EPCOT and the Disney Channel
Jul. 18th, 2007 01:58 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
acroyearOriginally posted for disneyworld , cross-posted here for my own records.
In the Disney blogosphere and "behind the scenes" literature, a lot of things are blamed for EPCOT's initial failures and subsequent inability to maintain a steady crowd and a loyal fanbase beyond the "geek" market. Walt's death and the inability of the Imagineers to build Walt's original vision (as we've now been able to see in full on DVD) ranks pretty high. Budget crises and crunches also come up.
"Lack of thrill rides" was Eisner's motto, but his subsequent development has split Futureworld into two - a thrill side (Test Track, Mission: Space) and a kids-friendly (semi-)education side (Seas, Land, Imagination). Rather than being a place the family stays together in (Walt's success in Disneyland), its become a place where families split up - mom and the under-10s go west, dad and the teenagers go east, and Grandma and Aunt Louise head south for the World Showcase. It's a very Balkanized place right now and it's unlikely to change in that respect.
One easy target is just the typical audience - nobody wants to be "educated" on their vacations anymore (if ever - see how the educational parts of both coasts' Tomorrowlands are gone). Horizons was doomed from the start to disinterest from a crowd that had to think too much and wanted a day to stop thinking.
But really, there's a much simpler explanation, one Disney could have done (and done beautifully) but didn't.
Marketing. But not in the typical "MBA" sense. Standard MBA marketing was the only thing they did, and it certainly wasn't enough, nor would it be what Walt, infamous for reinventing marketing on a regular basis, would have done.
EPCOT was beautiful, rich, clever, and wonderful when it opened.
But it was also stuck. It was condemned by Disney promotions and marketing to be a spot on a map.
Disneyland was NEVER a spot on a map. Disneyland was on TV, and was on TV first. More importantly, Disneyland on TV didn't show us that Disneyland was a place on a map, but that Disneyland was all around us. History, Fantasy, Science and Science Fiction, Nature, and Nostalgia were all there and all around. By the time Disneyland opened, with that same focus as the TV show in categorizing what we saw, we knew what we were entering: Disneyland in 3D, where we could do more than just watch it, we could live it.
EPCOT was just a spot on a map, a place to go visit. Nothing more. Why? Because EPCOT wasn't on TV. Yeah, the park was on TV, especially in its huge debut with the brilliant (if occasionally politically incorrect by modern standards) Danny Kaye. But EPCOT wasn't. Nothing tied EPCOT to anything else in the Disney arsenal or to anything else in the world around us.
In the oft-asked question "what would Walt do?", I see a very simple answer: Walt, even if he let EPCOT be what it became and not his original vision, would have done exactly what he did with Disneyland: tie it to TV. He would be giving the viewer glimpses into the EPCOT all around us, not just the EPCOT that was the park to be, just as much as he did 25 years before. How? EPCOT would have been a special daily or weekly part of the Disney Channel (personally, I think Walt would have named the channel itself EPCOT and had Disneyland-type stuff be the exception, not the norm).
The Disney Channel had just started a little while after EPCOT, in 1983. It had all the potential in the universe to dominate the children's tv space, which it did, AND link kids into seeing the parks as extension of the fun they saw on TV, which it didn't. Disney's classic characters were all over it, as were lots of new live action programs, but EPCOT was no where to be seen.
Figment and the Dreamfinder shouldn't have been stuck in one building - they should have been the characters to bring educational programming to The Disney Channel on a daily basis. Had that happened, there would have never been ANY suggestion by anybody to take Figment out of the ride 8 years ago.
Ludvig Von Drake, who was always associated with Disney educational programming with his debut in the first Wonderful World of Color, would headline a science show, even if just a narrator to bookend the show (since daily animation is expensive in those pre-computer days) the way Christopher Lloyd bookended the Back to the Future cartoon.
Rather than have people complain about the lack of Disney characters in EPCOT, people would come to appreciate Figment and Dreamfinder as if they always were Disney characters. From there, it would be easy to expand the shows to introduce a new character to represent tomorrow, perhaps inspired by Ward Kimball's early Tomorrowland shows, that could be an additional inspiration for park decoration and icons.
Perhaps too, an animated character, or maybe Dreamfinder again, would give a world travelogue show that would start with the original World Showcase nations and then grow from there. Don't think it would work? What do you think Inspector Gadget's Field Trip was? That series was hugely successful and very inexpensive.
Other new TV shows, educational or otherwise, could have been the driving force for new EPCOT attractions. With the strong Disney Channel tie, they could have done more to put their variety entertainment successes (Kids Inc, and the new Mickey Mouse Club) into EPCOT as occasional features, much as Bear in the Blue House and others have been part of Disney/MGM and DCA.
