Adieu, Mickey Bounce House?

“This was the view walking down Hollywood Boulevard on opening day. You can’t get this view anymore. I hope we will get this view again soon.”

Bob Weis

Executive Vice President - Imagineering

May 1, 2009

Passport to Dreams: Old, or New?

What you hear:

"Citizens of Tomorrowland! Join Buzz Lightyear on a daring space mission to save the universe from the evil Emperor Zurg!"

What you see:

One from the heart...

"Nice is different than good."

-Stephen Sondheim

And so it goes. On a wet Friday last February ‘It’s a Small World’ finally re-opened to the public, this time with 29 fresh faced Disney characters dotting the landscape from England to the Great Southwest. Yes, our Small World didn’t stop spinning after all. Life will go on as it always has before.

And, at least on this branch of the great Disney Blog-o-sphere, this will be the last you will hear about it.

The omniscient tone of Re-Imagineering has been a hallmark of this site since its inauguration back in early 2006. The ragtag group of professionals that contributed rarely personalized their opinions in an effort to raise the level of discourse above the general fanboy rabble.

But in this instance I can only speak from the heart.

For me, ‘Small World’ was my childhood. Having grown up on the coast meant nearly every day opened under a blanket of grey fog so it’s easy to understand how Small World’s kaleidoscopic wonderland profoundly affected the neural freeway inside this five year olds head. From that first boat cruise my childhood could easily be dated BSM and ASM, the orgiastic display of color, music, light and animation forever rewiring my sense of self.

As adolescence demands reassigning the Small World esthetic as cheesy, childish and annoying, I dutifully stepped in line. However, once I joined a burgeoning group of animator wannabes at Walt’s art school dreamland in Valencia, California, it was time to grow up. There the rigorous demands of design class, taught by some of the finest mid-century artists of their time, gave all of us a renewed respect for the masters of the form. Enter Mary Blair.

No longer would it be possible to dismiss the visual construct of this Disney attraction as kitchy, naive or childish. The color and design sensibilities on display were a wonder to behold; the more you studied it the more complex and sophisticated it all became. Several generations of animation students, smitten by the Mary Blair touch, have tried repeatedly to imitate her style. Rarely do they even come close.

But the merely visual does not a work of art make, as what truly etched this into the collective conscience as a classic work of pop art had everything to do with its simple, crystal clear conception. To sell world peace the show writers had the audacity to cast the children of the world, separated only by costume, skin color and setting, as a way to underscore our inherent innocence and common humanity. Thus was born a profound subtext that gave this Disneyland attraction a relevance that has lasted 45 years.

And so we come to where we are today, when the children of the world move aside to make room for dozens of distinctly different and specific Disney kids and kinfolk. And, as could be expected, endless debate on the merits and demerits of such an endeavor exploded on the internets.

On my first trip through Small World 2.0 I had the notebook out as well.

• New boats? A little cheap looking, but appropriately toy-like and should hold up well.

• Matte black ceiling. Very nice.

• Everything’s so bright and shiny. Bravo.

• Alice and the White Rabbit. Delightful, actually. If this were the only addition it might very well have been a fitting tribute to the creative legacy of the shows stylist.

• Peter Pan. Tinkerbell. Oh dear. There’s a reasonable argument for adding characters that are a part of the cultural folklore of their specific land. But isn’t the United Kingdom a bit overloaded?

• Cinderella has her own pedestal with Jaques and Gus staring up adoringly. Imagineering Ambassador Marty Sklar promised these characters wouldn’t say, ‘look at me, look at me’. This one screams it. What’s a flat painted bluebird on the backdrop doing? Wouldn’t the original designers have created this in three dimensions? Still, at least Cinderella is not portrayed in her Disney Princess ® finery, but in her populist rags.

• Pinocchio, looking encephalitic, chubby and squished, uncharacteristically hanging on strings and propped up under an arch of 26 lights belies the Imagineer’s watchword ‘Unobtrusive’.

• Aladdin, Jasmine and Mulan succeed in being unobtrusive.

• The African Jungle. Still bliss with or without the Lion King characters.

• Donald Duck, Jose Carioca and Panchito Pistoles puppets in South America? As authentic to the culture as the taco is.

• Ariel in the South Seas? Imagineering Senior Vice President Tony Baxter said that if a character stood out we’d be ‘looking at it for the wrong reason’. I was looking at it for the wrong reason. Ariel’s long strands of bright woolen hair, her own awkward solo and white hot spotlight gave me the heebies.

• Nemo, Dory and Flounder? Well, they’re only fish, though it can be argued the super shiny Flounder may actually be more obtrusive than his diva Mermaid friend.

• Stitch. So charming. So wrong.

• Relocated Rainforest? Thank you.

• American Southwest. Easily the most egregious misfire of the entire endeavor. Static children, out of step stylistically, flat unappealing scarecrow and hybrid cow-pig that, again, should have been realized in three dimensions if at all. Poorly art directed. Wonky, awkward Toy Story Woody and Jessie characters. Best to look down at your lap till the finale.

• Re-instatement of the gorgeous Farewell Tapestry, balloons, finale sun. Beautiful.


Still, for all the scribbling, cross chatter and geeky blogger debate, the point remains. The children of Small World were intentionally homogenous, but now some of them are a bit more ‘special’ than others. In Imagineering’s effort to make every last attraction at the parks more relevant by adding Disney characters, Small World’s core message has been compromised.

More relevant? No.

Less relevant? Absolutely.

There’s a cabal at Imagineering that bristle at those of us who appear to constantly reject any change at the parks. Their argument, not unfounded, is that when an attraction is so inexorably tied to the nostalgia of our childhoods any tampering is going to feel like a personal attack. Their remedy? Get over it. As audiences taste change, so must the park.

They’re absolutely right, but in patronizing those of us whose irritating ‘nostalgia’ keeps cramping their style, they’re also discounting the real message behind our madness: Is what you’re doing different or better?


Regardless, there are signs everywhere that the leadership at Imagineering, though faltering here and there, is doing the difficult introspection necessary for a vibrant and exciting renaissance. As I exited Small World 2.0 with a close friend (and one of the finest Disney historians on the planet) we both admitted that, overall, this is probably a minor misstep in the recent evolution of the Imagineering brand.

"Well," he remarked with a roll of the eye, "At least it's fix-able."

It’s not as if those pesky Disney characters can’t eventually be removed and the ride restored to Walt Disney's original vision. After all, Disneyland will never be completed.

Born Every Minute

"The addition of Eddie Murphy into Disneyland's Haunted Mansion is absolutely amazing! He's so lifelike and so well done. Audio Animatronics have reached a new peak!"

-Disney Fan

"The Eddie figure added to Haunted Mansion doesn't at all take away from the crazy fun of Disneyland's Haunted Mansion. He's so funny, and so much of the ride is funny too!"

-Defender OM

"It's so clear that Imagineers worked over-time to assuage all those ridiculous fears Disney purists had about Eddie Murphy's appearance in the Haunted Mansion. He fits in perfectly! His costuming, his manner, his funny ad-libs as you pass are all top notch! Bravo team WDI!"

-Not a Museum-goer

When Gods Speak

On Friday, February 6, 2009, it rained at Disneyland.

.

Happy Birthday, Uncle Walt

Today marks the 107th birthday of Walt Disney, born December 5, 1901 in Chicago, Illinois.

Happy Birthday to an American original.

The Little Things

"Enjoy the little things, for one day you may look back and realize they were the big things."

-- Robert Brault

In the rush to create the latest and greatest multi-million dollar E-ticket, one has to wonder why Walt Disney Imagineering doesn't pay more attention to the power-- and value-- of investing in the multitude of smaller touches that separate Disney's themed environments from the rest of the pack.


Fortunately, those smaller yet extremely satisfying projects aren't completely out of vogue. Witness the wonder of the newly refurbished Sleeping Beauty Castle walkthrough at Disneyland. It's not the only reason someone would visit the park, but it's definitely one of the reasons people keep coming back for more.

In a self-contained park such as Disneyland, those smaller touches are arguably easier to conjure and create. It's not difficult to add layer after layer of detail when you have a relatively small canvas to work with. Walt's park is also blessed with the power of nostalgia. Anything added at Disneyland needs to have that Disney look and feel. The guests demand it, and the company and Imagineers deserve a great deal of credit for respecting and adhering to those "old school" principles that, while sometimes creatively frustrating, have served the park well for decades.

In the early days of Walt Disney World, back when the Florida property was much smaller and easier to manage, that famously obsessive attention to detail flourished. For nearly a quarter of a century, Walt Disney World had the genuine look and feel of a true Disney environment. It seemed back then as if Imagineers held sway over everything--right down to the manhole covers and beyond.

But as the canvas expanded, and new parks and resorts emerged, Walt Disney World lost its creative focus. Today, the respect for theme has all but disappeared; lost are many of those wonderful "worlds within the World" that transformed the soggy swamp into an escapist utopia.

Recently, I had the wonderful (if not exhausting) privilege of escorting my energetic and inquisitive pre-schooler through the grounds of the Fort Wilderness Campground, truly one of the crown jewels of Walt Disney World. After taking a leisurely stroll, we headed back to the parking lot via the resort's internal bus system.

As the pine trees and campsites passed by our windows, a recorded voice came over the loudspeakers to tell us more about what we were seeing. This new automated voice system now operates on busses throughout Walt Disney World, and while the technology that makes it possible is undoubtedly cool, the attention to theme falls just a bit short. There is themed music on the bus, but the voice on the loudspeaker is "the" voice of Walt Disney World, the same voice you hear on the monorail, the same voice you hear on bus after bus after bus. And while the announcer's deep monotone is certainly attention grabbing, on the internal bus at Ft. Wilderness, it also, sadly, seems woefully out of place. Gone is the suspension of disbelief, gone is the feeling of being lost in the wilderness. Yes, we are on a bus in the wilderness, but it's the voice that breaks the illusion, reminding us, after all, that it's not really the wilderness, it's only Walt Disney World. Perhaps they were going for a Jack Wagner kind of presence here, but the execution is jarring-- and misses the mark. An opportunity to add to the immersion has been squandered, or at the very least, overlooked.

By way of contrast, cast your mind back to the early days of Walt Disney World. You're about to enjoy a trip down one of the water slides at River Country. You ascend the rock formation that serves as a staircase and peruse the "wanted" posters at the summit. The fresh Florida breeze blows through the partly cloudy sky over your slightly sunburned skin. Suddenly, a voice calls out over the uptempo banjo music:

"Welcome to 'Whoop 'n' Holler Hollow'! Now the water below us is up to six feet deep, and has a strong current. Only experienced swimmers should use the slide."

Those of us who remember River Country can instantly hear the old cowpoke's voice as he implores us to use caution. They didn't have to do it that way back then, but they did, and that simple themed voice-over remains a fond memory to this day, one of those small but inexplicably satisfying finishing touches that transforms mundacity into pure magic.

Yes, I know, some would argue that the typical Florida guest doesn't care about the details anymore. And harping about the voice on the bus is admittedly very, very picky. But Walt Disney World is supposed to be a collection of unparalleled immersive environments. Anything that detracts from that immersion needs to be addressed.

Fortunately, it won't cost a fortune to remedy the situation. Curbing the internal busses at Ft. Wilderness in favor of the old steam trains that used to traverse the campground would be beyond wonderful; but for now, let's be reasonable, and focus on the little things. In this uncertain time of smaller budgets and economic anxiety, a series of very small fixes might be just what the doctor ordered.

Walt Disney Imagineering would be wise to seize this opportunity, visit Florida, and take a much-needed inventory of all those missing details at Walt Disney World. Start by separating the property back into its individually themed environments. What works? What doesn't? What's missing? What can we add?

A holistic approach by Imagineering-- a renewed interest in, and creative ownership of, all of Walt Disney World-- would refresh the property and restore the Disney shine like never before. It's a simple, cost-effective approach. And here in Florida, it represents some tender loving care that's long overdue.

"Never neglect the little things. You can never do your best, which should always be your trademark, if you are cutting corners and shirking responsibilities. You are special. Act it. Never neglect the little things."

-- Og Mandino

Tis the Season...

It’s that time of year again to once again sluff off the cynicism and be thankful for our many blessings. Since its inception nearly three years ago, Re-Imagineering has witnessed much to be thankful for and it never hurts to remind ourselves of the many projects going right in the world of Imagineering.

Our first howl of disapproval was that giant Mickey Wand gracing the sleek lines of Spaceship Earth at Epcot Center. It seemed to exemplify all the tacky turns for the worse the stateside Disney parks were all suffering through. Now it is gone. The collective sigh of relief that followed undoubtedly spiked global warming to it’s most dangerous levels yet.

