Originally Posted By pheneix >>>has been all downhill since Emmer left his VP position in 1995 (although there were already issue in his tenure, to be fair!)<<< Since it got us a really cool fountain to look at, I'll forgive him for greenlighting Splashtacular.
Originally Posted By Labuda "Just don't touch my photo monoliths - I LOVE my pic being there 24/7/365!" SAME HERE! I'm at WDW ALL DAY EVERY DAY AND I LOVE IT! Ok, done yelling. hehe
Originally Posted By kennect My ex sister inlaw wouldn't allow her children to listen to Boy George...I am so thankful I can refer to her as "Ex" these days....Sorry to be OT here but this woman needs to be brought down....
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<EPCOT Center of the 1980s was so BIG in scope and execution ... so awe-inspiring that you almost thought the future was going be a Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow (too bad the 1990s and 00s have shown that to be very false). Disney's small-minded management with even smaller budgets have made the place feel smaller in many aspects.>> Oh come now. The main thing that has made Epcot seem smaller today is the relentless march of time. Spaceship Earth's lighting effects with neon tubes that seemed spectacular in the 80's seem positively quaint today. Flight simulators like Body Wars were cutting edge in the 80's. Can you seriously claim that they are today? Besides, Body Wars was never as good as Star Tours anyway, unless you liked to barf. <<Sophistication is a great word to describe the EPCOT Center of the 1980s.>> World of Motion sophisticated? Slapstick settings with animatronics recycled from other Disney attractions is sophisticated? Well, maybe to the Floridian's palate it is. Test Track actually attempts to educate people about what goes into automobile testing. Although it may have been entertaining, did WOM really educate anyone about anything? Horizons was a very well done attraction. And miraculously enough it was the ONE Future World attraction that actually dealt with the future!! But sophisticated? Maybe IMAX projections were cutting edge in the 80's. But now that everyone has seen IMAX films far more sophisticated than anything in Horizons, would it hold the same attraction today that it did then? Horizons had some pretty nice sets, but they were static. It worked for the 80's audience. Would it work today? Our daily exposure to increasingly sophisticated special effects makes the set pieces in Horizons seem (once again the phrase) positively quaint. The scope of Epcot has not gotten smaller. The world around it has gotten bigger and more sophisticated. Something that wowed us in the 80's doesn't wow us 20 years later. I think Epcot has done a tremendous job with trying to stay relevant and current in both its subject matter and its use of technology. It the 80’s still really turns your crank, what the heck? Get out your Boy George cassettes, find a barber who still does a mullet, and spend your time in Yesterland. I’ll be here in the 21st century waiting for you to catch up.
Originally Posted By leemac <<<<You think that with Jim MacPhee playing a key role in getting Eric's little monster torn down might create a little "tension" between WDI and Epcot management? >> I would say so. I can imagine the word 'frigid' might describe the feelings between the two paties.>> None whatsoever. Eric designed the wand for Epcot's Millennium experience and it worked wonders. It was never designed to still be in place in '07. At least MK did honor their agreement to remove the 50th decorations (also by Eric). WDI (including Eric) have been trying to get the wand taken down for years. That decision could only come from WDW management. <<In my very limited experience in dealing with Jim I can already tell he has ideas for Epcot that are way different than what WDI probably would like. For that matter, they are probably different than what his peers in TDO would like too.>> Well it doesn't make any difference. A park VP in WDW has very little input in future strategic planning for the park. Jim is there to run the existing operations from CMs to special events like Flower & Garden and Food & Wine to maintenance. He isn't there to propose future projects. He can have input as a member of the management team in the same way that his colleagues at MK, D-MGM and DAK can (only Dr. Beth has significantly more clout as she is very much on Joe Rohde's wavelength).
