Originally Posted By RandySavage EPCOT: From the early 80s to the mid 90s, the family vacation at WDW was an anticipated annual event. For most of those visits, EPCOT Center was the highlight of the trip. It was always the favored park in my family, and my young mind was mesmerized by the Future World’s monolithic tributes to the promise of technology and the human future. Each pavilion neatly addressed its subject matter with distinct yet similar tone, style and iconography, and while I greatly preferred some pavilions (Horizons, Motion, Spaceship Earth, Living Seas) to others (The Land, Energy), the sum of Future World was something more than its parts. During our final family trips in the mid-1990s, things like cohesiveness and overall story in Future World were beginning to unravel. So it was interesting to see how the park had fared a decade later. PROS: Mission Space: The repeated warnings (and news-making fatalities) had my heart pumping before I even boarded to cockpit to Mission Space. My nervousness actually enhanced this attraction by making it that much more intense for me. As far as the ride is concerned, the little windows and slightly blurred images really made the space flight believable. I thought I pressed my buttons at the right time, but got the “computer override†voice. In the end, I did not experience any negative physical effects (such as dizziness) at all and wanted to ride again immediately after (but the wait was excessive). I think a better job could have been done with the pre-show and the post-show area (from what I saw of it), but there is no doubt that Mission: Space is a one-of-a-kind, high-tech experience that you’d probably have to pay the equivalent of Epcot admission to experience at Cape Canaveral or the Kennedy Space Center. Imagination: I don’t remember caring for the original Journey into Imagination, but I had read a lot of negative reports about the this latest version online. The ride I experienced was far better than what the critiques had led me to believe, and the kids seemed to enjoy Figment and his song (and the finale). Spaceship Earth: The good news is that the new animatronics (Caveman, Pharaoh, Greek Actor) and show scenes looked superb. The Jeremey Irons narration was a little too ominous for my taste (I preferred Walter Cronkite), so I didn’t think Judy Dench was a real step down, although the script was dumbed down. The interactive ending provided a distraction but was still pretty lame (not that the last incarnation of kids on the internet was much better) World Showcase Ambassadors: I was glad to see that Disney still brings over young people from various nations to work at their respective Showcases. It’s always great interacting with these kids. CONS: Staggered Opening: I used to enjoy Future world at night, when it emptied out. Now, thanks to the staggered opening, it remains crowded until 7pm when they shut it down and push everyone into World Showcase. Penny pinching. Horizons Gone: It was my all time favorite WDW attraction growing up. It’s like someone bulldozed the street I grew up on. Let us hope that the blueprints have been saved for a brighter day. Fastpass: I’ve seen the whole Fastpass debate from the sidelines and now that I’ve experienced it, I come down (slightly) on the side of the anti-Fastpassers, for many of the generally-accepted reasons: it creates resentment between guests; it damages the build-up and story of an attraction that is often found in the queue; it requires you to create a strategic plan rather than explore the parks. Others in our group thought Fastpass was the best thing since sliced bread. We did use it quite a bit. I assume the majority of WDW visitors (in today’s age of instant gratification) are in favor of Fastpass and that it is here to stay. I guess it’s not so bad. Soarin’: As the most popular ride at WDW, my expectations were high. I was very underwhelmed. The theme and queue are incredibly boring and poorly themed… probably the least imaginative theme and queue ever for an E ticket. The ride itself, while cool in some ways, had some serious flaws: If you sit on the far left or right edges, you are not fully immersed by the screen and don’t get the sensation of flying; the abrupt cuts from scene to scene are pure laziness (why not add cloud special effects to transition from San Fran to Yosemite); the screen ribbing (either that or dirt) was pretty easily visible – a constant reminder that we were watching a movie. There is no story to care about, no adventure and the ride doesn’t tie in with The Land pavilion, much less Future World. Test Track: While the high speed part was exhilarating, the story for this attraction was just awful. We’re testing cars for GM. I feel like I do that on a daily basis. I can imagine this exact same ride with an adventure backstory and corresponding queue, pre-show and animatronic scenes and it would be a must-see (maybe Star Wars-based if it could be miraculously airlifted and dropped in another park). But playing the part of test dummies at an automobile test track… there is nothing about that which sparks the imagination. The original World of Motion did vastly better service to Future World and to Epcot. Menus at Marrakesh: While I enjoyed my curry mussels, the menus at this restaurant looked like they’ve been in use since Morocco opened. I’ve seen menus in better condition at Denny’s. Sightlines: A great theme park experience should transport you. Whenever something from the outside world makes an intrusion, it diminishes the overall experience. Locating the Swan and Dolphin hotels so that they loom over World Showcase was a terrible decision by Disney’s master planners. The Soarin’ theater works somewhat with Future World architecture, but the view of Canada was better before Soarin. OVERALL: Epcot, specifically Future World, faces a big dilemma. Once (from 1983 to the early 1990s) it was a coherent, stunning, and exciting tribute to a hopeful future. But piece by piece it was dismantled (maybe by necessity, maybe not) and transformed into a bizarre and incongruent amalgam of random, unimaginative attractions with no overarching thread to connect them (and no more memorable music, save Imagination). It faces a similar challenge as California Adventure, Walt Disney Studios Paris and the U.S. Tomorrowlands: it needs an identity. Animal Kingdom and Hong Kong Disneyland might be short on attractions, but they are secure in their own skins and can therefore grow comfortably and organically. Future World has an opposite - and much more difficult - problem to correct: it is plenty big attraction-wise, but the place no longer transports you, it no longer stirs the soul. How do you connect a Soarin’ with a Nemo with a Test Track so the whole place makes sense? (The way World of Motion, Horizons and Living Seas worked hand in hand together). How to make a natural whole out of park that currently feels like an assemblage of spare parts. This is the challenge Epcot now faces.