Where once the submarine lagoon at Disneyland sat dormant for nearly a decade, it resurfaced last year in fine fashion. We may whine that the Nemo and Friends overlay is more Fantasyland than Tomorrowland, but the love infused by animators and designers shines through, diluting that argument substantially. The subs are back, and that’s cause for celebration enough.

Expedition Everest, a classy, carefully researched and finely detailed attraction at Disney’s Animal Kingdom, was a call-back to what Imagineers do best. Opening in early 2006, it’s another jewel from the team of Joe Rhode, an Imagineer that truly ‘gets it’. Walt is smiling and so are we.

California Adventure got the new name, ‘Walt Disney’s California Adventure’, and the new infusion of more than a billion dollars of capital. Finally this glowering mis-mash mall of the cheap will become the romantic sun-kissed orange blossom state of Walt’s 1920’s arrival, all mission-style tile roofs, red-cars and Oswald the Lucky Rabbit.

Walt’s own California Adventure will, of course, be only be the beginning. John Lasseter is overseeing Car’s Land, a giant slab of acreage celebrating the romance and lure of Route 66, while the beloved little mermaid Ariel will debut in her own E-ticket extravaganza sometime in 2010. What she actually has to do with California is a little bewildering, but what the heck, we’ll welcome her to the golden state regardless.

Though the work at WDCA will take years to complete, the fact that the brass at corporate are putting their money where our mouths are signals much to be thankful for. Already Paradise Pier has seen a swatch of Victorian Era gingerbread bloom along its shores with the opening of Toy Story Midway Mania and the recent draining of the area lake is a clear sign that work has already begun to re-tool for the planned water fountain spectacular ‘Disney’s Wonderful World of Color’. Let us bow our head and give thanks.

Say what you will about adding Disney-kin ready-to-order dolls to ‘It’s a Small World’, (and this blog certainly has) but when version 2.0 re-opens in early 2009 it will be cleaner, sound better and revive missing details not seen since the late 60’s. Perhaps refreshing those glittering details came with a deal with the devil, but we’re thankful for the spit and polish nonetheless and will try not to notice the price-tags affixed to those adorable Disney characters throughout the attraction.

Now that Obamania is in full swing and the country appears ready to proudly wave the red white and blue again, Disneyland’s Main Street is ready to highlight the long neglected ‘U.S.A.’ part of its title in the coming months. Up will go the banners and flags while the Opera House will welcome back a resuscitated Lincoln, this time possibly sharing the stage with Barack himself in a supporting role. Republicans and Democrats can now both unite and give thanks.

Back at Disney World, Space Mountain is slated for an infusion of some tender loving care in the near future and though it may not be the complete overhaul this classic deserves, every little bit helps.

The rumor mill is also closely monitoring the plans for a much needed re-tooling of Florida’s Fantasyland. Details are sketchy, but it appears hopeful that the entire land will undergo a complete makeover. Perhaps we should thank Harry Potter over at Universal for that one.

We also bow courteously to the ooky new sets and surreal sounds at the Haunted Mansion, the splash of Siemens all over Spaceship Earth, the newly refreshed bears at Country Bear Jamboree and the promise of things to come at The Hall of Presidents.

Finally this week marks the soft re-opening of a true gem at Disneyland’s Fantasyland, the retro ‘57 Eyvind Earle version of the original castle walk-thru not seen at Disneyland since the mid-70’s. Though this is a small animatronic-free series of intimate dioramas and not a splashy blast-em up E-ticket extravaganza, it remains a sterling example of Disney magic at it’s absolute finest.


Here quality, craftsmanship and artistry take the front seat and the effect is positively swoon-worthy. Mere thanks for this re-opened jewel-box doesn’t seem appropriate. Genuflect.

Happy Holidays from Re-Imagineering!

.

Gettyland

It’s sometimes hard to recall some of the simpler pleasures of Disneyland in this rough and tumble era of season pass holders and video game attention spans, but once upon a time they flourished from one end of the park to the other.

Luckily there are still places you can go in Southern California that succeed in stirring up some of the sense-memories that were very much a part of vintage Disneyland. One of these places is the newly re-opened Getty Villa in Malibu, California.

It’s here, in this painstaking recreation of the Villa Dei Papiri in ancient Hercullaneum, where much of Disneyland’s missing mystique is alive and well.

Plumb the exit polls of Disneyland in its first two decades and you’d get a clear idea of what informs the Getty Villa playbook of today:

• Disneyland was obsessively clean. Back when there seemed to be one janitorial host for every 10 square feet it was common for guests to bet on how quickly a cigarette butt would be scooped up the moment it was tossed to the ground. The winner always knew to bet on seconds.

• Disneyland cast members were courteous and well informed. Mid century America swooned with approval at all the well groomed smiles and came back year after year for more.

• Disneyland was often bucolic, pastoral and idyllic. There were moments to be found around every corner of Walt’s park that celebrated the quieter pleasures found in a small town or a rural countryside.

It is these elements that truly transform mere fun into pure bliss, elements that are in full bloom and firing on all cylinders at the Getty Villa and that underscore so much of the compromised Disneyland experience of today.


Though primarily a world class museum of Greek and Roman antiquities, visitors to the Getty Villa wishing to merely revel in the experience of being transported to another time and place are richly rewarded.

On arriving at what might as well be called Rome A.D. 79 Land, docents greet everyone up close and personal with a smile and guide map and send you on your way through the garden path stairwells to the shining Villa on the hill. This personal touch is classic Disneyland.

Lush landscaping abounds, unobstructed by souvenir stands, vacation club kiosks or popcorn vendors, from the Italy specific herb garden and fruit trees to the 300 varieties of plants endemic to ancient Rome. Along covered walkways around the inner and outer peristyle guests are treated to fanciful fountains, bronze statues and intricate wall paintings. Past the jaw dropping 220-foot reflecting pool a spectacular view of the Pacific Ocean awaits, poking up between two terraced hillsides bordering the villa.

Everywhere small wonders excite the senses; the gorgeous sculptural banisters on the way to the second floor, the fountain festooned with seashells, the painted crickets scampering over the peristyle murals, the exquisite craftsmanship of the pocket window shutters along the gallery hallways or the whimsical intermingling of rosemary and boxwood topiaries for textural variety in the gardens.

Granted, these subtle qualities are far removed from the more animated theatrics of Disneyland today but, within the more reflective and calming wonderland of the Getty Villa, no less effective in stirring up a true sense of wonder.

Visits to places like the Getty Villa help to clarify where the Disneyland touch has tarnished over time. Guests are finding it a little harder to find more peaceful pleasures at the park, like an evening stroll along the gas lit banks of the River’s of America, quaint water features like Skull Rock or lazy hikes along the trails surrounding Fort Wilderness. Cast member smiles and personal service are often as barren as Thunder Mesa. Visual clutter and errant trash has eroded the suspension of disbelief in many a themed environment. Crowds and noise seem to have edged out the meaning and value of quieter oases of enchantment.

Luckily there are hold outs in the Disney Theme park hierarchy. The Zen-like environments at Disney’s Animal Kingdom or Epcot’s World Showcase in Florida immediately come to mind.

Still, if you’re looking to reconnect with the simple pleasures of Disneyland at at its finest look no further than the Getty Villa in Malibu, California.

Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

Recently I received an email with a deceptively simple question that seemed like a great topic for Re-Imagineering:

Hey Merlin,

When you get a moment -- just philosophically speaking, if you could take Tomorrowland to any place you wanted, what would you do? Would you just bring back the old stuff (Rocket Jets, PeopleMover, Adventure Thru Inner Space, Carousel Theatre, Circle Vision, etc.) as they were, or would you bring them back repurposed, or would you go forward to completely new ideas (the way Walt would’ve, I think), or what --?

I cannot believe the passionate debates this subject is creating --

Dexter Reilly

It's a good question. To answer it, let's look at what Walt really did in 1967: He didn't actually scrap the place and go forward with all-new ideas or an all-new aesthetic or point-of-view as is often ascribed to him, he simply grew the idea from what was most successful and updated his message with the latest technology and modern design.

Thematically, the same utopian, optimistic corporate global futurism was on display in New Tomorrowland, just with a better budget, a more complex show and entertainment experience for the 60s. The additions and revisions of 1967 padded out the original concept (as did those in 1978).

In terms of attractions: Astro Jets, Autopia, Monorail, CircleVision, Skyway, Submarine Voyage and Flight to the Moon all survived the original 1955/59 Tomorrowland into the 1967 New Tomorrowland, but in improved, technically advanced versions, while Carousel of Progress, PeopleMover and Adventure Thru Inner Space were added (and Space Mountain was being planned for), all extensions of the original theme.

The design aesthetic was updated and improved, but within the same family of streamlined ultramodernism that had been associated with science-fiction since the 1930’s.


In updating Tomorrowland these days, where thematic concept has gone off-track - - for the original Disneyland anyway, as Walt had a specific vision for his work and park that should be maintained - - is to discard the idea of utopian modernism. When Imagineers turn instead to recent trends in fantasy-science-fiction, Hollywood (Star Wars), eco-futurism (agri-future gardens), dark apocalyptic vision (Alien Encounter), cartoon franchise marketing (Buzz Lightyear) or nostalgic pre-modern futurism (Jules Verne, steampunk), it no longer feels like Walt Disney’s Tomorrowland.

Neither does it seem like Walt’s Tomorrowland to focus on other worlds than our own for answers to Man’s future. His concept seemed to be about how we can help shape our own destiny with optimism and imagination and stick-to-it-tivity.

People haven't changed all that much. They still want to see what it's like to live like the Jetsons or the Space Family Robinson - - in an exotic world of streamlined beauty and comfort and inner and outer space experiences. A vision that’s familiar and reassuring but once removed from our own. (Unlike the variation on a current tract home as we see in the new Innoventions. It looks so much like what we already have, it just smacks of consumerism rather than futurism).

The beauty of Apple, Mac and iPod design shows us that the design ideas of modernism still hold that same glamour and appeal and image of forward momentum for the consumer public.


WALL*E's starship Axiom shows a great model for an upgraded Tomorrowland design in that it embraces that same flavor of utopian ultramodernism we all loved in the past while adding the Tokyo-like technology of the present and future (video-screens and billboards, etc). The blend keeps everything minimalist in shape and texture, just adding a layering of the new and current. It’s a progression of the Tomorrowland ideal, not a replacement for it.

Though the film’s irony is that the BuyNLarge folks have a failed dream of their consumer Utopia, the humans on the Axiom handily ignore that outcome - - as guests of Disneyland always have (and would still if given such eye candy and futuristic pleasures at the park once again).

Is optimistic futurism selling a lie of corporate propaganda like BuyNLarge? Well, the ideal is still relevant even if the execution in our real-world has been misguided. To progress, we still need the optimist’s ideal that Man can and will make things better. We just have to do it more wisely.

As the filmmakers behind “WALL*E” have said: We are all still waiting for that jet-pack future we were promised. If we can’t have it everyday, we at least expect to find it at Disneyland.


In terms of attractions for a New Tomorrowland, a slate that features advanced technology with a variety of experiences should be the imperative, so let’s take another look at the varied pleasures Tomorrowland once provided when it was “A World on the Move” taking place Above, On, Below, Within and Without our Earth’s surface.

What have we lost?

The Rocket Jets up on the platform were not only an attractive “weenie,” but also a soaring experience high over Disneyland, the gift of flight. Skyway also provided this point-of-view - - But the "air" portion of the Disneyland experience parfait is gone now. It should be returned in some form.


Inner Space provided both a visceral shrinking experience to another dimension “inside” our own and a psychedelic visit to a world of surreal Disney design. It went internal instead of external to teach us about ourselves (and to blow our minds with abstract visuals and effects) - - another angle of the Disney experience we have lost without replacement. Exploring the world of the atom is still a relevant and compelling idea, we just need a new tech way to do it - - like the Spider-Man ride at Islands of Adventure, a moving, three-dimensional experience. With the theme still so fresh, why not bring it back in a new way?

As a show, perhaps Carousel of Progress has had its day, but seeing the progress of Man and the product of his imagination should not be a dead concept - - Is there another way to do it that's interesting today that still entertains and inspires us toward a Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow? The original EPCOT’s late, lamented Horizons was a modern variation on the theme and points in directions a new attraction could go.

And there are new places to visit within and without Man’s experience on Earth that we haven’t even considered. These should be natural extensions of Walt’s approach, new visions that expand on the original idea without cannibalizing it.


So, here’s the answer for me: I'd bring back the nostalgic and reassuring images of a fantastic ultramodern future we love - - then add in the all-important new angle of exploration and adventure and thrill and wonder that extends the optimistic utopian theme, as Walt himself had done.