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> Now, if they could only bulldoze the hat at MGM, << Rumors I've heard are that the hat is the new icon, and isn't going anywhere. it's more likely that the Grauman's facade behind it will disappear someday.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 “I think Epcot has done a tremendous job with trying to stay relevant and current in both its subject matter and its use of technology.†I’m sorry, but how exactly are the current rides more sophisticated and relevant than the originals? Test Track is a ride in a car through an almost empty warehouse – I’d much rather have, as you said, “Slapstick settings with animatronics recycled from other Disney attractions†-- at least there was plenty to look at. Not to mention that catchy song!! Or Imagination – they took out all of the cutting edge special effects and animatronics, and replaced it with cardboard flats and three animatronic Figments – yeah, real cutting edge. But at least they brought back the song. Mission: Space – they removed a ride that was 15 minutes in length and replaced it with a 3 minute simulator. And while it’s certainly intense, it’s really not that different than riding Star Tours or Body Wars. Maybe if they had actually built the entire, grand Space Pavillion – but like everything else in the new Epcot, it was a half-*ss effort. And then there’s Nemo – the only “cutting edge†effect is the 3 screens in the tanks – the rest is just video projections. I’ll say this, of all the new stuff, Nemo probably is the best – special effects-wise, but it’s still a far, far cry from some of the original EPCOT attractions of the 80s. I really could go on and on, but I think you see my point. Not one of the new Epcot attractions has been anywhere near as grand in scope as any of the original EPCOT Center attractions built in the 80s. And yes, I agree that those rides needed updates – but to replace them with something inferior to the original product is not what I would call progress…
Originally Posted By plpeters70 "None whatsoever. Eric designed the wand for Epcot's Millennium experience and it worked wonders." Could someone please point me to some data that shows that the Wand somehow worked "wonders" for the park. I mean, one of the things that people who like the Wand always said to people who wanted it down was that "ordinary guests don't care one way or the other." So, if they don't care about the Wand anyway, what good was it really doing for Epcot?? Do we actually have any real proof?
Originally Posted By leemac <<Could someone please point me to some data that shows that the Wand somehow worked "wonders" for the park.>> The wand was part of Epcot's Millennium celebration. Most commentators have said that Epcot posted some decent numbers during that period. Was it due to the wand? Highly unlikely but it was all part of the experience. It did play its part. I always thought it was a clever addition to the park for that period. The park just came alive again during that period with no significant attraction developments. Has it overstayed its welcome? Definitely but I never found it to be offensive like some. The Sorcerer Hat at D-MGM I never understood at all. However a lot of that is down to the celebration it was attached to: the 100 Years of Magic just didn't work. The only real lasting legacy is the Jammin' Jungle parade at DAK.
Originally Posted By dshyates EPCOT when it opened was spectacular in scope and Disney has let it rot on the vine. Yes the 80s stuff is provencial now. The future is still ahead of us and Disney is celebrating it by ignoring it. Everything that has been "upgraded" has been shortened and less themed. The queue for Soarin' was so bad they barely got it opened before they had to rebuild it. Just like the ENTIRE park next to Disneyland. I know for a fact they need to fire or excecute or something their entire flock of ivy league educated MBAs and get in people who love Disney. More guys who think a sub ride is cooler than marketing Mickey Mouse toilet paper to WalMart. In other words more guys trying to raise brand value, less guys who don't even understand what it is they are killing.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Test Track is a ride in a car through an almost empty warehouse – I’d much rather have, as you said, “Slapstick settings with animatronics recycled from other Disney attractions†-- at least there was plenty to look at. Not to mention that catchy song!!>> I think the lines for Test Track show that most people disagree with your assessment of it as a ride through an empty warehouse. It also employs some of the most advanced ride technology ever used. <<Or Imagination – they took out all of the cutting edge special effects and animatronics, and replaced it with cardboard flats and three animatronic Figments – yeah, real cutting edge. But at least they brought back the song.>> I didn't mention Imagination, now did I? I didn't think the original was that great, but the current one is certainly not an improvement. <<Mission: Space – they removed a ride that was 15 minutes in length and replaced it with a 3 minute simulator. And while it’s certainly intense, it’s really not that different than riding Star Tours or Body Wars. Maybe if they had actually built the entire, grand Space Pavillion – but like everything else in the new Epcot, it was a half-*ss effort.>> I don't buy that long = good. You must really love the Tiki's. I can't believe that anyone who has actually been on Mission Space would equate it to Star Tours or Body Wars. The experiences are totally different, as is the technology. Oh well, everyone has an opinion and you are entitled to yours. It is just very different from mine.
Originally Posted By DLFAN1979 ""I think the lines for Test Track show that most people disagree with your assessment of it as a ride through an empty warehouse."" Its called HYPE and seeing and hearing a car go whooooosh at 60mph outside. Do you REALLY REALLY think guests know whats INSIDE? Hell, these are the same ppl that dont even KNOW what Mansion or Pirates is.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Do you REALLY REALLY think guests know whats INSIDE? Hell, these are the same ppl that dont even KNOW what Mansion or Pirates is.>> Yes I do. Seventy percent of WDW visitors are repeat visitors. They've likely been on it before. Source: <a href="http://www.qualitydigest.com/jan97/disney.html" target="_blank">http://www.qualitydigest.com/j an97/disney.html</a> Next time you strike such a condescending tone you might want to make sure that what you are saying actually makes sense.
