Rumor: EPCOT wand removal!

[pyrateslife4me84]

Wait whoa whoa whoa! I don't get this. I like the hat. I like the wand. It's all personal opinion really. But when someone says that the hat doesn't belong at the end of a street in Hollywood, then could someone tell me how a medieval (i can't spell) castle belongs at the end of a street modeled after a town in missouri from the early 1900s? No one has really mentioned that little irk. I have no problem with it at all, but it's the same idea as the hat.
And for the hat being nothing more than for pins... Disneyland's castle doesn't do anything at all (anymore.) I'm not attacking the castles, just in disbelief that no one really sees the similarities.

I guess the difference is that the castle isn't on Main Street...it's in Fantasyland. Perhaps if the Great Movie Ride were changed into a ride about animated films and they redefined the boundaries of Animation Courtyard to include the GMR, people would stop complaining (though I doubt it, but it would be the same idea as the castles fitting in).

[danyoung]

...when someone says that the hat doesn't belong at the end of a street in Hollywood, then could someone tell me how a medieval (i can't spell) castle belongs at the end of a street modeled after a town in missouri from the early 1900s?

You actually make a pretty good point there, PP. But I still have two big problems with the BAH. First, it just doesn't stylistically fit within the theme of Hollywood Blvd., where somehow stylistically and architecturally speaking, the castle seems a much better fit with Main Street. It's like here's a real Hollywood Blvd., and then all the sudden is this giant cartoon thing at the end. Doesn't work for me.

The second problem is that I really love the Chinese Theater, and I think the entire Blvd looked much better with this landmark at the end than the BAH.

Oh, and I really like your sig - big Python fan. "So, where are you going?" "I'm going with you." "No, you stay and guard the prince." "But if I were to go, would I go with you?" Just plain classic!

[Pizzapants]

You actually make a pretty good point there, PP. But I still have two big problems with the BAH. First, it just doesn't stylistically fit within the theme of Hollywood Blvd., where somehow stylistically and architecturally speaking, the castle seems a much better fit with Main Street. It's like here's a real Hollywood Blvd., and then all the sudden is this giant cartoon thing at the end. Doesn't work for me.

The second problem is that I really love the Chinese Theater, and I think the entire Blvd looked much better with this landmark at the end than the BAH.

Oh, and I really like your sig - big Python fan. "So, where are you going?" "I'm going with you." "No, you stay and guard the prince." "But if I were to go, would I go with you?" Just plain classic!

Haha, yeah you're only the second person to catch on to my sig Well done! It makes me happy that there are people out there with just as cynical a sense of humor as me. But anyway, about the BAH (that makes me laugh too) Yeah, it doesn't really fit with the hollywood blvd business. But i think what it comes down to is personal opinion and what you are used to. The first time i went to disney world was the only time the hat wasn't there, and that is the trip that is least profound in my memory. Every trip since then the hat has been there and so i've justr excepted it. I'm new-school
It's like at DIsneyland, the old-schoolers complain about Star Tours in Tomorrowland, yet it's been tehre ever since i have been going to the park, so in my mind it belongs there because "its always been there" to me. Same with the BAH. But I assume you went to dinsey world before the BAH, so that's what you are used to. And there's nothing wrong with that.

...even though i still feel that the BAH is really a secret missile silo... sshhhh!

[WDW1974]

There's a reason why Disney's parks are designed a certain way. There's a great book that came out about 10 years ago called Designing The Disney The,e Parks: The Architecture of Reassurance. It's well worth a read for anyone who thinks the BAH and BAW are OK with them.

It has nothing to do with opinion, despite what you may believe, when I say these things don't belong there from a story view-point, and yes, why it makes perfect sense to have a fairy-tale castle sitting at the end of Main Street USA.

My advice would be to buy the book and get an understanding of why Disney designed things the way they did, and why plunking a giant wand on the geosphere or a giant hat in front of the Chinese Theater is just plain wrong.

[Escapé]

It's a far cry when there's a richly detailed castle at the end of a street .. when compared to some "toony" styled icon like a wand and a sorcerer's hat straight out of Fantasia.

[TheDisneyInquisitor]

It has nothing to do with opinion, despite what you may believe, when I say these things don't belong there from a story view-point

It is opinion, however, when one says that they think the hat looks better (or the theater).

It's a far cry when there's a richly detailed castle at the end of a street .. when compared to some "toony" styled icon like a wand and a sorcerer's hat straight out of Fantasia.