Keep what works, then PLUS it. Wouldn’t Walt have wanted to do both? That's what the company ALWAYS did in those times. They never threw away the past, only added to it. They brought along the best and built forward from it.

What is the new experience or two? Well, that's the fun part to dream up for today’s Imagineers - - But it should be flashy and memorable, exceed expectations, thrill us - - and grow out of the consistent theme, taking us to an experiential and design plane we haven't yet visited - - or provide a visceral experience that is lacking in other attractions and areas at the park. And it should be artistically beautiful and modern. And all within the parameters of established theme.

Disneyland should always be a complementary platter of Past, Future, Fact and Fantasy, Nostalgia and Challenge in all its angles, a unified timeline with a running theme. The recipe for the future is on the dedication plaque.

Go back? Go forward?

Do both.

Audio Out-Source Atronics

Just last June Disney Imagineering quietly announced what has been one of the worst kept secrets at the company; the majority of all Audio Animatronics manufacturing would be outsourced.

In a casual, plain-spoken letter to O-Meon.com, WDI Spokesperson Marilyn Waters explained:

“The new strategy for our Manufacturing and Prototype Organization is to focus on greater innovation in prototyping and developing the next generation of Audio-Animatronics figures. This will involve strengthening our competencies in the creation of unique Audio-Animatronics figures.”

In other words, WDI stands to save a considerable amount of cash by letting outside companies create the majority of Audio Animatronics figures used in their parks. Nowhere did this pay off more handsomely than in the recent creation of the more than 200 animated children in Hong Kong’s ‘It’s a Small World’ which just opened last April. Chinese vendors were not only a fast, efficient and friendly labor pool, but most importantly worked substantially cheaper than their US counterparts.

For the Disney company, outsourcing animatronics is nothing new. They’ve been using private firms for decades, Garner Holt Productions in San Bernardino probably being the most high-profile. Still, the official announcement from Bruce Vaughn, Craig Russell and Kevin Eld last June stands as a reality check in the history of this venerable art form.

As far as Walt Disney was concerned, Audio-Animatronics was nothing less than the next great leap forward in the history of animation. His giddy excitement over this new form of entertainment took palpable shape in his animatronics masterpieces Tiki Room, Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln, Carousel of Progress and Pirates of the Caribbean. After Walt passed away audio animatronics arguably reached it’s technological zenith with Hall of Presidents, Mickey Mouse Revue and Bear Country Jamboree in 1971 and the mind-bogglingly complex 114 characters in 1974’s America Sings.

Since then Audio Animatronics showcases never quite surpassed the level of sophistication and audaciousness of those earlier halcyon days. Though Epcot saw a substantial renaissance of animatronics performers when it opened in 1982, most notably within Spaceship Earth, Journey into Imagination and American Adventure, often the figures verged from limited animation (Kitchen Kabaret, Horizons) to mere mannequins (World of Motion, El Rio de Tiempo).

But it was Epcot’s park-wide reliance on film over form that perhaps foreshadowed the years to come. Filmed entertainment at Epcot took precedence over Animatronic showcases 2-1, with even the most spectacular figures of American Adventure sharing half their stage presence with lengthly movie interstitials.

Today Audio-Animatronics never carry a show; instead single complex characters either introduce a ‘movie’ (Toy Story Mania), punctuate a movie (Tough to be a Bug, Muppets 3-D) or provide a climax to a rollercoaster (Expedition Everest). The balance of audio-animatronic characters are now relegated to dark rides and often can’t even be called truly ‘animatronic’, the animation now left to rotating turntables and opening and closing doors (Monsters Inc., Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh).

With the official word now public, the only question to be asked is what this portends for the future of the art form. Are sophisticated animatronic variety shows officially a thing of the past? Will dazzling new leaps in technology only show up as single figures sprinkled sparingly throughout the park? Has Disney copped to the cheap showmanship of everyday 2-D film and digital video over truly dimensional animated fantasy performances?

One can argue that out-sourcing animatronics makes perfectly good business sense in our complex new world market. But we can also wonder whether Disney Imagineering has inconspicuously relegated the Audio-Animatronics Extravaganza as a relic of days gone by.

Perhaps, to counter Al Jolson’s giddy proclamation in 1927, “You ain’t seen nothin’ yet!”, we have indeed seen it and it’s time to move along.

Sleeping Beauty to Reawaken!

July 17, 2008 - Anaheim, CA - The interior of Sleeping Beauty Castle at Disneyland will open in time for the December holiday season, offering guests a “reawakened” version of its classic walkthrough presentation kissed with vibrant scenes of Aurora, her charming prince, the evil Maleficent and other characters from the beloved fairy tale film.

“It is fitting that we are announcing the return of a classic on the 53rd anniversary of Disneyland,” said Tony Baxter, Senior Vice President of Creative Development for Walt Disney Imagineering, who unveiled a model of the castle on July 17, the birthday of Disneyland park.

Next year marks the 50th anniversary of Walt Disney’s “Sleeping Beauty,” and the excitement generated by the anniversary of the motion picture spurred interest in the return of the Disneyland attraction.


Also celebrating the milestone 50th Anniversary of “Sleeping Beauty” is Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment, which will release a two-disc Platinum Blu-ray™ Hi-Def disc, making “Sleeping Beauty” the first Walt Disney animated classic title to be released in high definition, as well as on two-disc Platinum DVD. A bonus feature on the new release will be “The Original Sleeping Beauty Walk-Through Attraction With Walt Disney Imagineering,” an immersive experience recreating the original castle walkthrough.

On April 29, 1957, nearly two years before the premiere of Walt Disney’s animated feature “Sleeping Beauty,” the Sleeping Beauty Castle Walkthrough opened with an in-park ceremony featuring Walt Disney and actress Shirley Temple who, some 20 years earlier, had presented Disney with his special Academy Award – one Oscar and seven little ones – for “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.”

The crafting of the 1957 walkthrough show fell to Walt Disney Imagineer Ken Anderson and animation art director and color stylist Eyvind Earle, credited with giving the motion picture “Sleeping Beauty” the distinctive and colorful look of storybook illustrations in medieval style. An entirely new look appeared in 1977 when the attraction’s redesign featured miniature dioramas, including moving figurines similar to the window displays in the shops on Main Street, U.S.A.


When the attraction is unveiled later this year, the “show” will differ from the dioramas of the 1980s and ‘90s, returning to the unique style of the original 1957 show and motion picture. Enhanced with new scenes and special effects magic, the re-Imagineered attraction will employ technology not available in the 1950s to represent scenes from the story of "Sleeping Beauty," including the magic of good fairies Flora, Fauna and Merryweather, and the more sinister spells of the evil Maleficent.

For the first time, guests who are unable to climb stairs or navigate the passageways of the Castle will be able to experience the walkthrough “virtually” in a special room on the ground floor of the Castle.

Source: Disneyland Press Release

A "Bold, New" World

"Our guests tell us they want additional shopping and dining experiences at Downtown Disney."

Kevin Lansberry
Vice president - Downtown Disney Florida

Souvenir stands, carnival thrills, and T-shirt shops. U.S. 192 in Kissimmee? Not if some at the Walt Disney Company have their way, as they prepare to execute what they call a "bold new vision" for Downtown Disney at Walt Disney World in Florida.

In a news release quietly disseminated late last Friday, the Walt Disney Company announced its new plan for the Downtown Disney area. Buried within the news release, this sentence: "To make way for the new offerings, all of the clubs currently on Pleasure Island will close on September 27."

At first glance, this might not seem like that big a deal for the Imagineering enthusiast. But slated for demolition, along with the more traditional clubs of Pleasure Island, is one of Imagineering's true crown jewels: The Adventurers Club.

If you're a Disneyland enthusiast who lives in California, you might not know much-- or anything-- about this hidden Imagineering gem. It's one of the truly superior attractions we Floridians can proudly claim as our own.

Some guests who enter this 1930's gentleman's club wander around the mezzanine, and depart without discovering the true genius this venue has to offer. Guests who descend the staircase and sit down for a drink or two are in for the time of their lives.

Throughout the evening, several amazing performers make their way through the Adventurers Club, welcoming everyone to a 1937 New Years Eve open house. The club president and other permanent members continually converse with the guests. An animatronic colonel (okay, he's really a puppet) leads patrons in the singing of the club's all-purpose theme song. Musical performances here can be of Broadway caliber, and few who stay long enough to learn the club salute are immune from the club's addictive charm.

While the sublime execution of the club's detailed back story and character development are a testament to the truly talented men and women who perform their hearts out each and every evening, just as incredible-- and important-- is the rich intricacy and superb thematic execution of the venue itself.

The walls and antechambers of the Adventurers Club are adorned with an almost infinite number of period photographs, artifacts and mementos from fellow adventurers around the world. This amazing attention to (and investment in) the details sets the Adventurers Club apart as one of the finest themed environments ever created by Walt Disney Imagineering. Consider experiencing Pirates of the Caribbean as a walk-through attraction. Would the details withstand the scrutiny? They do at the Adventurers Club. Remember, this isn't a roller coaster or even a slow-moving boat ride. It's a fully realized environment that has to endure intimate and repeat inspection from guests who spend several hours poring over its walls. Remarkably, the club's interior not only endures, it envelopes, as only a classic Disney attraction can.

Today, the Adventurers Club still thrives in the midst of a diminished Pleasure Island. After two decades of financial and creative success, many here in Florida considered it sacred ground.

Or for the time being, at least safe.

So it should come as no surprise that the Adventurers Club is currently slated for demolition, along with the rest of Pleasure Island's clubs, in favor of a "bold new vision." A vision that includes (brace yourselves)...

...a t-shirt shop and a hot air balloon.

From the news release:

"Over the next year, the 120-acre entertainment-shopping-dining complex will add a number of one-of-a-kind, immersive experiences for guests. Downtown Disney will even get its own iconic attraction, in the form of a giant, tethered balloon that will take guests 300 feet into the air to view the amazing vistas of Walt Disney World Resort. Other new experiences include... a design your own t-shirt store from Hanes [that] will add to the growing collection of merchandise guests can personalize at Downtown Disney."

To be fair, there is legitimate logic behind some of the changes. Until as recently as 2004, Pleasure Island's gated turnstiles impeded pedestrian traffic between the Marketplace and West Side, two wildly profitable retail areas. Removing the turnstiles improved the awkward and sometimes dangerous traffic flow, but invited non-paying guests onto the Island. Loitering teenagers are now tarnishing Downtown Disney's desired reputation as a family-friendly destination. Add to the equation property that's far too valuable for aging dance clubs, and its obvious that changes must and will be made.

Let's be clear about this. No one is saying Pleasure Island shouldn't change. But there are at least two things about this "bold, new vision" that should be especially troubling to anyone who cares about the Walt Disney company, financially or creatively.

One: That Disney's idea of "bold" and "new" calls for replacing unique Disney experiences with even more third-party dining and shopping venues, a t-shirt shop, and a hot air balloon.

Two: That caught in the path of the wrecking ball is one of the finest themed environments ever created by Walt Disney Imagineering.

Unless someone with power and vision intervenes, the Adventurers Club will welcome its final guests this fall.

And that, on so many levels, is very, very sad. The sense of loss this time will come with added profundity and poignancy, because what's being destroyed is so unique, and works so very, very well.

Perhaps the club will find a new home inside Animal Kingdom or elsewhere. We're not holding out much hope. But we are losing sleep. We just can't imagine a Walt Disney World without the Adventurers Club, and, judging from the more than five thousand on-line petition signatures compiled so far, a lot of other people feel the same way.

The capable folks at the Walt Disney Company should go back to the drawing board on this one, and challenge themselves to re-imagine a truly "bold, new" Downtown Disney, one that keeps the Adventurers Club in its mix. The current plan is only "bold" for its audacity, and destroying works of creative genius to pursue short-term profits is sadly nothing "new."

Compare and Contrast

"Disneyland will never be completed. It will continue to grow as long as there is imagination left in the world."

- - Walt Disney

"When completed, Disney's California Adventure will feel more immersive and richer. It will have more heart."

- - Jay Rasulo

"Yes, but is it art?"

"She was an extraordinary artist, and Walt thought very highly of her. She was the most amazing colorist of all time. I don't even think Matisse could hold a candle to her - and I mean that very sincerely."

- Marc Davis
Disney Animator, Imagineer on Mary Blair


.

Editorial Comments

One time imagineer and current Pulitzer Prize winning editorial artist Ann Telnaes recently chimed in on the recent Small World refurbishment over at Flipanimation.net.

"Like many of my former CalArts classmates, I'm a fan of Mary Blair's work and this redo sounds like another unfortunate move by people in the company who have no business making creative decisions. It also sounds very political, adding a big 'Up with America' scene at the end. Maybe they should include animated Bush and Cheney Dolls."

