressing
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I agree that Imagination 2.0 was better. It maybe didn't have the purple whatzit, but it seemed to me a more cohesive attraction.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Yah, there was a clear through line that made sense for first time riders. With the version they have now, your sort of need to know a little about the concept of 2.0 and that Figment was loveable and adorable in the original one. Otherwise, you just get a tour through some completely unrelated scenes with a really annoying dragon And with 2.0, I didn't even mind that it "insulted" you at the beginning by showing that you have no imagination. I thought it was kind of cheeky and played well with the ending where you see a similar imagination-scanner device. With the scanner ending now, there's no explanation for what it is, why you're there, why it explodes, or what you're looking at for the finale
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Technically, Test Track is more in-line with the original concept for "the transportation pavilion".
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Not cool to mess with a good thing!" The very principle that EPCOT Center was built on meant that technology pavilions in Future World would always be looking forward into the "future" of American industry. An omnimover ride through the history of transportation might have been a novel concept in 1982, but would seem like a relic today (see: Universe of Energy). I'd rather that Disney take a few risks and fail than to always play it safe, especially at Epcot.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Ahem, that should be: The very principle that EPCOT Center was built on was the premise that technology pavilions in Future World would always be looking forward into the "future" of American industry.
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb Speaking of Universe of Energy, isn't it time someone messed with that work of art?
Originally Posted By Kusin_It So $100(time value of money and all that nonsense) per head to enter Epcot Center isn't enough to pay for Horizons and World of Motion???!!! Come on, Mr. Disney.. tell that story to the Marines.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt And who is Mr. Disney? More importantly, what is the point of this thread? How long have WoM and Horizons been gone now? Why bring this up now Kusin?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<So $100(time value of money and all that nonsense) per head to enter Epcot Center isn't enough to pay for Horizons and World of Motion???!!!>> Apparently not. The Wonders of Life pavilion has remained closed since MetLife pulled out as the sponsor.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA 'Journey Into Imagination' - the original, was very cool. That opening scene, introducing Dreamfinder and Figment, was brilliant. Had I been Czar of EPCOT Center, I would have kept the opening scene and plussed up the rest. 2.0 just seemed cheap and sort of boring. 3.0 is just weird, but I'm glad Figment is back . As for 'Universe of Energy' with Ellen and Jaime and Alex Trebec, after a while it just gets ridiculous looking after 15-20 years pass by. Like 'Cranium Command' the live action footage of current celebrities becomes dated very quickly. Future World indeed.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros All things considered, I think that the UOE film has aged surprisingly gracefully. Ellen is still a household name (though there was a bit of a 'scandal' when she came out a year or two after the attraction opened) and Trebek is still hosting Jeopardy! (sans mustache), with the same announcer and everything. Jamie Lee Curtis is still a well-recognized actress (yogurt, anyone?), and even Bill Nye the Science Guy has had a resurgence in recent years There are certainly a lot of things in the film that peg it to the mid-90's (from clothes and hair styles to Ellen's cordless phone and apartment furniture), but most of the jokes still work and the well-known faces are still well known. I'm definitely ready for an upgrade (especially since the AA Ellen and snake-like creature she's battling have been MIA for about a year now), but I also worry about how they would do it. The ride system is one of the most unique ever designed, so it would be a shame to lose it, but I also can't see Disney's current leadership getting excited about a 45-minute experience; the building's big enough for a large thrill ride, but I hope they don't go that route with it Stupid Judy and her stupid energy...