Then what about Spaceship Earth? Although it has probably the coolest archetecture in WDW, it is by no means richly detailed. In fact, most people call it The Big Golf Ball.

[pyrateslife4me84]

There's a reason why Disney's parks are designed a certain way. There's a great book that came out about 10 years ago called Designing The Disney The,e Parks: The Architecture of Reassurance. It's well worth a read for anyone who thinks the BAH and BAW are OK with them.

It has nothing to do with opinion, despite what you may believe, when I say these things don't belong there from a story view-point, and yes, why it makes perfect sense to have a fairy-tale castle sitting at the end of Main Street USA.

My advice would be to buy the book and get an understanding of why Disney designed things the way they did, and why plunking a giant wand on the geosphere or a giant hat in front of the Chinese Theater is just plain wrong.

Yes it does have to do with opinion, because it's your opinion what the story is. The story remains unpublished as far as I know, and you are not an Imagineer, so you are assuming what the story is. It is my opinion that the story is changing...and that at least has the support of just about every new attraction since MGM opened...certainly since the publication of the out-dated book you speak of.

[Mouse princess]

. In fact, most people call it The Big Golf Ball.

I am one of those people.

I do not much like the hat, personaly, I like the Chinese theatre. But that is just a personal opinion. Not sure I would argue if it belongs there. MGM- movies- a hat from a movie- far stretch but it still a symbol of a movie. I don't hate it, it adds a bit more color and life that was not at MGM before.

[TheDisneyInquisitor]

MGM- movies- a hat from a movie- far stretch but it still a symbol of a movie.

Not that far fetched considering the chinese theater is just a place where you see movies. But I completely agree with you that it is just an opinion (and if you like the theater better, that's great).

-Michael

[danyoung]

Then what about Spaceship Earth? Although it has probably the coolest archetecture in WDW, it is by no means richly detailed. In fact, most people call it The Big Golf Ball.

What does rich detail have to do with it? Does the arch in St. Louis have rich detail? Not at all, yet it's one of the coolest structures in the country. The wand takes away from the majesty of SE because it's so cartoony! It's a cute thing to put up a big Mickey hand, and as a structure they did a decent job with it. I just don't think it fits the rest of the theming of Epcot. And every time I look in that direction from anywhere in Epcot, I just wish the thing would blow down and give us our perfect sphere back.

[danyoung]

The story remains unpublished as far as I know, and you are not an Imagineer, so you are assuming what the story is. It is my opinion that the story is changing...and that at least has the support of just about every new attraction since MGM opened...certainly since the publication of the out-dated book you speak of.

The book that WDW1974 spoke of IS the published story, right out of the mouths of the creative geniuses behind most of the great artwork in Disney history. It's widely considered to be the definitive manual on the subject of Disney architecture. Perhaps you should be a bit more familiar with it before you denigrate it so easily.

[TheDisneyInquisitor]

What does rich detail have to do with it?

Look at the quote I was replying to. (Btw, with all the hurricanes it survived, it ain't blowing down anytime soon )

-Michael

[TheDisneyInquisitor]

The book that WDW1974 spoke of IS the published story, right out of the mouths of the creative geniuses behind most of the great artwork in Disney history. It's widely considered to be the definitive manual on the subject of Disney architecture. Perhaps you should be a bit more familiar with it before you denigrate it so easily.

But does it ever once mention the wand and/or hat. Being that it was published in 1998, I doubt it. And unless it specifically says that the hat/wand doesn't go with the theming, it doesn't serve any use to this conversation.

[tloolgb]

Unless you consider morbidly obese folks wearing lanyards and cheap Pooh tees on ECVs to be quite cultured.

Ha ha ha ha!

[danyoung]

But does it ever once mention the wand and/or hat. Being that it was published in 1998, I doubt it. And unless it specifically says that the hat/wand doesn't go with the theming, it doesn't serve any use to this conversation.

I don't buy that at all, Mike. That's like saying that because the Constitution has no reference to pot or sex offenders, then it has no use in legal arguments. It's been a few years since I read the book, so I'll let WDW1974 pick up the thread. But in general, it simply lays out the thought processes for those who came up with the concept of entertainment architecture, which is what most Disney buildings are. Now, whether it has anything specifically to say about a wand or a hat, the concepts that were covered do indeed apply to this type of discussion. I may just have to break down and do some heavy reading over the weekend!