More of Ann's amazing work can be found at her site.

Blair Family Memories

We would like to speak from our point of view as Mary Blair's nieces.

We have been impressed and deeply touched by the eloquence and outpouring from the hearts of so many people who want to keep 'Small World' as it is. And now the Artists! Amazing. A HUGE thanks to all of you!

Our thoughts are the same. PLEASE keep the integrity of Small World--the children of all nations and its message of world peace. It is a completely unique experience, in and of itself. Our intention is not a 'put down' to the imagineers, who have made Disneyland a fabulous, magical place for children and adults---something for everyone. 'Small World' however, doesn't need fixing. It isn't broken. Bring back it's original color and sparkle. Mary loved 'sparkle'. She also loved children.

We have enjoyed the 'special memories' that many have written about Small World. We have one also. In 1978, several months before Mary died, my sister Maggie and I, along with my family, began planning a surprise 50th wedding anniversary party for our parents. Maggie and I met with Mary at a favorite restaurant of Mary's near her home in Soquel, California to discuss the plans. She introduced us to the hostess saying, 'these are my two nieces, whom I adore'. We adored her as well.

As part of the party plans, Lee put together a slide show, and we taped our parent's favorite 'old' songs, putting the music from 'It's A Small World' in several places. We did that to honor Mary, but also to make the party more fun. (And no, it didn't make us crazy.)

When the party was over and most guests had gone, Maggie and I were doing 'cleanup chores'. We looked up in time to see Mary, a lone figure in the middle of the dance floor. She had a gentle smile on her face, eyes closed, and was turning slowly around and around to the music from 'It's a Small World'. Two weeks later she was gone.

Again, our family appreciates very much your kind words and heartfelt feelings.

Our Best,
Jeanne Chamberlain & Maggie Richardson
.

"We felt that we had accomplished what we set out to do..."

“When we completed 'it’s a small world' for presentation at the New York World’s Fair, we felt that we had accomplished what we’d set out to do. We wanted to foster a better understanding among the nations of the world by showing the dress, the customs, the language, the music, and a little of the culture of our neighbors around the world - - and we wanted to show it to be a very happy one. And I think it’s safe to say that having fun has universal appeal.”

From the dedication of "it's a small world" at Disneyland, May 28, 1966
.

The World of Animation Speaks

“Mary Blair is one of the most remarkable artists of our time, and her work on "It's a Small World" one of her crowning achievements. The attraction is the result of many talented artists working at the peak of their creative powers. Restoration aside, I can't imagine improving on the original ride.”

Pete Docter
Director / Monsters Inc.

"I would be sad to see the integrity, unity and beauty of Mary Blair's inspired work of 'It's a Small World' be broken to accommodate imagery that does not fit into her vision. It would be like cutting scenes from, say, JUNO into TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD. Both great films, but they just don't fit together in tone or look and would harm the vision of both. Van Gogh into a Rembrandt? Unthinkable. 'It's a Small World' is a beautiful piece of our history - I hope and wish that it will be preserved and cherished as the work of art it is."

Brenda Chapman
Story Supervisor - Lion King / Director - Prince of Egypt

"The 'It's a Small World' attraction is a genuine piece of american art, created by a great american artist and to change it does a disservice to the artist and the fans who have been inspired by Mrs. Blair's work. In this culture of changing and updating everything to catch our shortening attention spans it is necessary to have a foundation that remains the same and stays constant for the positive growth of our culture. I did not grow up in California and visited Disneyland much later in my life. Going through the ride for the first time, it's charm transported me back to my childhood and made me feel nostalgic for what that wonder and innocence once was. I am saddened that my children might never have that experience."

Pete Sohn
Animator, Story Artist, Voice Actor (Emile -Ratatouille)

"Like many people, 'It's a Small World' holds a special place in my heart. It was the first attraction that my wife and I rode after I proposed to her, and its joyful message of worldwide harmony shone especially bright that day.

I've always been inspired by Mary Blair's color and design work - bold, playful and unique, yet firmly linked to the Disney style. I love to wait outside "It's a Small World"'s signature clock, waiting for the parade of happy figures from many lands. It's still one of the purest ways to experience her sensibilities.

I was surprised to hear recently that modifications being made to the ride would include its content. Because the idea of the ride is to introduce a vision of a world in peace and harmony, I believe uniquely American cartoon characters or displays - however appealing and beloved - would be disruptive to that vision.

I understand that Disneyland was never intended to stand still, that progress is as integral there as the childhood fantasies from which it sprang. But decades from now, I'd like to be able to travel through that same, small world where my wife and I began our lives together."

Jeff Pidgeon
Animator, Story Artist / Toy Story

"Preserving something, whether it's a film, a great painting or a great ride, like 'It's a Small World', assures that it can be enjoyed for generations the way it was originally intended to be enjoyed. Restoring a ride is one thing, changing its meaning is another. If I want to see Disney characters I can always go to Toontown, go see a parade or go on one of many other rides which feature them. Let the park patron make the choice. That's part of the fun of Disneyland. Would you impose the Country Bears upon the Indiana Jones ride? Or sneak Simba in on Great Moments With Mr. Lincoln? It would make as much sense."

Lou Romano
Production Designer / Incredibles, Voice actor / Linguini - Ratatouille

“With all the uncertainty in the world today, one of the few places a person could always escape both reality AND hype, no matter how brief, was It's A Small World at Disneyland. I consider myself lucky to have been able to experience it as it was truly meant to be seen--many times. Its plea to make the world a better place through the multinational voices of our future is something we need today more than ever. Lets hope better taste prevails and any hint of commercialism is avoided in the restoration of this truly great ride.”

Ralph Eggleston
Production Designer / Finding Nemo

“Most people who have sailed through the “It’s A Small World” attraction at Disneyland and The New York Worlds Fair over the past 44 years may not be aware that standing at a high vantage point proudly overlooking her creation, is one small, unobtrusive Animatronic figure representing none other than Mary Blair, herself. I can only imagine a small tear rolling down her tiny cheek at even the thought of changes to her original vision for this now beloved attraction. It is my thought that altering this classic ride, in any way, for any reason, would be akin to defacing any well known work of art hanging in any museum around the world. I would urge those proposing this change to the original Small World attraction to please pause and reconsider. Mary gave so much to Disney and it’s artists in so many ways, please leave this attraction as a monument to her work and her spirit. Thank you.”

Dave Pruiksma
Long time Supervising Animator - Disney Feature Animation

“Mary Blair's striking color, innovative design and strong sense of whimsy have marked her as one of the most influential artists of the 20th century. It's a Small World is a monument to both her talent and the vision of Walt Disney. How bold to create an experience not dedicated to advertising a product, but to encouraging acceptance and appreciation of our different cultures.”

Mark Walsh
Supervising Animator - Ratatouille

"I'm totally pissed about (the Disney character additions to) 'Small World', but maybe I've grown to accept the gradual crapification of anything good about Disneyland by people who care only about cross linking everything they own so that they each advertise each other. This is just one more step closer to a Disneyland boiled down to a series of billboard advertisements with a merchandise shop as the wiener at the end."

Don Shank
Visual Development Artist / The Incredibles

"Ironically, the phrase 'Its a small world, after all' takes on a sad, dark meaning in context to today's corporate culture. It speaks directly to the character of those who run the show; that is to say, small, small people of small, small integrity, running the entire world. Changing the ride as they intend to do, with Disney characters dominating the world, perfectly represents everything for which the corporate world stands. It may very well be an unintended work of modern art! I say brilliant, guys!"

Steve Moore
Director, Animator, Editor-in-chief FLIP animation.net

"I am one who thinks that the refurbishment of 'Pirates Of The Caribbean" has ruined that ride. The old 'Pirates' transported riders to a completely unique world and a completely different time period. The addition of Jack Sparrow breaks that fantasy, and brings riders into the modern day. Putting cartoon characters in 'It's A Small World' will have the same effect. Really, how many Aladdin dolls will be sold by adding him to this ride? Is it worth wrecking the integrity of one of Disneyland's most charming attractions?"

Alan Smart
Director / Spongebob Squarepants

"I grew up in Flushing New York, and at age nine had the opportunity to witness 'It's A Small World' in its debut at the Pepsi Pavillion at the New York World's Fair. This ride was a major influence on my life - and is a part of all of our lives. It's theme is of universal understanding. The whole point is to show that we are all the same, no matter where we live. The addition of Disney licensed characters completely cheapens the experience and dilutes the message. I am wholly against this desecration of a Disney classic. "

Jerry Beck
Animation Historian / Editor Cartoon Brew

"Mary Blair's work on Small World is an artistic achievement of her unique sensibilities, a symphony of color, glitter, cellophane, and hope for the world's children. It should be maintained for future generations to enjoy, and not compromised by additions vainly trying to blend in.”

Wendell Luebbe
Art Director

"I'm utterly appalled that a corporation as thoughtful and considerate as The Walt Disney Company would actually consider welcoming those dirty little money-grubbing rats into the hallowed sanctuary that is 'It's A Small World.' Somebody's got to put their foot down before it's too late."

Craig Kellman
Character Designer / Madagascar

“How can a company who understands the concept of "theming" so well make the decision to add film characters to a ride originally designed to celebrate "Children of the World"? The simple design aesthetic is a perfect marriage to that theme as well. The additional characters incorporate multiple design aesthetics and would introduce a visual chaos to "It's a Small World". It would be far better to remove a ride than to compromise the design of that ride with poorly conceived additions. The Walt Disney Co. should respect its own business plan and design concepts or hand over the scepter to someone who does.”

Fred Cline
Designer and Storyboard Director

“Let's keep the original integrity of It's a Small World. It's refreshing to have rides that don't always pay homage to the Disney characters. It gives Disneyland greater breadth and richness.”

Tia Kratter
Art Director

“With much of today’s entertainment being driven by a pop-cultural grab bag esthetic, Walt Disney’s Small World has stood for over 40 years as a most refreshing oasis. Designer Mary Blair’s brilliant creative vision is felt in every crevice and corner of the attraction. To alter this vision by adding elements outside of Blair’s unique design sensibility would not only be a gross creative misstep but would also obscure the very spirit and message of the ride itself.”

Mike Giaimo
Art Director - Pocohantas

"Disney needs to take a preservationist approach to historic works of art emblematic of Walt's vision for Disneyland. Mary Blair's design of Small World is one of Disneyland's unique treasures and should be preserved in its' entirety."

Sue Kroyer
Producer

"Although we recognize the practical necessity of updating attractions to keep Disneyland commercially viable, IT'S A SMALL WORLD is a special circumstance for two reasons. First, it has a unique political and historical pedigree having been created for the New York World's Fair as a testament to worldwide harmony through children. Second, it genuinely represents a personal vision of one of the greatest Disney artists, Mary Blair. "

Bill Kroyer
Director

"Walt Disney's works sought to reconnect us with the spirit of youth. Despite differences of culture and geography, we are all bonded by the laughter, clarity and simplicity of a child's point of view. This quality is not influenced by the whims and trends of a changing consumer society. It is a constant. It remains relevant. The unique talents of Mary Blair, Marc Davis, Rolly Crump and others gave form and feeling to Walt's dream of harmony for future generations. Their uncompromised vision should be preserved at Disneyland as a colorful legacy for our collective inner-child, both past and future."

Tim Hauser
Writer

•••

Why?

As “It’s a Small World” moves slowly and inexorably towards becoming a showcase for Disney cartoon characters one question and one question alone needs to be asked of the Disney Company loudly, firmly and often by all those participating in the campaign to save Small World from homogenization.

Why?

Demand that the Walt Disney Company give a strong, solid unequivocal reason for adding Disney characters to ‘It’s a Small World’.

Tell the Disney Company that it’s foolish to think this addition will draw in more people. The attraction has never suffered for business. Despite being one of the highest capacity attractions in the park it almost always has a good sized line.

Tell the Disney Company that two years ago 'The Enchanted Tiki Room' underwent a massive and expensive restoration while retaining the same show that premiered in 1963. The crowds rushed back in line.

Tell the Disney Company that, despite your own personal opinion, you understand why many guests might have expected to see Jack Sparrow in ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’ as they associate the attraction with the movie but that this is a completely different issue.

Tell the Disney Company that the addition of Disney characters to ‘It’s a Small World’ will only upset core fans and generate indifference among most of the general public.

Tell the Disney Company that the Small World they know and love isn’t, as the Disney Company publicly proclaimed, in need of more 'relevance'.

Tell the Disney Company that adding Disney characters into ‘It’s a Small World’ appears to be yet another marketing ploy to sell more character merchandise and that the public will continue to assume as much until given a more sensible excuse.

Tell the Disney Company you want to know ‘WHY?’ Send an e-mail asking ‘WHY?’ Send a letter asking ‘WHY?’ Stop by City Hall at Disneyland and ask ‘WHY?’

