Epcot....what happened?

[Princess_Lisa]

Periodically these types of thread emerge regarding the loss of the distinct theme of each park. I too miss the day when "MGM" was a working studio and the attractions related to a movie studio. I miss EPCOT being a look at new or futuristic technology, innovation or just science. I agree with others that they could/should get sponsors like Tesla, Apple to show off those new technologies. There is no reason why introducing these educational or science concepts can't still be a ride or attraction that draws enough patrons to disperse the crowds evenly.

This. When I was a kid, each park had a distinct concept and its attractions focused on that concept. Now, there's a little bit of everything spread over all the parks.

 

[Bree]

Sponsorship or not, for the life of me I cannot figure out why Disney can't get Sony, LG, Apple, Google, Tesla, (and on and on and on) to display their current and prototype products in Epcot. Huge audience. Engaged audience. Free publicity. If that is not the proper direction for Epcot, I don't know what is. Oh yeah. Now I remember. Wanna Build A Snowman?

My thoughts too. The place is no longer an Experimental Prototype Community Of Tomorrow. I used to love the Innoventions buildings. My kids still talk about the time they got to be in a video game. That was 8 years ago!

 

[epcotty]

Yeah, Epcot isn't really as amazing as it used to be, I agree. It's still a great park and we still enjoy going though

 

[DisneyChristmas]

DH and I enjoyed the Millennium addition of several nations (not found in World Showcase) markets, rides, and interactive displays at the indoor area where Soarin eventually was built. I wish that this could have continued.

 

[atricks]

The Imagination pavilion is a shadow of its former self, the ride was shortened and nowhere near as good as the original (although the first replacement was even worse), the magic eye theater (Magic Journeys, EO, Honey I shrunk the Audience) isn't even being used anymore. Disney just refused to update Future world and let a lot of things rot to the point they shut them down. (Ellen was a good example of that too, and Innoventions, and Wonders of Life, or the second half of Spaceship Earth)

Sponsorships dropping out were part of the reason, but not the only reason, they just let it stagnate.

The old area you talked about, the Imageworks upstairs portion of Imagination, is now used as a DVC lounge, but even though some of the old stuff is still standing, it's all off and/or broken. Rainbow Tunnel in particular looks sad nowadays.

 

[bryanb]

I totally agree with you. Especially Tesla. Tesla should be sponsoring the Motor Speedway at MK with electric based cars. It’s amazingly head scratching why gas guzzling cars are still being used. Actually, a Sugar Rush themed Motor Speedway would be better than that even!

Alas, I don't think that can happen. Chevrolet® is the official exclusive car sponsor. I'm sure they have an iron-clad contract that would not allow other non-GM brands to have a competing message, even in another park. Maybe once the GM contract runs out, Tesla could swoop in.

 

[bryanb]

This. When I was a kid, each park had a distinct concept and its attractions focused on that concept. Now, there's a little bit of everything spread over all the parks.

Totally agree. Same thing is happening with Disney California Adventure and Hollywood Studios. They're becoming generic IP theme parks where anything can get crammed in there. Only Animal Kingdom has remained relatively pure in concept, though some would debate whether Pandora fits... but at least it has a conservation theme. For the others, seems like anything goes.

 

[50surgeries2012]

I'd wish they would bring back the old version of the Figment ride. I loved that version. The latest one seems OK. But, it's just not as magical as it used to be. It seems kind of more cheesy now.

 

[DaisyNY]

In addition to Guardians of Galaxy, I read somewhere that they are adding a 3D or 4D Ratatouille ride to France...two very welcome additions!

 

[Magic_Man]

Maybe once the GM contract runs out, Tesla could swoop in.

Keep in mind, though, that cars are the minority of what Tesla makes. Their true future is in solar tile and battery technology. But I get your point.
The whole sponsorship think is a red herring. Sponsors were a necessity when Epcot was built as the company was teetering. After that, sponsorships became "nice to haves" because, well, who wouldn't want free money. But today? For the cost of making a third rate Star Wars spin off movie (of which there will no doubt be half a dozen), the futuristic heart and soul of Epcot could be restored. Instead of charging sponsors like Siemens (who doesn't even really make any consumer products that an average guest can go into a store and buy) to be a sponsor, Disney could ask companies to come in free of charge to display their products. The cost to Disney of having LG take over a quarter of the old Innoventions is the same as having that exact same square footage sit empty.

