WOW some great posts!
Yes Splash Mountain is also a Theme Violation, one that we have all just accepted. But it does not fit the "Frontier" theme, except it does have a lot of red rock.
I also toyed with putting the Flying Carpets on here. But as others stated, the Adventureland theme is prett fluid around the world with Pacific Islands, the Caribbean, the Jungles of Africa all being depicted. So it is boarder line.
Like others, I WISH I could say Chester and Hester were a theme violation, however because they were very intelligently incorporated into the theme of Dinoland USA, it is not.
But while most of Futureworld at Epcot is a theme violation, there are a few pavilions that technically are not in violation.
1. Test Track - It is now forward thinking about the future of cars
2. Mission Space - forward thinking about the future of space travel
3. Ellen's Energy Adventure - outdated, but true to the theme
4. Journey into Imagination with Figment - while you might not be a fan, it is an exploration of what you imagination is.
4. Spaceship Earth - while the decent might make most of us weep, it is technically future focused even if it is told through an old eSurance commercial animation.
I like this thread a lot. It's thought provoking.
To me, Tomorrowland is kind of the dumping ground for things that the Consumer Products division wants in the parks to sell merchandise...and if it can in any way be connected to "aliens" or "space" then they stick it in Tomorrowland. Really, to them, Tomorrowland has become "Space Land" and anything vaguely "space" goes there.
Monsters Inc. is there because someone thought that monsters are close enough to "aliens" to belong there...and there was nowhere else to put anything Monsters Inc related. Because Monsters Inc. sells a lot of merchandise, they wanted to do something with it and they forced it into Tomorrowland.
I really wish "Meet the Robinsons" had been a big hit. Then, they could have redone Tomorrowland with the Robinsons as the heart and core...and had it be a land about inventors, inventions, and the limitless possibilities of the future. That could have been really cool. And even Buzz Lightyear could have made sense in that land if "Star Command" was fleshed out a little to maybe be an actual thing that exists in the future.
I think with the Star Wars purchase that we're going to eventually get a Tomorrowland that is really just a space port setting...and the attractions would all be departures off into world's from that port. I think this will work...but we are many, many years from Tomorrowland making any real sense.
As for the "Hat" at DHS. I teach my kids to never, ever use the word "hate"...but, oh, that hat. It makes me angry when I see it. Worse, is the stage they built in front of it. It's just ugly upon ugly. There is a house not far from where my sister lives where the people there have a bunch of cars up on blocks and an old truck and other junk. It looks like a house you'd see on the show Hoarders. Every time I see that Big Annoying Hat at DHS I think of those kinds of junky houses...and it feels like DHS is a park where they just let this clutter sit for all these years.
I really hope Disney learned a lesson from this and is not going to do any more elaborate, expensive, decorations that are "temporary". Because we know that in many cases these things aren't really temporary. They just sit there like hoarders' junk and clutter. I don't even remember what that "hat" was supposed to celebrate originally. Was it the millennium, or some park milestone for DHS? It just sat there for years.
What makes me angriest about the Hat is the excuse I've seen repeatedly for why it was never removed: that it was not in the budget to tear it down, so it was cheaper to leave it up. By that logic, we should all just leave our Christmas trees and lights up all year forever. Because that is easier than taking decorations down when the occasion is over.
It was put up for the 100 Years of Magic celebrating Walts birth. Wow I can't imagine the WDW of today throwing a celebration like that again. How times change.
And I think you are right about Tomorrowland it is just a dumping ground. Now if I were king of WDW. I would have put Monsters Inc Laugh Floor in DHS by Midway Mania in the Pixar Studios area.
Pixar Studios, then is a creative dumping ground.
True. But the way I see it, all of these other settings (Caribbean, Polynesian, Africa) basically are all junglie (jungle-ish?). To me, that makes them more complimentary than the desert environment that all of a sudden is there with spitting camels. Just my thought.
I'm not entirely sure how Nemo in the Seas is a theme violation. And I'm fine with Tomorrowland being a sci-fiction, whimsical sort of a place with Future World depicting real life future. We don't need two lands based on real future.
Where were you when we were brainstorming ideas for EPCOT?
Those are two questions, I honestly can't answer those questions looking at this attraction.
If you look at elements of the Seas with Nemo and Friends you can say ... yes that is it's thing to look at, or see.
Queue: Australian Beach and Under a pier
Ride: Trans Atlantic journey
Exit: Sea Base
Sea Base Area:
Animal Viewing: You are viewing from windows in an underwater Sea Base
You are at a scientific research station that is learning to talk with Turtles
Play play with semi-education exibits
So when you take all the elements independently you can say "yes that is nice, great theme" But when you add it all up to a whole that is supposed to be in Future World in Epcot which is defined on Wikipedia as
"Future World consists of a variety of pavilions that explore innovative aspects and applications including technology and science." - Epcot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It just doesn't come together.
I could not tell you how the Seas with Nemo and friends fits that theme, or how all the thematic elements make a whole within the pavilion itself.