But good luck getting a reasonable answer.

You can parse the argument seven ways from Sunday but it still comes out the same; there is absolutely no good reason to add Disney characters to ‘It’s a Small World’.

•••

Imagineering Ambassador Marty Sklar defends the addition of Disney characters to 'It's a Small World' as an effort to make the attraction 'more relevant' in an open letter posted here.

.

With Utmost Reverence

“No one approaches our classic attractions with more reverence than Disney Imagineers who take great care when refreshing beloved attractions."

-Marilyn Waters
Disney Imagineering Spokeswoman
.

The BLAIR Family Speaks

Dear Disney Executives,

It has recently been brought to my attention that the Walt Disney Company including WDI has proposed changes to the “It’s a Small World Ride” at the Disneyland Park in Anaheim. As I understand the changes include the addition of the Disney Characters (Mickey, Minnie, Lilo & Stitch, etc.) to the ride in select areas, and the replacement of the “Rainforest” section with Mickey Mouse in a tribute entitled “Up with America”. I also understand that the boats and trough they ride in will be expanded for the safety and comfort of the parks modern day guests.

While I fully understand and support the upgrade to the boats as a necessary safety upgrade, the addition of the Disney Characters and the “Up with America” section I do NOT support as it represents a gross desecration of the ride's original theme and my Mother’s stylized artwork.

The Disney characters of themselves are positive company icons, but they do NOT fit in with the original theme of the ride. They will do nothing except to marginalize the rightful stars of the ride “The Children of the World”. This marginalization will do nothing but infuriate the ride’s international guests and devoted Disney fans.

My Mother and I have always had a strong sense of patriotism for America and I DO support a tribute to America. Disneyland has several venues, which are perfect places for this tribute including “Main Street USA” or “New Orleans Square”; unfortunately the “It’s a Small World” ride is NOT one of them. Once again this will marginalize the children of the world theme and bastardize my Mother’s original art. Furthermore ripping out a rainforest (Imaginary or otherwise) and replacing it with misplaced patriotism is a public relations blunder so big you could run a Monorail through it.

As a former WED employee I am saddened to realize the degradation of the company’s talent and focus and the subsequent decline at the Disneyland Park itself. I cannot believe someone from WDI was paid to come up with such an idiotic plan as this.

As the head of the Blair family I cannot urge you strongly enough to abandon this idiotic plan and instead upgrade the boats and return the ride to it’s original classic form, design and colors. The desecration of Mary’s art is an insult to Mary Blair, her art, and her memory, and to the entire Blair Family itself.

Sincerely,

Kevin L. Blair
Representing;
Kevin Blair, Donovan Blair, Jeanne Chamberlain,
Maggie Richardson, Kevin Allison

There's so much that we share...

THEME

The original intent of this attraction was clearly to suggest the core similarity of many peoples inhabiting a single planet. The evident implication is that we should be able to share the world in equality and peace.

Walt Disney chose children as a metaphor of humanity and innocence, and as a symbol of hope. Having discarded several unsatisfactory designs, he finally chose Mary Blair’s innocently simple dolls with distinct ethnic differences, but inescapable overriding similarities.

He presented these "children" in a panorama of colorful landscapes, and then united them in a spectacular all-white carnival of peace. And yes, in that more innocent age of America in which the ride was conceived, perhaps the admixture of cultures in the finale did subtly suggest America the "Melting Pot" at its happiest harmonious potential. The figures, unique to this one attraction, have sustained it for 43 years.

The "improvement" vulgarizes the theme and essence of what has given this ride its irresistible appeal for millions and millions of people.

STAR PLAYERS

The introduction of the joyously irascible Donald, the mischievous Stitch, the regal Simba and other Disney characters with their distinct attributes and back-stories destroys the unifying and equalizing anonymity of the original Small World population.

They introduce a perverse divisiveness diametrically opposed to the original import of the attraction. Once a select group of special privileged inhabitants of the World are distinctly identifiable Disney Stars, the remainder are necessarily relegated to the status of homogenous background bit players.

The audience, too, becomes divided into the "haves" who have seen the films and focus on identifying the stars while neglecting the supporting players, while the "have nots" are left out of the game: the very antithesis of the attraction's original thrust.

Moreover, Stitch, of course, is not a peaceful citizen of planet earth, but a blue alien, described by the Internet Movie Database as a “notorious extra-terrestrial fugitive from the law.”

Simba is an animal who fought off a relative in in order to claim his throne, in a kingdom clearly ruled by force rather than civil discourse; hardly an exemplary citizen for a human world at peace.

DIMINUTION OF CHARACTER

The Disney characters are, of course, one of the Company’s chief assets. But they are suffering homogenization, as the Grimm Brothers’ royals cavort with Minnie, Ariel and Jasmine in the Tween Spa Make-over Afternoons. Their insertion into A Small World is one more inappropriate and exploitive over-exposure.

HOMOGENIZATION OF THE PARK

Once the familiar “stars” invade Small World, the attraction loses its individuality. Guests are no longer transported into a unique festival of humanity, but find themselves in a continuation of the Fantasyland milieu of cartoon characters. The ride forfeits its distinct ambience and the park loses a singular different environment.

TRIVIALIZATION

The ride as originally conceived gives both children and adults a thrilling vision of the possibility of an innocent and unified world at peace, and this theme is clearly confirmed in the farewell salute of "Pax" in many languages. Beneath the pretty gaiety of the attraction is a stirring, serious and inspiring metaphor and message of hope for a troubled globe. Once the ride is reduced to one more panorama of the much-exposed Disney stock company - now with a supporting cast of singing dolls in an incompatible design style - any unique, innocent and important concern is compromised by intrusive celebrity and imposed familiarity.

May cooler heads prevail.

-Bravoman
March 7, 2008

A World of Tears

She was Walt Disney’s favorite conceptual artist, a woman whose sense of color and design influenced the look and feel of numerous Disney projects from 1942 to 1970.

Inarguably her crowning achievement was the 1964 New York World’s Fair show “It’s a Small World”, which later moved to Disneyland where it’s been enchanting guests for more than 40 years. By this summer five versions will exist, the newest appearing in Hong Kong.

The classic model, Mary’s pitch perfect original at Disneyland, is now down for ten months so that the boat flumes can be replaced with a deeper design more appropriate for todays heavier boatloads.

Unfortunately W.D.I. has taken ill advantage of the downtime by staking out areas throughout the attraction to place a selection of smiling Disney characters to spice up the proceedings. Imagine a grinning Stitch in Hawaii, a demure Belle in Paris, a Peter Pan in London.

And in one of the most egregious and downright disgusting decisions in Disney theme park history, the gorgeous New Guinea rainforest scene, replete with some of Mary Blair’s most whimsical character creations (a crocodile with an umbrella, colorful birds hatching from eggs) and her drummer children with Tiki Masks on the opposite shore will be replaced with a Hooray for U.S.A sequence.

Mary Blair’s formidable legacy has taken enough of a beating with the destruction of her Tomorrowland murals back in 1998. This recent move, if it goes through, would be nothing less than a brutal dismissal of her profound and enduring influence on the Disney aesthetic.

The insertion of Disney characters into this classic E-ticket is troubling enough. “It’s a Small World” may be a color and design masterpiece but more importantly the show’s simple message of shared humanity using children of the world and their innate innocence as the metaphor makes it a cultural touchstone and a casebook example of uncluttered visual storytelling. Cute as they may be, Belle, Mickey, Stitch or Nemo have nothing to do with selling the core values of UNICEF, the show’s original partner. Their appearance not only trivializes the central theme but more disturbingly seems to emphasize global brand marketing and franchising above all else.

When the attraction re-opens several months from now this salute to the children of the world will have turned into yet another guest search for hidden Mickeys, the earlier cleaner message all but lost on future generations. Here, also, is where Small World finally becomes yet another prelude to selling more plush, having now devolved into an elaborate hyper commercial window display, all charm and sincerity leeched from its bones.

It’s hard enough to stomach the addition of completely out of place Disney characters in this visionary gem of an attraction, harder to fathom the removal of the rainforest sequence but all out infuriating that it will be replaced with a loud, garish, tacky and aggressively incongruous Hooray for U.S.A. set piece. Nobody does Mary Blair quite like Mary Blair, but the concept art released by the Walt Disney Company for this section of the ride appears to have been designed by artists not even aware of her existence, let alone her singularly specific design sensibility. Gone is her use of a harmonic color palette, gone is her keen eye for shape and form, gone her impeccable taste and theatricality.

And when the rainforest goes, it goes for good, replaced with a group of sets never intended for American audiences from the show’s very inception. In consciously excluding a large scale U.S.A.-land from It’s a Small World (a lone cowboy and indian in the finale was just enough), the original show writers were asking American audiences to step away from their own national consciousness and take stock in the wider world around them. It’s a Small World was never about nationalistic fervor. It was about finding our common humanity outside our own borders.

This is not a change at Disneyland to take lightly. Letters should go out to all corners of the company pleading for a halt to the desecration of Small World once and for all. A campaign to “Save Our Rainforest” is appropriate, one with tee-shirts, wristbands and a countdown clock. It’s safe to say that with enough of a hue and cry from those of us who actually pay the bills at W.D.I the company might do an about face. Fortunately this was a concept that was pitched to executives before Bruce Vaughn and Craig Russell took the reigns at Imagineering so there’s still room for hope.

“It’s a Small World” is a work of art. Those fortunate enough to be the caretakers of a masterpiece are more than welcome to try on a new frame once in a while, to carefully restore its surface, switch out the lighting or even move the piece to another room.

But even the most fool-hardy owner knows not to paint over the original canvas.

Disneyland is your land. Don’t let this happen.

Spaceship Dearth

WE ARE ALL PASSENGERS TRAVELING TOGETHER

ON THIS SPACESHIP EARTH, STUPID.

“I don't believe in talking down to children.

I don't believe in talking down to any certain segment.”

- Walt Disney

I think it is safe to assume that anyone reading this blog frequents other Disney blogs, fan sites and discussion boards, and even if you haven’t experienced the new Spaceship Earth for yourself, you’ve at least read about it. I’m guessing you’ve already heard the new animation in the first half of the attraction looks great and the on-board touch-screen during the descent reduces the climax of Epcot’s centerpiece attraction to a tonally incorrect interactive display.

Let me just say, I agree and I agree--respectively.

Let’s get beyond that and look at the overall philosophy behind this do-over because it says a lot about what some people at WDI think of the average guest.

As far as I can tell, this version of Spaceship Earth communicates that the Walt Disney Company thinks its guests are dumb as a box of rocks.

The original Spaceship Earth was the result of the combined effort of countless artists--among them at least three certified geniuses: Buckminster Fuller, John Hench and the visionary poet Ray Bradbury. Bradbury is a true wordsmith; the man couldn’t write prose even if he wanted to. When he signs autographs, he writes a short extemporaneous poem. And if anyone doubts his visionary status, go back and read Fahrenheit 451. Bradbury warned us against the dangers of valuing immediate gratification (specifically via television) over the pursuit of knowledge (specifically via literature). The society that would result from such values was one which would treat each of its members as if they had the intellect and the curiosity of a lobotomized chimpanzee.

Bradbury wrote the original script for Spaceship Earth, but his carefully chosen words were dumbed down with each successive refurbishment. Spaceship Earth for Dummies now features Dame Judy Dench spouting such awkwardly transparent attempts to be relevant as “Rome built the first world wide web,” and a reference to the preservation of ancient texts as “the first back-up system.” Is it just me or did this remind anyone else of a well-meaning but dimwitted history teacher trying to relate to eighth graders? No offense to the talented actress in question. She didn’t write this stuff. But unfortunately neither did Bradbury. How much did they pay her to say, “Remember how easy it was to learn your ABCs?” The word “condescending” just isn’t strong enough; this language is insulting.

While we’re on the subject of narration, it's important to note show writers removed the word “Islamic” and replaced it with “Arab.” Why would they do that? Aren’t Muslims our fellow passengers aboard Spaceship Earth as well?

There was another odd change in the renaissance scene. A sculpture of a woman with a bare breast has been replaced with a covered-up version. Really? We’re too prude for the renaissance now? Seriously? The renaissance!?

I wish the concealing of marble cleavage was the oddest choice made during this refurbishment, but unfortunately, no. Someone decided a go-go dancer should work on a mainframe computer. Yes, I know she isn’t really a go-go dancer, but come-on. Who dressed that lab technician? Austin Powers? I don’t care if it is the 1970s and you like to climb into a cage at Studio 54 after work, but when you come to work as a lab tech you better dress like a lab tech, young lady. This costume design choice is fundamentally wrong.