All of this and much more would have made EPCOT real in our minds and THAT would be what would make the park real. EPCOT wouldn't be a place on a map, EPCOT would be all around us, presented to us in such a way as to make us want to go to the park and live it for a day, just as we live our fantasies, our history, our adventures, and our future for a day.
Hey Disney Channel: it's not too late...
In the Disney blogosphere and "behind the scenes" literature, a lot of things are blamed for EPCOT's initial failures and subsequent inability to maintain a steady crowd and a loyal fanbase beyond the "geek" market. Walt's death and the inability of the Imagineers to build Walt's original vision (as we've now been able to see in full on DVD) ranks pretty high. Budget crises and crunches also come up.
"Lack of thrill rides" was Eisner's motto, but his subsequent development has split Futureworld into two - a thrill side (Test Track, Mission: Space) and a kids-friendly (semi-)education side (Seas, Land, Imagination). Rather than being a place the family stays together in (Walt's success in Disneyland), its become a place where families split up - mom and the under-10s go west, dad and the teenagers go east, and Grandma and Aunt Louise head south for the World Showcase. It's a very Balkanized place right now and it's unlikely to change in that respect.
One easy target is just the typical audience - nobody wants to be "educated" on their vacations anymore (if ever - see how the educational parts of both coasts' Tomorrowlands are gone). Horizons was doomed from the start to disinterest from a crowd that had to think too much and wanted a day to stop thinking.
But really, there's a much simpler explanation, one Disney could have done (and done beautifully) but didn't.
Marketing. But not in the typical "MBA" sense. Standard MBA marketing was the only thing they did, and it certainly wasn't enough, nor would it be what Walt, infamous for reinventing marketing on a regular basis, would have done.
EPCOT was beautiful, rich, clever, and wonderful when it opened.
But it was also stuck. It was condemned by Disney promotions and marketing to be a spot on a map.
Disneyland was NEVER a spot on a map. Disneyland was on TV, and was on TV first. More importantly, Disneyland on TV didn't show us that Disneyland was a place on a map, but that Disneyland was all around us. History, Fantasy, Science and Science Fiction, Nature, and Nostalgia were all there and all around. By the time Disneyland opened, with that same focus as the TV show in categorizing what we saw, we knew what we were entering: Disneyland in 3D, where we could do more than just watch it, we could live it.
EPCOT was just a spot on a map, a place to go visit. Nothing more. Why? Because EPCOT wasn't on TV. Yeah, the park was on TV, especially in its huge debut with the brilliant (if occasionally politically incorrect by modern standards) Danny Kaye. But EPCOT wasn't. Nothing tied EPCOT to anything else in the Disney arsenal or to anything else in the world around us.
In the oft-asked question "what would Walt do?", I see a very simple answer: Walt, even if he let EPCOT be what it became and not his original vision, would have done exactly what he did with Disneyland: tie it to TV. He would be giving the viewer glimpses into the EPCOT all around us, not just the EPCOT that was the park to be, just as much as he did 25 years before. How? EPCOT would have been a special daily or weekly part of the Disney Channel (personally, I think Walt would have named the channel itself EPCOT and had Disneyland-type stuff be the exception, not the norm).
The Disney Channel had just started a little while after EPCOT, in 1983. It had all the potential in the universe to dominate the children's tv space, which it did, AND link kids into seeing the parks as extension of the fun they saw on TV, which it didn't. Disney's classic characters were all over it, as were lots of new live action programs, but EPCOT was no where to be seen.
Figment and the Dreamfinder shouldn't have been stuck in one building - they should have been the characters to bring educational programming to The Disney Channel on a daily basis. Had that happened, there would have never been ANY suggestion by anybody to take Figment out of the ride 8 years ago.
Ludvig Von Drake, who was always associated with Disney educational programming with his debut in the first Wonderful World of Color, would headline a science show, even if just a narrator to bookend the show (since daily animation is expensive in those pre-computer days) the way Christopher Lloyd bookended the Back to the Future cartoon.
Rather than have people complain about the lack of Disney characters in EPCOT, people would come to appreciate Figment and Dreamfinder as if they always were Disney characters. From there, it would be easy to expand the shows to introduce a new character to represent tomorrow, perhaps inspired by Ward Kimball's early Tomorrowland shows, that could be an additional inspiration for park decoration and icons.
Perhaps too, an animated character, or maybe Dreamfinder again, would give a world travelogue show that would start with the original World Showcase nations and then grow from there. Don't think it would work? What do you think Inspector Gadget's Field Trip was? That series was hugely successful and very inexpensive.