Originally Posted By danyoung >Its called HYPE and seeing and hearing a car go whooooosh at 60mph outside.< Hype works for the first few months of an attraction's opening. After that the lines are a result of the attraction's ongoing popularity, as evidenced by Test Track, or failure, as evidenced by Mission: Space. And yes, Trippy, Test Track is a hit. But I still miss World of Motion, and wish they had put in a fully immersive multi-scene multi AA attraction to replace it.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<But I still miss World of Motion, and wish they had put in a fully immersive multi-scene multi AA attraction to replace it.>> I can understand that. Most of my favorite attractions at WDW use AA. I guess the difference is I'm fine with getting my AA at Magic Kingdom and experiencing different types of attractions at the other parks.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<My ex sister inlaw wouldn't allow her children to listen to Boy George...I am so thankful I can refer to her as "Ex" these days....Sorry to be OT here but this woman needs to be brought down....>> Let's all start an online campaign to bring down Ken's ex-sister-in-law ... I'll sign the petition, someone pass a pen ... crazy broad actually LIKED the wand too!
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Oh come now. The main thing that has made Epcot seem smaller today is the relentless march of time. >> Bull. Tripster. EPCOT was built to be timeless. SSE (minus the cartoon appendage) and all of the pavilions were built that way. What EPCOT wasn't built for was the total lack of reinvestment, not to mention upkeep that became the hallmark of Michael Eisner's Decade of Decline. You build a park and market as a permanent world's fair and then you wonder why guests in 1995 aren't lapping up 1982 entertainment that hasn't been changed? Gee ... that's real tough. EPCOT was meant to always be in a 'state of becoming' ... there were plans for new pavilions, new attractions, expansions ... nothing ever happened once Eisner got gunshy about spending money. <<Spaceship Earth's lighting effects with neon tubes that seemed spectacular in the 80's seem positively quaint today.>> I find that comment interesting only so much as there's a 'laser' effect that many folks think is new on SSE that in fact had been turned off/broken for well over a decade, but Siemens got working a few months ago. <<Flight simulators like Body Wars were cutting edge in the 80's. Can you seriously claim that they are today? Besides, Body Wars was never as good as Star Tours anyway, unless you liked to barf.>> Well, then we better tell WDI to stop the new Star Tours redo immediately, Trippy. Look, I don't disagree with the uderlying point about simulators. I feel WDI sold EVERYONE a bill of goods about them back in the late 80s as being the new wave of theme park technology and being so smart financially because you could regularly swap out shows and reprogram (raise a finger for every time that's happened ... oh, you were in a lawnmower accident? doesn't matter because you won't need a single digit). It's the same problem that even a great ride like Mission Space will have. It will never be reprogrammed. And after going on it 25 times, it doesn't have the same wow factor. <<Sophistication is a great word to describe the EPCOT Center of the 1980s.>> <<World of Motion sophisticated? Slapstick settings with animatronics recycled from other Disney attractions is sophisticated? Well, maybe to the Floridian's palate it is.>> WoM was a wonderful wacky AA-filled trip through the history of transportation worked on by Disney Legend Ward Kimball. No, it wasn't sophisticated, but neither is a ride through a black building in a GM car ... (commonly overheard: 'Mommy why are we stopped in the dark' ... 'That's why we own a Toyota and a BMW, sweetheart!') <<Test Track actually attempts to educate people about what goes into automobile testing. Although it may have been entertaining, did WOM really educate anyone about anything?>> The ride, no. But TranCenter was just as educational as anything in the Test Track pre/post show now. <<Horizons was a very well done attraction. And miraculously enough it was the ONE Future World attraction that actually dealt with the future!! But sophisticated? Maybe IMAX projections were cutting edge in the 80's. But now that everyone has seen IMAX films far more sophisticated than anything in Horizons, would it hold the same attraction today that it did then? Horizons had some pretty nice sets, but they were static. It worked for the 80's audience. Would it work today? Our daily exposure to increasingly sophisticated special effects makes the set pieces in Horizons seem (once again the phrase) positively quaint.