Originally Posted By leemac <<So, Leemac, in your opinion, what should be the mission of Epcot? Future World in particular? Surely something better than "Science Fair" and it can't really be Tomorrowland.>> The current mission statement of Future World is exactly what you'd expect for Tomorrowland. TL isn't the land of the future any more and never will be. Instead it will be a collection of different assets and more often than not based on movie tie-ins. I don't have an issue with that as I think that MK's TL is a horrible canvas to work on - far too open and vast to really create a cohesive vision. Although TDL's version is even worse. I'm probably not the right person to ask about Future World as I still love it. I enjoy Mission:SPACE, Test Track and The Seas with Nemo & Friends.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<I'm probably not the right person to ask about Future World as I still love it. I enjoy Mission:SPACE, Test Track and The Seas with Nemo & Friends.>> Me too.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>I loved the original Epcot Center as much as the next person but ultimately I felt the park needed to evolve and more away from the "educational" aspects that didn't keep up with the audience's ability to source knowledge elsewhere.<<< It should have evolved in how it presented information, not the image of the future it presented. The optimism and wonder is sorely needed back.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***At worse edutainment attractions are downright revisionist like Meet The World*** Apparently you've never attended a Japanese public school history class. ;p
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb >>>It should have evolved in how it presented information, not the image of the future it presented. The optimism and wonder is sorely needed back.<<< Sadly no one is buying the optimistic "Star Trek" view of the future right now. Too many fear the distopian "Blade Runner" (or similar) view of the future is where we'll end up. Get too optimistic and FW becomes a joke :-(.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>Sadly no one is buying the optimistic "Star Trek" view of the future right now. Too many fear the distopian "Blade Runner" (or similar) view of the future is where we'll end up. Get too optimistic and FW becomes a joke :-(.<<< Hey, it works in RoE, and to an extent in Spaceship Earth. No reason to experiment and see if it works. I think it would. But seriously... The way people view the world now is depressing.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>And I would never mistake the parks for bringing a "moment in time brought to life." Disney's history is a very biased version.<<< As a historian, I would say all history is biased (look at the Beyeau Tapestry, stitched 20 years after the Norman Conquest, tells a a ver biased side, or indeed most tales of the American Revolutionary War). Disney has always tried to educate, pretty much since the 1930's. It is only during Igers reign they seem to have stopped.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>>I prefer the classic E-tickets to the toons, but c'mon, it's simply a preference, Dave, not a reflection of one's intellect (though you probably beg to differ).<<< Yep I would, I lament how stupid TV has become, or most movies, or the fact so many people do not read, or how news is not longer news but editorial, and how Disney have dumbed things down to a toon level. funny, I used to defend Disney parks when people considered them low brow (I always thought they were medium brow with some highs). Now, they are pretty much low brow. Turkey leg anyone?
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo It is so sad that there no longer seems to be an appetite for a happy medium. As many on here know, my main draws at WDW are Epcot and DAK. Why? Because they are immersive and entertaining with an educational layer. In raising my kids, of course we take them to museums, different cities, galleries and the like, and we have fun. But still I know if we take them to Rome or Athens there is a potential fun factor missing. Also, it can be jarring in the real world to have a vision of what a place is like (e.g. Paris) and then see a 1960's office building with graffitti and a guy urinating in the street. Disney used to offer a really great taster, an idealised vision of Africa, or the Caribbean, or the old West etc. It still does, but each piece of tooning or thrilling erodes the theme. Also, my love of Disney stemmed from having many disabled friends and family members. It used to be we could all go to Disneyland and enjoy everything together, then that started to change in the late 70's and has been getting more and more away from the mission for the last few decades. That really saddens me.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Disney used to offer a really great taster, an idealised vision of Africa, or the Caribbean, or the old West etc.>> Color me confused - you say that "all of history is biased" and then add this? Are you saying that you like your history to be idealized? Seems at odds for someone that is lamenting the fact that (US) news has shifted to op-ed talking heads (you can't aim the same accusations at the UK news media).