 

[dreiwhit]

Sponsorships dropping out were part of the reason, but not the only reason, they just let it stagnate.

FWIW, I don't think anyone at Disney corp really knows what to do with Epcot. And no one really seemed to have a vision for that park.

 

[HydroGuy]

Totally agree. Same thing is happening with Disney California Adventure and Hollywood Studios. They're becoming generic IP theme parks where anything can get crammed in there. Only Animal Kingdom has remained relatively pure in concept, though some would debate whether Pandora fits... but at least it has a conservation theme. For the others, seems like anything goes.

I partly agree with you but I think with regard to DCA it is more complicated. I thought the move to change Tower of Terror into Guardians of the Galaxy was absolutely terrible. What I have heard is that Disney had a licensing issue with the Twilight Zone IP owner which made changing ToT a priority for them. For some reason DHS either does not have the same issue regarding ToT or the timing is further out in the future. I do not know. I think that is what pushed them from ToT to GOTG at DCA. To their credit, they did a good job with GOTG and it has been a huge hit with visitors. Whether it has along a long shelf life is TBD.

Just about everything else that they have done to DCA has been A+ to me. Except for changing the theme of Condor Flats to more of a National parks theme. But I was clearly in the minority on that.

Now they are changing Paradise Pier to Pixar Pier. In that I thought Paradise Pier was a weak, cheap theme in the first place that would make Walt Disney roll over in his grave (he did not like seaside amusement parks which is one reason he built Disneyland in the first place) I support the transformation of Pixar Pier.

However, I am concerned with GOTG and Pixar Pier they are losing touch with the theme of the whole park as it relates to California.

With regard to DHS, it sounds like I liked the DHS of recent years a lot more than the typical WDW visitor where it ranks #4 in visitors. I am sad by how much they are changing it and afraid it will not feel the same anymore. Star Wars Land? Perfect move. Toy Story Land? Not sure yet. Closing Great Movie Ride for Mickey Mouse ride? That will make me forever sad. Although GMR was showing its age and probably becoming less and less relevant to the younger generation. Loss of Lights, Motor, Action? I thought that was perfect for DHS and am saddened by that loss as well. Streets of America? Good riddance to that waste of space in my book.

 

[bryanb]

Keep in mind, though, that cars are the minority of what Tesla makes. Their true future is in solar tile and battery technology. But I get your point.
The whole sponsorship think is a red herring. Sponsors were a necessity when Epcot was built as the company was teetering. After that, sponsorships became "nice to haves" because, well, who wouldn't want free money. But today? For the cost of making a third rate Star Wars spin off movie (of which there will no doubt be half a dozen), the futuristic heart and soul of Epcot could be restored. Instead of charging sponsors like Siemens (who doesn't even really make any consumer products that an average guest can go into a store and buy) to be a sponsor, Disney could ask companies to come in free of charge to display their products. The cost to Disney of having LG take over a quarter of the old Innoventions is the same as having that exact same square footage sit empty.

Yeah sponsorships are a bit confusing. Corporate alliances were all the rage at one point, and they often had added benefits. The terms of those deals are confidential, but it was believed that Coca-Cola gave Disney all of the syrup for free or at cost (imagine the profit on a $3+ soft drink!) in exchange for signage. GM would have Disney Parks promotions in showrooms and feature it in advertising. I have no clue what Siemens does for Disney other than cash. Maybe they supply some other technology to the parks at reduced cost. But it would be so much better if these tie-ins had a more natural fit into the theming.

I partly agree with you but I think with regard to DCA it is more complicated. I thought the move to change Tower of Terror into Guardians of the Galaxy was absolutely terrible. What I have heard is that Disney had a licensing issue with the Twilight Zone IP owner which made changing ToT a priority for them. For some reason DHS either does not have the same issue regarding ToT or the timing is further out in the future. I do not know. I think that is what pushed them from ToT to GOTG at DCA. To their credit, they did a good job with GOTG and it has been a huge hit with visitors. Whether it has along a long shelf life is TBD.