I’m afraid we’re going to have to go back and review the basics in order to address this foolishness properly. The next paragraph is solely directed at anyone who thinks it’s a good idea to have a go-go dancer working on a mainframe computer in an optimistic, uplifting, dramatic attraction. Everyone else please skip to the following paragraph.

Every artist makes choices; writers, painters, sculptors, songwriters, set designers. Every artist. Theatrical designers (and theme park design is a theatrical art) must make choices that compliment a unified vision with the goal of eliciting a specific emotion from the audience. When poor choices are made, choices which contradict or distract from the intended message or emotion, it is evident and it pulls the audience out of the moment. The go-go outfit stands out and calls attention to itself instead of reinforcing the message. The show is not about that lab tech, the show is about all of us as the human race, how far we’ve advanced and the exciting future that awaits us. Every artist working on this show should be thinking about how they can reinforce that message with every choice they make. That’s not to say a bit of humor to lighten the mood isn’t welcome. It is. The sleeping monk is a good example, but I don’t see any humor here either. Was the lab tech’s outfit meant to be funny? What is the carefully thought out Henchian logic for that choice?

This brings us to the big choice. As many other bloggers, fans and just plain old park guests have already observed, the choice of reducing the second half of the attraction to a touch-screen interactive, which would normally be relegated to the post show, seems to be a way to save money, but I don’t think so. The cost of those screens was not insignificant. It seems to be more a result of the Company’s current infatuation with “interactivity.” For evidence of that infatuation just check out the recent New York Times article on Toy Story Midway Mania.

Unfortunately this obsession with shoving interactive elements into every attraction is usually at the expense of the fundamental principles that built Epcot and the Disney Parks in the first place. It doesn’t have to be; Disney theme parks have always been interactive experiences. But that’s a whole other can of worms.

I wonder if anyone remembers the last time WDI installed video screens in ride vehicles. It was for a little fiasco called Superstar Limo. Why would anyone want to duplicate any element of that show?

As a Bradbury fan, I can’t help but note the irony that they placed the villain from Fahrenheit 451 (a television screen) right in the ride vehicle. And here, just as in that world, the guests are expected to look at it instead of the world around them. An unintentional metaphor to be sure but I can’t help but read the message as: “stare at your own television, ignore the world passing by you and we’ll protect you from the dangers of marble nudity and big words you don’t understand.”

It’s sad to think that Spaceship Earth has fallen victim to one of the very dangers Bradbury warned us against. It’s downright heart wrenching to think that Epcot is capable of evoking parallels to the distopian future Bradbury warned us might be, instead of the utopian future Walt told us could be.

Finale Scene from Spaceship Earth

.

Hong Kong Phooey

Happy Haunts Materialize

"You son of a bitch, you left the bodies and you only moved the head stones! You only moved the head stones! Why?! Why?!"

-Steve
Poltergeist 1982

In the fall of 1999, about the time that word came down from Accountaneering that every corner of the Disney Theme Parks had to show a profit, Epcot’s Leave a Legacy program began.

The once gorgeous and inviting entrance breezeway, punctuated by colorful floral planters and a gentle fountain, gave way to what can only be described as an enormous War Memorial; 35 polished granite monoliths covered with the names and faces of several thousand Disney guests, each etched onto tiny one inch steel squares.

The base of Spaceship Earth, originally just a simple reflective column, was now festooned with tent poles, tarps, signage, video kiosks and cast member hucksters panhandling for the $35-$38 necessary to become ‘part of the legacy’; all this hitting guests barely two minutes after entering the park.

And just exactly what was so wrong about this new addition to Epcot?

For one, Leave a Legacy was never more than a bald faced money-making ploy. P.T. Barnam would’ve been proud of the several thousand suckers that fell for this scam. You can be assured Disney couldn’t have cared less about your legacy. They wanted your money.

Leave a Legacy is an element of the Disney Parks that divides guests rather than unites them. Those with enough status, bearing and disposable income can proudly shout, ‘I’m part of the legacy!” while those strained by the already steep entrance fee and unwilling to participate can’t help but be reminded that they’re not. Isn’t Epcot, indeed every Disney theme park, supposed to celebrate our common humanity rather than underline our differences?

Leave a Legacy degrades the original entrance plaza. After waiting in tight lines and cramped spaces at the ticket booths it was a delight to burst into this open, uncrowded urban garden. The pylons that held Spaceship Earth aloft gave way to generous inviting ‘arms’ that embraced guests and beckoned them forward. The only focal point then was the dazzling geosphere itself, gleaming under the Florida sun. The only monolith present was the gorgeous clear lucite spires at the center of the courtyard’s fountain, aimed skyward and inscribed with the park’s distinctive interlocking circles logo; a logo that ironically celebrated unity of cultures, ideas and people from around the world. Today the maze of hard granite slabs that make up Leave a Legacy, some as high as 19 feet, compete with Spaceship Earth for attention, block views and congest the entrance to Future World.

Leave a Legacy has absolutely no resonance in a park dedicated to the romance of the future. The markers are a cold hard reminder of the past and as Epcot’s Millennium anthem ‘We Go On’ attests, this is a park meant to celebrate the promise of tomorrow, not look back to previous visits.

By far the most repellant aspect of these granite roadblocks is that they’re just downright ghoulish. There’s just no escaping the fact that when you attach names, dates and etched faces to the side of a giant polished granite slab you’re making a powerful iconic statement. No matter how hard Disney marketing may try to spin it, Leave a Legacy is still a compelling evocation of war memorials, tombstones, crypts and death.


All the more creepy is that, though intended as a tribute to the living, in the eight years that passed since the program began a substantial swath of faces enshrined on these markers have passed as well, turning the evocation of a tombstone into the real deal. What better way to start your latest Epcot Adventure than Leaving a Tear at Grandma’s Legacy marker?

At Disney, where understanding the effect of imagery on the subconscious is an art form, one wonders how the ball was dropped so vigorously on this aggressive display of bad taste back in 1999.

As it is a new era at Disney Imagineering, rumblings underfoot suggest that serious lessons have already been learned from this giant misstep at the Mouse House. As of June, 2007 the Leave a Legacy program was discontinued and the tarps and banners at the base of Spaceship Earth removed. As for whether the monoliths will soon follow, word on the street is...

Promising.

.

Boy, Do We Need Them Now.

"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."

-Douglas Adams
Author

(L to R) Herb Ryman, Ken O'Connor, Collin Campbell, Marc Davis, Al Bertino, Wathel Rogers, Mary Blair, T. Hee, Blaine Gibson, X. Atencio, Claude Coats and Yale Gracey

Tomorrow Is Another Day

No doubt about it. Re-Imagineering has gotten considerably quieter these past few days. The reason is simple; so much has been going right at Imagineering that the temptation to rain on anyone's parade seems counter productive.

The fiercely offensive Mickey Wand is now history. California Adventure will be getting a billion plus makeover. The Subs are back at Disneyland. Even Disney Studios Paris is turning over a new leaf.

With aggressive competition coming from Universal soon, Imagineering is eagerly stepping up to the plate. Every year for the coming ten will bring new and interesting surprises from coast to coast and creative management, two words that haven't earnestly been used together at WDI for nearly two decades, is pressing for quality at all costs.

Of course it's not all peaches and cream. Our watch-dog days here at Re-Imagineering are far from over. There are still walls to tear down and dreams to nurture. Passionate discourse and debate from our readers, the heart and soul of this site's campaign, has been the real fuel for change at Imagineering.

It's time attention was paid.

In the coming weeks some of the most dynamic and passionate voices 'behind the blog' will come front and center to remind us of much of the work that still has yet to be done.

Disneyland's Tomorrowland is a great start.

"The Astro Orbitor in DL is an example of ego gone wild. This overdressed, ripped off from 'The Dark Crystal' carnival ride was shoehorned into the available real estate by someone who should know better. Taller than Walt's castle right next door, with half it's animation broken for years and it's cheesy "plastic painted like metal" toy store finish, it clashes wildly with the rest of the hub. Not to mention the hideously out of place rock work that surrounds it, an obviously desperate attempt to somehow blend it all together.

Tear it down and give us the WDW Astro Orbitor or even the old Rocket Jets weenie with a new paint job. Put the Rocket Jets back where it belongs, atop the Peoplemover with brand new 3rd generation [vehicles] winding below. Walt was not wrong about the placement ... as it was it was truly thrilling unlike the current grounded model."

-David Smith

"Here's another great flop. The wet marble fountain.

When they designed it they didn't think people would actually go in and get wet. So they got two problems. One, it smelled like a sewer from sweat, dirt, urine and feces from children since they didn't chlorinate it, and they had soaking wet people sitting down in plush seats in 'Honey I Shrunk the Audience' and ruining them!

Then they chlorinated the water to lose the sewer problem and wound up rotting the rubberized pavement which was never designed for chlorinated water. Did anyone think ahead at all? If you've ever seen any of the REST of Tomorowland 2055 that Bruce Gordon worked on you'd see just how much was never built. INNOVENTIONS was never part of the original plan.."

-Destino

"I think Imagineering can offer a lot more to revitalize Tomorrowland's tarnished reputation than a wholesale return to its past glories. It certainly needs the multilevel kinetic energy and atmosphere lost by the foolish removal of the People mover and the original skyline placement of the Rocket Jets. Tomorrow land would benefit hugely by the creation of an immersive attraction that does not rely simply on another animated character overlay. It needs something fresh and purely Disney in tone and execution, like Pirates or the Haunted Mansion. While I'm extremely pleased that the subs are returning, for both their crowd-relief and visual potential, I'd have preferred to see an original adventure of underseas exploration. Something to take us to a new places and immerse us in the sort of faux-scientific reality that used to make Tomorrowland the liveliest corner of the Park. That's what Mission to Mars/Moon and Inner Space provided and made them so popular in their time. A re-imagined, state of the art Inner Space Adventure would be fantastic. Put it in the center of the land...by getting rid of Innoventions! It's like a big black hole looming over the area, sucking out all energy. Same with HISTA. If we must keep Star Tours, at least put a different film in each pod so the experience is fresher and more random."

-Barry

"I've really thought that they should have fully embraced the 1967 aesthetic in their Tomorrow land revamp at Disney land. The LAX airport attraction is a perfect example of maximizing the theme. A Tomorrow land using this space-age googie aesthetic combined with the best of modern ride technology would be killer. Adventures Thru Inner Space with modern effects and ride systems? Sign me up right now. There's a way to embrace the design of the period without it being completely tongue-in-cheek and kitschy. It doesn't have to be loaded with obscure references. It just has to be cool. I would love to see every Tomorrowland allowed to retain a unique identity. There's been an alarming homogenization of Tomorrowlands in recent years that must be stopped and turned back. Finding a unique voice for DL would be a perfect start."

-Michael Crawford

"I visited Disneyland today for the first time in about a decade. While I enjoyed Space Mountain and Star Tours, Tomorrowland overall struck me as being somehow "broken". I didn't realize the Rocket Jets had been removed, and actually walked around confused for a moment looking for them. I really missed that Saturn V replica that looked so tall and scary to me as a child. Their replacement looks like a silly kiddie version that wouldn't have impressed me at 3, certainly not worth my time now.

Innovations was HORRIBLE. The opening speech made me feel like I had signed up to be in a commercial test audience. "And check out this new PEN PHONE. It even has a CAMERA. On the screen, pictures of Earth from space thanks to GOOGLE! Now go play on computers with...INTERNET GAMES!"

Ooooh! Aaaaah! I could have avoided the line and replicated the Innovations experience by pulling out my own mobile phone and surfing the web.

And how on Earth could Disney have eliminated CircleVision?!? I never once missed that when visiting in my younger years. I never got tired of the presentation. To this day it is something completely unique. The following should be brought back ASAP: Rocket Jets, CircleVision, and Carousel of Progress. If ASIMO is any good, put him in his own attraction.

-MC

• Tomorrowland Poster by Greg Maletic •

You Dream About Going Up There....

OH GOD NO! CANADA!

The term “Spaceship Earth” was first popularized by Buckminster Fuller; essentially it reminds us that the Earth, like a mechanical vehicle, requires care and maintenance and all of us are in it together. Regardless of our cultural differences, or ethnic heritage, or country of origin, we all must work together because we’re all passengers on this great Spaceship Earth.

Oh, I’m sorry, am I boring some of you? Or maybe all of you?

It’s so hard to tell these days. A bunch of guys at Imagineering keep saying that this stuff is boring, that it’s not “relevant.”

So here’s an idea. Maybe to make this blog entry less boring, we could hire a hip Hollywood celebrity to read it to you. Like Ellen DeGeneres or Eric Idle or Colin Mochrie or Martin Short. Is Celine Dion here?