>> Would it work today? I'd love to see the numbers for the last year Horizons ran open with FULL advertising and promotion vs. what Mission Space gets. I know this for a $150-million plus cost, MS has never had longer than a 45-minute wait anytime I've been there. Ever. Usually it's a walk-on to 30 minute type wait. Horizons needed updating ... changing ... plussing ... money ... just like every Epcot pavilion. It is absurd and beyond embarrassing that Disney is still showing a 1981 view of Canada and was doing likewise with China until 2003. You simply can't build a park like Epcot, leave it alone and think marketing schemes alone (Millennium anyone?) are enough to get people to visit. <<The scope of Epcot has not gotten smaller. The world around it has gotten bigger and more sophisticated. Something that wowed us in the 80's doesn't wow us 20 years later. I think Epcot has done a tremendous job with trying to stay relevant and current in both its subject matter and its use of technology.>> You're way off on this one, Trippy. Epcot has done a great job of being relevant? How? By closing attractions, resturants and shops and not replacing them? By sticking cartoon characters wherever they can? By closing the freaking park year-round at 9 p.m.? (great job, George!) Please don't insult those of us who know better. The fact that Epcot is still such a great place is a tribute to its original creators and scope. Because for the last 15 years, management has done its best to spend the least and WalMart the place. <<It the 80’s still really turns your crank, what the heck? Get out your Boy George cassettes, find a barber who still does a mullet, and spend your time in Yesterland. I’ll be here in the 21st century waiting for you to catch up.>> Sorry. No cassettes here. And you might enjoy a mullet, but I'll stick with the universal style and appeal the Spirit is known for. I wouldn't want to return to the 1980s )when people actually had healthcare and jobs weren't being sent to India and we weren't at war with 'evildoers' loosely defined as anyone the current administration doesn't like). But I would enjoy a return to the way Disney ran its parks in the 1980s. Super WalMart may work for you, but it doesn't for me.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip OK Spirit, you got me on one point. 80's Epcot would not seem very great today. But 80's Epcot was probably better for the 80's period in time than 2007 Epcot is for today's period in time. OK?
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<None whatsoever. Eric designed the wand for Epcot's Millennium experience and it worked wonders. It was never designed to still be in place in '07.>> You might want to tell that to the VP of the park when it was built who went around telling everyone it was designed to be there for a decade 'or more.' <<At least MK did honor their agreement to remove the 50th decorations (also by Eric).>> I don't think they had much choice. One reason is because the mirror clearly was for the 50th of Disney parks and would have made no sense whatsoever if it stayed (unless someone just put Disney Parks: Where Dreams Come True Across the Globe! on it ... see how easy it is to be a Disney marketing wiz?) The other reason why it didn't stay is that DSP wanted the characters to use for their Toon Studios redo. <<WDI (including Eric) have been trying to get the wand taken down for years. That decision could only come from WDW management.>> I don't know what Eric wanted, and unless he joins the LP community I doubt we will. I'm more interested in what Eric wants to do to plus Epcot. What Eric thinks needs to happen to Imagination and WoL. What is he going to do about all the 'dead zones' that are now in the park. What about World Showcase? It was always meant to grow and there are at least 5-6 expansion pads for new pavilions, are these just going to be used for Food and Wine Fest temp exhibits? That's what I want to know from Eric. <<In my very limited experience in dealing with Jim I can already tell he has ideas for Epcot that are way different than what WDI probably would like. For that matter, they are probably different than what his peers in TDO would like too.>> <<Well it doesn't make any difference. A park VP in WDW has very little input in future strategic planning for the park. Jim is there to run the existing operations from CMs to special events like Flower & Garden and Food & Wine to maintenance. He isn't there to propose future projects. He can have input as a member of the management team in the same way that his colleagues at MK, D-MGM and DAK can (only Dr. Beth has significantly more clout as she is very much on Joe Rohde's wavelength.>> Dr. Beth has the clout because she has Joe's ear and vice versa. I think it's the perfect symbiotic relationship between an ops exec and a creative/designer exec. I just don't see that kind of bond between Eric and Jim ... but Eric and Phil might be a different matter entirely!
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I can understand that. Most of my favorite attractions at WDW use AA. I guess the difference is I'm fine with getting my AA at Magic Kingdom and experiencing different types of attractions at the other parks.>> Yeah, Trippy, but the way Phil Holmes sees to it that the AAs aren't maintained, they're soon all going to look like manaquins at Macys.