Originally Posted By leemac <<But seriously... The way people view the world now is depressing.>> There is a difference between optimism and escapism IMHO. Disney should be an escape - taking you to places you can't visit whether it be the past or fictitious. Entertainment doesn't need to be optimistic in its presentation. That said most of Disney's output continues to be on the sunny side of life. I don't see that changing with the changes to the parks. Epcot isn't any more dour because it has shied away from its historical storytelling.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>>There is a difference between optimism and escapism IMHO. Disney should be an escape - taking you to places you can't visit whether it be the past or fictitious. Entertainment doesn't need to be optimistic in its presentation. That said most of Disney's output continues to be on the sunny side of life. I don't see that changing with the changes to the parks. Epcot isn't any more dour because it has shied away from its historical storytelling.<<< I don't find this true at all? What, in EPCOT, is now about the opportunity and "sunny" side? Mission: SPACE, to some extent... but Test Track? Nemo? Imagination? None of them have that grand feeling of YOU being the engine for progress and technology or science. That's an issue, IMO, because that's what made the original park so grand. There's none of that, now... it's a very cold, excitement driven, deal. There's no personality in it.
Originally Posted By Mr X You don't think Imagination is "sunny side"? Funny that you say Mission actually *is*, since the ending is a mission gone horribly wrong (simulation or otherwise)...what's optimistic about THAT?
Originally Posted By Mr X ***None of them have that grand feeling of YOU being the engine for progress and technology or science*** I think that if you use that as your narrow criteria, Test Track certainly DOES fit the bill. After all, YOU get to participate in the creation of the car of tomorrow, since that's all done via Test Track. When you stop and think about it, Test Track really DOES keep to the original Epcot vision in a way. Mission Space? Not so much.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Also, it can be jarring in the real world to have a vision of what a place is like (e.g. Paris) and then see a 1960's office building with graffitti and a guy urinating in the street. ...It still does, but each piece of tooning or thrilling erodes the theme.<< So are you saying that instead of having toons and thrills, you think that Disney should have graffitti and people urinating on the streets? It certainly would add some realism to Hollywood Blvd at the Studios if they added some skanky lingere stores and a handful of hookers, instead of the Citizens of Hollywood. Part of what's great about Disney stuff is that it isn't real and never will be. It's the only place to get that. Yah, the toons and thrills get old, but to an extent I would rather have those than too much realism.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 None of them have that grand feeling of YOU being the engine for progress and technology or science. That's an issue, IMO, because that's what made the original park so grand. There's none of that, now... it's a very cold, excitement driven, deal. There's no personality in it. --------------- Soarin' is a feel good ride..The Land is very much exactly what you are asking for and what has that become ? A side attraction at best for most visitors. So how does Disney keep the masses happy and still do this- the Land is a nive future driven diversion that most visitors avoid like the plague. Energy was made to be more 'personal' as you ask with Ellen- and it also is largely ignored. How can they force peoiple to actually be entertained while causing them to think at the same time ? This is not an EPCOT only issue- it carries across to public education .. Although JII is fairly lame- it at a most bawsic level asks people to use their imagination to think things thru -- the story telling was surely better originally, but the concept is a good one...walk on attraction. I wish I had the solution but EPCOT is not the problem - it's a general public mainly with the attention span of a gnat and seeking immediate gee whiz gratification
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<the Land is a nive future driven diversion that most visitors avoid like the plague. Energy was made to be more 'personal' as you ask with Ellen- and it also is largely ignored. >> Yea...this isn't necessarily true. While they aren't as popular as TT, M:S, or Soarin', both attractions pull in pretty decent numbers. Far from "ignoring them like the plague".
Originally Posted By plpeters70 vbdad - the three examples you have chosen are all attractions that either haven't been touched in years, or were "upgraded" into something much less appealing than the original was. As a counter example, look at Spaceship Earth - that ride still draws them in. Granted, it lives in the most amazing ride building in all of Walt Disney World, but I'd like to think that some of the draw is just that it is an amazing ride too. The Land, Energy and JII all need work - Energy and JII need to be totally re-done from top-to-bottom, and Living with the Land needs to be updated. (And it's probably time for that Lion King film to be retired too!)
Originally Posted By Britain When Steve Jobs came on board as the company's largest share holder, I really felt that he was going to insist on sprucing up Epcot to reflect his sensibilities. I guess he prefers to make futuristic things for the here and now, rather than make speculative (fake) things about the future. Leemac, any insight on Jobs' influence on that? Or on imagineering in general? Thanks in advance!