Martin Short after all is now on his fourth Disney Theme Park Film, "O Canada!" right after “The Making of Me,” “Monster Sound Show,” and “CineMagique.” Whoopi’s got nothing on him. The new version of “O Canada!” is the latest in a painfully long line of theme park films starring b-list celebrities making post modern, non-diegetic comments about a subject someone at WDI seems to think is dull.

It’s a weird time for Disney and for Epcot. The first non-Magic Kingdom theme park is about to celebrate its 25th Anniversary. And it’s celebrating by exhibiting a severe case of bipolar disorder. On the one hand it’s getting back to its roots--having just removed the wand-shaped blemish from Spaceship Earth, or as the Canadians call it, “that big silver ball.” On the other hand, Epcot’s most recently updated attraction, "O Canada!" embraces the worst conventions of Eisner-era theme park films.

The new version of “O Canada!” is heavily scripted with sitcom style writing (“Okay, sometimes I do get a little excited about curling, but who doesn ’t?”) and self-referential non-jokes (“Keep your hands and arms inside the country at all times”), which were kind-of funny the first time we heard them 18 years ago (Robin Williams' “Keep your hands and arms inside the theater until it comes to a complete stop” in the original version of the Magic of Disney Animation at Disney-MGM Studios).

The writers at WDI haven’t just fallen into a rut. They’ve embraced a quasi-artistic movement (post modernism) that is the complete antithesis of everything guests found appealing about Disney theme parks in the first place. You know that thing about leaving the world of today and entering the world of yesterday, tomorrow and fantasy? How long will it be before we get the first theme park film that makes reference to the theme park film convention of referencing the theme park experience? And with all the celebrity faces and current references, you can bet this particular theme park film will age as well as a beaver tail with extra maple butter sitting out in the Florida sun.

Oh, wait, am I getting too preachy? Am I losing some of you? Perhaps here we should have Gilbert Gottfried break in and shout:

“B-O-R-I-N-G with a capital “B” and a capital “ORING.” Aren’t you supposed to be in the 'Fun' business. Fun? Remember fun?”

Would that be better? We're told today’s “MTV Generation” can’t pay attention to anything over 30 seconds long despite that very 'generation' now well over 30 with kids of their own; MTV having been on the air for over 25 years. Regardless, some Imagineers still seem to think that kids today need to be assaulted constantly with quick cuts and flashy imagery or they'll immediately force their entire family out of the theater and into the closest Six Flags or Universal park.

Apparently kids today also like to watch actors once popular before they were born interrupt beautiful vistas with derogatory comments about other attractions that they may have visited earlier that day and undoubtedly found boring.

The one redeeming aspect of this do-over is the fact that they did not remove the original theme song. They simply updated it with a more contemporary orchestration. It’s a shame the Future World pavilions did not receive the same treatment. But even the song wasn’t allowed to just happen. Instead, we’re treated to the jarring experience of Ned Nederlander jumping into frame and announcing: “This would be a perfect place for a song. I think so, don’t you?”

CircleVision films are inherently visceral experiences. That’s the whole point. You, the audience, get a 360 degree view of a breathtakingly beautiful place that you’d like to visit. Great CircleVision films like “America the Beautiful” flow like music; they don’t stumble like a bad sitcom pilot.

Well, this would be a perfect place to wrap up my blog post with a statement of my thesis and a summation of my position. I think so, don’t you?

These shows are going to be around for a long time, so timelessness and sincerity are essential. Any attempt at “hip and edgy” always falls flat for Disney and especially at Epcot.

Oh, I almost forgot the obligatory ma’am-you-forgot-your-purse comment. Here it is...

No celebrities were harmed in the making of this blog post. All actors mentioned in this post have turned in brilliant performances during their careers and the contributors to this blog have no wish to disparage them personally.

And Gilbert Gottfried seems like he’d be a really nice guy in person.

Now, how do I get out of here? Because I have a Fast Pass to Soarin'.

Authentic Canadian Cheese

News Fit for an HP Printer

News Flash. Mike Mendenhall leaves the Walt Disney Company after 17 years of service.

It’s no accident that the very best of WDI’s work came at a time when Imagineers only had to answer to other Imagineers. The idea that any outside interest could come in and dash the dreams of any attraction design team on a mere whim was completely alien to this amazing assembly of creative thinkers.

But for the last few years no matter how original or innovative the idea was it could be scrapped in the blink of an eye because some business executive or marketing group didn’t feel it jived with the latest direct to video release or had limited potential to sell keychains.

As creative road blocks go, Mike Mendenhall and his group of marketers and publicists was one of the most formidable. As the leader of Disney Parks and Resorts global brand image, marketing strategy, planning, publicity, advertising, media, new media online, interactive TV, strategic alliance marketing, special events and promotions and customer management, Mendenhall had more creative say than any Imagineer at WDI and more power than the President of Disneyland or Walt Disney World.

Mendenhall is responsible for changing the attraction approval process by installing a marketing review before projects are given a green light. This review had become so important that his department could shut down any Imagineering project before it got funded. This great marketing inquisition, more than anything else, has led to all those out-of-character characters invading Frontierland, Adventureland and Tomorrowland as well as such awkward attractions as Stitch’s Great Escape, Monster’s Inc. Laugh Floor and DCA’s Monsters Inc.: Mike and Sully to the Rescue, the latter title penned directly by Mendenhall himself.

His threat to all things classic Disney was felt in even the smallest divisions. When the two person creative team responsible for the nostalgic Disneyland 50th Anniversary collectibles presented their concepts to Mike he dismissed them as esoteric and “not our guest”. Eventually the two artists convinced Disneyshopping/catalog to proceed with production of the collectibles independent of the Disneyland Merchandising and Marketing teams. Despite the Mendenhall meddling the collectibles made the company millions.

How did a guy with a bachelor of science degree from Emerson become such an indomitable roadblock to so many creative endeavors at the Mouse House?

Jay Rasulo, chairman of the Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, loved him, even adding “Senior Creative Executive, The Disneyland Resort” to his title. Towards the end of his tenure Jay was grooming him for the head of Walt Disney Imagineering.

But then John Lasseter happened.

Unfortunately for Mike, Jay’s plans just didn’t fit this new Marketing paradigm.

HP, the company that brings us all things Printers and Ink, will start taking care of Mike on October 1st, a date that ironically happens to mark Epcot Center’s 25th Anniversary, a celebration that Mendenhall and his marketers refused to support. Luckily other divisions, despite their limited budgets and resources, have rallied together to take care of the proceedings, with many personnel working long hours and racing the clock to make this last minute celebration as memorable as possible.

For this once glorious and groundbreaking park it’s the best they could do under the circumstances.

With one less hoop to jump through at Imagineering the mood is once again ecstatic. In this unseasonable ‘Year of a Million Dreams’ this definitely counts as one big dream down.

All of us at Re-Imagineering wish Mike Mendenhall well as he starts his new career selling ink cartridges. Still, as one insider put it, “Thank God for Apple and Epson”.

J.K. Rowlings Magical Gift

Just last May it was announced that Warner Bros. and Universal were partnering to create a 20 plus acre Harry Potter ‘theme park within a theme park’ at Universal’s Islands of Adventure in Orlando. Disney Imagineering had officially lost the bid to celebrate all things 'Boy Wizard' within their own theme parks.

Intuition would tell us that the Disney Company had just dropped the ball on one of the most lucrative franchises on the planet. But for Disney Imagineers this was no loss whatsoever. In fact, it was cause for celebration. "Perhaps the best thing that's ever happened to WDI" one top level executive was overheard saying.

It’s certainly no loss to the notoriously quality obsessed J.K. Rowling either. Universal is sparing no expense to make sure this fully immersive environment will be of the highest caliber. Within this “Wizarding World” guests will be able to interact with many of the locations from the books and films, including the village of Hogsmeade, the Forbidden Forest and the iconic Hogwarts Castle. “I don't think fans of the books or films will be disappointed," said J.K. Rowling.

Taking a cue from the genesis of WED Imagineering in its golden age, talent isn’t being bartered from art school interns or freelanced out to fly-by-night design firms but is coming directly from artists, technicians and visual story-tellers from the motion picture industry itself. Stuart Craig, the three time Academy Award winning production designer of the Harry Potter movies (as well as Gandhi, Dangerous Liaisons and The English Patient) is heading up a core design team well versed in the incredibly specific milieu of three dimensional fantasy environments.

“The philosophy on the movies,” Stuart noted, “was to make everything seem as real and credible as possible. We undertook a period of research and looked at the great European cathedrals, Oxford University in this country. All of this informed us and helped us keep the world credible; to keep the detail very real and very specific. That same philosophy was applied to the theme park.”

You can bet that come late 2009 guests to Universal’s Islands of Adventure will feast on an intricately detailed fantasy environment that promises to rival the richness of a Pirates of the Caribbean or a Haunted Mansion, an ironic homage to the classic Walt era Imagineers. J.K. Rowling wouldn’t have it any other way.

After the official press release from Warner Bros. and Universal Orlando you’d have thought that Bob Iger would be marching several legions of Disney Executives to the guillotine or that an angry mob of stockholders would be storming the castle. Instead a group of resilient battle weary Imagineers were quietly grinning from ear to ear, cracking open a bottle of champagne and staring out upon a very, very ‘blue sky’.

Chat with any Imagineer that’s lived through the last couple decades at WDI and they’ll tell you tales of the good old days back in the 70’s and 80’s when the company took pride in being an industry leader and when it was not only fun but vital for Imagineering to one-up the competition every step of the way. This was a time when so much was going on at then WED that even friendly rivalries between creative leads on separate in-house attractions broke out, assuring the highest quality showmanship from every corner of the company.

Now more than ever Imagineers are itching to step up to the plate in the spirit of knocking the socks off the competition. With ‘Harry Potter’s Wizarding World’ opening in Orlando the competition has never been more fierce.

“We are going to devote more time, more money, more expertise and more executive talent from throughout our entire organization and creative team,” noted Tom Williams, chairman and CEO of Universal Parks, “to ensure that this entire environment is second-to-none.”


Universal can go right ahead and follow the franchise. The heritage of Disney Imagineering, however, is one of building franchises from the ground up. With Hogwarts Castle looming on the horizon, WDI is primed and ready to show the world something fresh, exciting, original, daring and wholly surprising, to dare to deliver to guests an experience they never knew they wanted.

Make no mistake about it, it's going to be tough for WDI to top what's going on over on those islands of adventure. But they will. They have to. For the company that put the ‘theme’ in theme parks nothing less than their reputation is at stake.

And for todays Renaissance Imagineers the challenge couldn’t be more intoxicating.

Gentlemen, start those engines.

W.E.D. ON WED

“When we opened Disneyland, a lot of people got the impression that it was a get-rich thing, but they didn’t realize that behind Disneyland was this great organization that I built here at the Studio, and they all got into it and we were doing it because we loved to do it.”

“Disneyland was a natural. It was so close to what we were doing in film. I thought of it a long time, but very few people believed in it at first. Now look at it.”

“Disneyland is a thing that I can keep molding and shaping. It’s a three-dimensional thing to play with. But when I say, ‘play with it,’ I don’t mean that. Everything I do I keep a practical eye towards its appeal to the public.”

“Disneyland would be a world of Americans, past and present, seen through the eyes of my imagination – a place of warmth and nostalgia, of illusion and color and delight...”

“Physically, Disneyland would be a small world in itself – it would encompass the essence of the things that were good and true in American life. It would reflect the faith and challenge the future, the entertainment, the interest in intelligently presented facts, the stimulation of the imagination, the standards of health and achievement, and above all, a sense of strength, contentment and well-being.”

“A word may be said in regard to the concept and conduct of Disneyland’s operational tone. Although various sections will have the fun and flavor of a carnival or amusement park, there will be none of the ‘pitches,’ game wheels, sharp practices and devices designed to milk the visitor’s pocketbook.”

“Almost everyone warned us that Disneyland would be a Hollywood spectacular – a spectacular failure. But they were thinking about an amusement park, and we believed in our idea – a family park where parents and children would have fun – together.”

“When I started on Disneyland, my wife used to say, “But why do you want to build an amusement park? They’re so dirty.” I told her that was just the point – mine wouldn’t be.”

“Disneyland is like Alice stepping through the Looking Glass; to step through the portals of Disneyland will be like entering another world.”

“It came about when my daughters were very young and Saturday was always daddy’s day with the two daughters. So we’d start out and try to go someplace, you know, different things, and I’d take them to the merry-go-round and did all these things – sit on a bench, you know, eating peanuts – I felt that there should be something built where parents and the children could have fun together. So that’s how Disneyland started. Well, it took many year… it was a period of maybe 15 years developing. I started with many ideas, threw them away, started all over again. And eventually it evolved into what you see today at Disneyland. But it all started out from a daddy with two daughters wondering where he could take them where he could have a little fun with them, too.”