Other new TV shows, educational or otherwise, could have been the driving force for new EPCOT attractions. With the strong Disney Channel tie, they could have done more to put their variety entertainment successes (Kids Inc, and the new Mickey Mouse Club) into EPCOT as occasional features, much as Bear in the Blue House and others have been part of Disney/MGM and DCA.
All of this and much more would have made EPCOT real in our minds and THAT would be what would make the park real. EPCOT wouldn't be a place on a map, EPCOT would be all around us, presented to us in such a way as to make us want to go to the park and live it for a day, just as we live our fantasies, our history, our adventures, and our future for a day.
Hey Disney Channel: it's not too late...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
I am in agreement with you ...
Date: 2007-07-18 06:35 pm (UTC)I think you're right ... there's a way to market educational things as fun, and Disney missed the boat. EPCOT is actually my favorite of the four parks at WDW, and I think I would have loved it just as much as a kid ... I'd developed a healthy curiosity about other places and people by the time I was 6 years old, and I would have loved it.
it was *HOW* it was promoted that was wrong
Date: 2007-07-18 06:43 pm (UTC)you're missing my point. that was promotions by typical 80s "MBA" style.
that's not how Walt promoted Disneyland.
showing me the park and the making of the park still made it the park. it didn't make it real. it didn't make it an extension of life elsewhere. it didn't make the characters of epcot (figment, dreamfinder) a daily celebrity that i wanted to go visit.
see the difference?
you really need to see the early Disneyland tv shows (some now on the Disney Treasures dvds) and how Frontierland became real not because Walt showed how Frontierland in the park was built, but because Walt showed us his vision of Frontierland as a concept FIRST - Davy Crockett, Zorro, Elfego Baca, and more. Adventureland wasn't "the making of Jungle Cruise", it was True Life Adventures, trimmed down from the 90 minute movies to an acceptably paced 45 minutes. Fantasyland wasn't "here, come ride this ride", it was "here's Alice in Wonderland" (and oh, by the way, you can ride the teacups!).
the concept was sold, and continually resold, FIRST, and only then did the park connection become clear with those rare few where Walt showed you the park as it was built and after it opened.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-18 07:21 pm (UTC)This is why I call faires that beat you to death with history, "Eat Your Broccoli" Faires. After a while, even REC figured that out.
In fairness ...
Date: 2007-07-18 09:50 pm (UTC)Re: it was *HOW* it was promoted that was wrong
Date: 2007-07-18 09:51 pm (UTC)Captain EO didn't exist in 1983, which is the time-frame i'm talking about. In fact, by 1986, EPCOT was already being seen as a failure by some and EO was looked upon by critics as a band aid.
EO also required you to like Michael Jackson, which I didn't at the time (age 15) and was at a very low creative point for Lucas as well.
One of the key things inspiring my discussion is Figment and how he was the original "character" of EPCOT at the time it opened and through at least 1984 when I finally got to visit it, but you only heard of him if you were at the park or you saw a piece "promoting" the park as you've described.
that's not how to make a character one worth visiting. you make the character part of our daily lives first and THEN you remind them they can have the kids meet and greet the character at the park. they realized this later when adding Bear in the Blue House and other disney channel kids shows to Disney/MGM and DCA, but it was too late for Figment, who should have been treated as a Disney regular character from the getgo.
Relegated to the park, he was condemned to an early death; his resurrection even today since 2002 is really incomplete and makes him more a troublemaker than the inspiring character he was intended to be 25 years ago. Dreamfinder could have been a guide to the world as attractive to young kids (8-12) as the best interpretation of, say, Willy Wonka. Instead, he lies forgotten, a piece of history and nothing more. All because he too was condemned to live in only one building and not be treated as part of the larger Disney empire.
But at the same time, while I am a Figment fan myself, that aspect of Figment and Dreamfinder also made it difficult for the company to promote because they had no movie.
And that was PRECISELY my point of the whole rant! They *should* have created a tv show, on the Disney Channel where they had no issues with pleasing advertisers (which now they do), with which to promote the characters and give them, and EPCOT, a LIFE beyond the park gates.
The promotions you describe (and yes, I recall many of them) are of a park within the park gates, not a park that exists beyond it. Disneyland existed BEYOND the gates, and that is what created the nostalgia for it even before people stepped foot into the park for the first time.
THAT's marketing.
Don't have a show or movie for a really good character idea? MAKE ONE.
the lack of imagination for what to do with a character all based on that is just atrocious. but really the source of it was that adding promotions to the Disney Channel was an afterthought. Walt would have built the channel as a promotions engine FIRST and done so by building up the characters and the culture to the point where you had to go to EPCOT not because it looked cool, but because it was already a part of you.