Just about everything else that they have done to DCA has been A+ to me. Except for changing the theme of Condor Flats to more of a National parks theme. But I was clearly in the minority on that.

Now they are changing Paradise Pier to Pixar Pier. In that I thought Paradise Pier was a weak, cheap theme in the first place that would make Walt Disney roll over in his grave (he did not like seaside amusement parks which is one reason he built Disneyland in the first place) I support the transformation of Pixar Pier.

However, I am concerned with GOTG and Pixar Pier they are losing touch with the theme of the whole park as it relates to California.

With regard to DHS, it sounds like I liked the DHS of recent years a lot more than the typical WDW visitor where it ranks #4 in visitors. I am sad by how much they are changing it and afraid it will not feel the same anymore. Star Wars Land? Perfect move. Toy Story Land? Not sure yet. Closing Great Movie Ride for Mickey Mouse ride? That will make me forever sad. Although GMR was showing its age and probably becoming less and less relevant to the younger generation. Loss of Lights, Motor, Action? I thought that was perfect for DHS and am saddened by that loss as well. Streets of America? Good riddance to that waste of space in my book.

Good points. For Paradise Pier, I think I grew to tolerate it for what it was, but you're right that these amusement parks (complete with carnival games and whirly rides) were the antithesis of what Walt wanted. So ironic that the park actually paid homage to them. I find it too bad that Star Wars land is at Disneyland park too, but I don't have a better solution. I need to just repeat to myself the mantra that Disneyland will never be completed.

 

[Magic_Man]

I have no clue what Siemens does for Disney other than cash.

Something to do with monorails, perhaps? If so, it's not a hefty endorsement of what Siemens does.

 

[ttintagel]

In a nutshell, the company just didn't believe enough in EPCOT, and didn't think there would be a big enough return on investment, to invest in keeping things modernized and refreshed while still staying true to the original mission.


Specific to ImageWorks - there's a great YouTube video,“Imagination 1999 and 2002 ultimate tribute” by MartinsVidsDotNet, that details all the changes to the imagination Pavilion over the years, and the rationale for each one.


The spark that Lit the fuse was a part of the contract with the original sponsor, that said the Pavilion had to be refurbished after a certain number of years. However, there was nothing about who would pay for it, and so the sponsor wouldn't put up the money. That led Disney to make every change as cheaply as possible. Keeping the upstairs section open would have meant spending money to make it accessible for guests with disabilities, and continuing to do maintenance on both floors. It was cheaper for them to just close it down.

 

[Magic_Man]

The spark that Lit the fuse

Sort of gives a whole new meaning to:

 

[glassslippergirl]

FWIW, I don't think anyone at Disney corp really knows what to do with Epcot. And no one really seemed to have a vision for that park.

It does seem that way. To me, Disney has proven that they aren't good at updating attractions when they become outdated. They wait until it is hopelessly outdated, and close it instead. Disney Quest is the best example. The attractions there were never meant to be in use 15+ years after they were opened; they were meant to be replaced regularly to showcase new technology. For whatever reason ($), they weren't updated often, and almost two decades later, the whole facility closed. I know there were issues with the business model and the franchises that never happened, but that one Disney Quest could in Disney Springs could have been a shining star if it was updated as needed. Many of us have fond memories of Image Works, but by the time it closed, many of the attractions were becoming outdated as we were doing more and more on the Internet. That one station where you could direct the music, that's become a game on Wii that anyone can do at home now (DH, who loved that particular station at Image Works when he was a kid, was soooooooooo excited to buy that game). It's an inherent problem with "future-tech"-- eventually, the future becomes the present. By the changes being made to Epcot, I think Disney is telling us that they are moving away from attractions that showcase the "technology of tomorrow." It's too expensive, time consuming, disruptive-- whatever-- to update these attractions as often as needed. And so the vision becomes showcasing their intellectual property, which probably does have a longer "shelf life" before it will need an update.