“Disneyland is like a piece of clay, if there is something I don’t like, I’m not stuck with it. I can reshape and revamp.”

“Whenever I go on a ride, I’m always thinking of what’s wrong with the thing and how it can be improved.”

“It’s no secret that we were sticking just about every nickel we had on the chance that people would really be interested in something totally new and unique in the field of entertainment.”

“Disneyland is a work of love. We didn’t go into Disneyland just with the idea of making money.”

“We did it, in the knowledge that most of the people I talked to thought it would be a financial disaster – closed and forgotten within the first year.”

“The more I go to other amusement parks in all parts of the world, the more I am convinced of the wisdom of the original concepts of Disneyland. I mean, have a single entrance through which all the traffic would flow, then a hub off which the various areas were situated. That gives people a sense of orientation – they all know where they are at all times. And it saves a lot of walking.”

“The idea of Disneyland is a simple one. It will be a place for people to find happiness and knowledge. It will be a place for parents and children to share pleasant times in one another’s company; a place for teachers and pupils to discover greater ways of understanding and education. Here the older generation can recapture the nostalgia of days gone by, and the younger generation can savor the challenge of the future. Here will be the wonders of Nature and Man for all to see and understand. Disneyland will be based upon and dedicated to the ideals, the dream and hard facts that have created America. And it will be uniquely equipped to dramatize these dreams and facts and send them forth as a source of courage and inspiration to all the world. Disneyland will be sometimes a fair, an exhibition, a playground, a community center, a museum of living facts, and a showplace of beauty and magic. It will be filled with accomplishments, the joys and hopes of the world we live in. And it will remind us and show us how to make these wonders part of our own lives.”

“Disneyland will be the essence of America as we know it, the nostalgia of the past, with exciting glimpses into the future. It will give meaning to the pleasure of the children – and pleasure to the experience of adults. It will focus a new interest upon Southern California through the mediums of television and other exploitation. It will be a place for California to be at home, to bring its guests, to demonstrate its faith in the future. And, mostly as stated at the beginning – it will be a place for the people to find happiness and knowledge.”

“To all who come to this happy place: Welcome. Disneyland is your land. Here, age relives fond memories of the past... and here youth may savor the challenge and promise of the future. Disneyland is dedicated to the ideals, the dreams, and the hard facts that have created America… with the hope that it will be a source of joy and inspiration to all the world.”

“Disneyland is a show.”

“I don’t want the public to see the world they live in while they’re in the park. I want them to feel they’re in another world.”

“Disneyland is not just another amusement park. It’s unique, and I want it kept that way. Besides, you don’t work for a dollar – you work to create and have fun.”

“In the wintertime you can go out there during the week and you won’t see any children. You’ll see the oldsters out there riding all these rides and having fun and everything. Summertime, of course, the average would drop down. But the overall, year-round average, its four adults to one child.”

"Why do we have to grow up? I know more adults who have the children's approach to life. They're people who don't give a hang what the Jonses do. You see them at Disneyland everytime you go there. They are not afraid to be delighted with simple pleasures, and they have a degree of contentment with what life has brought - sometimes it isn't much, either."

“The idea for Disneyland lay dormant for several years. It came along when I was taking my kids around to these kiddie parks… I took them to zoos, I took them everywhere, and while they were on the merry-go-round riding 40 times or something, I’d be sitting there trying to figure what I could do. When I built the Studio I thought we ought to have a three-dimension thing that people could actually come and visit – they can’t visit our Studio because the rooms are small. So I had a little dream for Disneyland adjoining the Studio, but I couldn’t get anybody to go in with me because we were going through this depression. And whenever I’d go down and talk to my brother about it, why he’d always suddenly get busy with some figures so, I mean, I didn’t dare bring it up. But I kept working on it and I worked on it with my own money. Not the Studio’s money, but my own money.”

“Drawing up plans and dreaming of what I could do, everything. It was just something I kind of kept playing around with.”

“Here is adventure. Here is romance. Here is mystery. Tropical rivers – silently flowing into the unknown. The unbelievable splendor of exotic flowers… the eerie sound of the jungle… with eyes that are always watching. This is Adventureland.”

“Here is the world of imagination, hopes and dreams. In this timeless land of enchantment, the age of chivalry, magic and make-believe are reborn – and fairy tales come true. Fantasyland is dedicated to the young-in-heart – to those who believe that when you wish upon a star, your dreams come true.”

“Here we experience the story of our country’s past… the colorful drama of Frontier America in the exciting days of the covered wagon and the stagecoach… the advent of the railroad… and the romantic riverboat. Frontierland is a tribute to the faith, courage and ingenuity of the pioneers who blazed the trails across America.”

“A vista into a world of wondrous ideas, signifying man’s achievements… a step into the future, with predictions of constructive things to come. Tomorrow offers new frontiers in science, adventure and ideals: the Atomic Age… the challenge of outer space… and the hope for a peaceful and unified world.”

“Now, when we opened Disneyland, outer space was Buck Rogers. I did put in a trip to the moon. And I got Wernher von Braun to help me plan the thing. And, of course, we were going up to the moon long before Sputnik. And since then has come Sputnik and then has come our great program in outer space. So I had to tear down my Tomorrowland that I built 11 years ago and rebuild it to keep pace.”

“Everybody thinks that the Park is a gold mine – but we have had our problems. You’ve got to work it and know how to handle it. Even trying to keep that Park clean is a tremendous expense. And those sharp pencil guys will tell you, ‘Walt, if we cut down on maintenance, we’d save a lot of money.’ But I don’t believe in that – it’s like any other show on the road; it must be kept clean and fresh.”

“To try to keep an operation like Disneyland going you have to pour it in there. It’s what I call ‘Keeping the show on the road.’ Not just new attractions, but keeping it staffed properly… you know, never letting your personnel get sloppy… never let them be unfriendly. That’s been our policy all or lives. My brother and I have done that and that is what has built our organization.”

“There are many ways that you can use those certain basic things and give them a new décor, a new treatment. I’ve been doing that with Disneyland. Some of my things I’ve redone as I’ve gone along, reshaped them.”

“The first year I leased out the parking concession, brought in the usual security guards – things like that – but soon realized my mistake. I couldn’t have outside help and still get over my idea of hospitality. So now we recruit and train every one of our employees. I tell the security police, for instance, that they are never to consider themselves cops. They are there to help people. The visitors are our guests. It’s like running a fine restaurant. Once you get the policy growing, it grows.”

“The Era We Are Living In Today Is A Dream Come True.”

“Disneyland will always be building and growing and adding new things… new ways of having fun, of learning things and sharing the many exciting adventures which may be experienced here in the company of family and friends.”

“When we were planning Disneyland, we hoped that we could build something that would command the respect of the community and after 10 years, I feel that we’ve accomplished that, not only the community but the country as a whole.”

“It’s something that will never be finished. Something that I can keep developing, keep plussing and adding to. It’s alive. It will be a live, breathing thing that will need change. A picture is a thing, once you wrap it up and turn it over to Technicolor you’re through. Snow White is a dead issue with me. A live picture I just finished, the one I wrapped up a few weeks ago, it’s gone. I can’t touch it. There’s things in it I don’t like; I can’t do anything about it. I wanted something alive, something that could grow, something I could keep plussing with ideas; the Park is that. Not only can I add things, but even the trees will keep growing.” The things will get more beautiful each year. And as I find out what the public doesn’t like, I can’t change it, it’s finished, but I can change the Park, because it’s alive. That is why I wanted that Park.”

“It has that thing – the imagination, and the feeling of happy excitement – I knew when I was a kid.”

“You can’t live on things made for children – or for critics. I’ve never made films for either of them. Disneyland is not just for children. I don’t play down.”

“To make the dreams of Disneyland come true took the combined skills and talents of hundreds of artisans, carpenters, engineers, scientists and craftsmen. The dream that they built now become your heritage. It is you who will make Disneyland truly a magic kingdom and a happy place for millions of guests who will visit us now and in the future.”

“A lot of people don’t realize that we have some very serious problems here, keepin’ this thing going and getting’ it started. I remember when we opened, if anybody recalls, we didn’t have enough money to finish the landscaping and I had Bill Evans go out and put Latin tags on all the weeds.”

“I had different cost estimates; one time it was three and a half million and when I kept fooling around a little more with it and it got up to seven and a half million and I kept fooling around a little more and pretty soon it was twelve and a half and I think when we opened Disneyland it was seventeen million dollars.”

“Disneyland is the star. Everything else is in the supporting role.”

“Here You Leave Today – And Visit The Worlds of Yesterday, Tomorrow and Fantasy.”

“Disneyland is often called a Magic Kingdom because it combines fantasy and history, adventure and learning, together with every variety of recreation and fun designed to appeal to everyone.”

“I first saw the site for Disneyland back in 1953. In those days it was all flat land – no rivers, no mountains, no castle or rocket shops – just orange groves, and a few acres of walnut trees.”

“Well, it took many years. I started with many ideas, threw them away, started all over again. And eventually it evolved into what you see today at Disneyland.”

“Disneyland will never be completed. It will continue to grow as long as there is imagination left in the world.”

“Disneyland really began when my two daughters were very young. Saturday was always Daddy’s Day, and I would take them to the merry-go-round, and sit on a bench eating peanuts, while they rode. And sitting there alone, I felt there should be something built, some kind of family park where parents and children could have fun together.”

“Well, you know this Disneyland concept kept growing and growing and finally ended up where I felt like I needed two or three thousand acres. So I wanted it in the Southern California area; had certain things that I felt I needed, such as flat land because I wanted to make my own hills. So I had a survey group go out and hunt for areas that might be useful and they finally came back with several different areas and we settled on Anaheim. “The price was right but there was more to it than that, and that is that Anaheim was a sort of growing area and the freeway project was such that we could see that eventually the freeways would hit Anaheim as a sort of a hub so that’s how we selected Anaheim.”

“Anaheim was a town of 14,000 then, and if someone had mentioned that one year soon six million visitors would come to Disneyland, folks might have had second thoughts about inviting us. In fact, we might have had second thoughts about building a Disneyland!”

“I think what I want Disneyland to be most of all is a happy place – a place where adults and children can experience together some of the wonders of life, of adventure, and feel better because of it.”

“The way I see it, Disneyland will never be finished. It’s something we can keep developing and adding to. A motion picture is different. Once it’s wrapped up and sent out for processing, we’re through with it. If there are things that could be improved, we can’t do anything about them anymore. I’ve always wanted to work on something alive, something that keeps growing. We’ve got that in Disneyland.”

“I just want to leave you with this thought, that it’s just been sort of a dress rehearsal and we’re just getting started. So if any of you start resting on your laurels, I mean just forget it because… we are just getting started.”

“Well, I think by this time my staff, my young group of executives, and everything else, are convinced that Walt is right. That quality will out. And so I think they’re going to stay with that policy because it’s proved that it’s a good business policy. Give the people everything you can give them. Keep the place as clean as you can keep it. Keep it friendly, you know. Make it a real fun place to be. I think they’re convinced and I think they’ll hang on after… as you say… well… after Disney.”

"I love the nostalgic myself. I hope we never lose some of the things of the past."

“The whole thing here is the organization. Whatever we accomplish belongs to our entire group, a tribute to our combined effort. Look at Disneyland. That was started because we had the talents to start it, the talents of the organization. And our World’s Fair shows – what we did was possible only because we already had the staff that had worked together for years, blending creative ideas with technical know-how.”

“Well WED is, you might call it my backyard laboratory, my workshop away from work. It served a purpose in that some of the things I was planning, like Disneyland for example… it’s pretty hard for banking minds to go with it… so I had to go ahead on my own and develop it to a point where they could begin to comprehend what I had on my mind.”

“There’s really no secret about our approach. We keep moving forward – opening up new doors and doing new things – because we’re curious. And curiosity keeps leading us down new paths. We’re always exploring and experimenting. At WED, we call it Imagineering – the blending of creative imagination with technical know-how.”

-WALT DISNEY

It's Official!

Word came through this morning that, after seven long years of desecrating the glorious Spaceship Earth geosphere at Epcot Center, the 257 foot tall Mickey arm and wand will indeed be coming down. Work starts this Monday, July 9th, and will be complete by Epcot's 25th anninversary in October.

Jim Macfee, Epcot's Vice President, noted, "We think the timing of the removal is right."

Ya think?

Those that truly care about the heritage of Epcot couldn't be happier.

There's still much work to be done in Future World; the removal of the dismal Epcot Cemetery, the transformation of Test Track / World of Motion into a true showcase for the future of transportation, the write off of Mission: Space as a dismal and deadly failure, the rebirth of the Energy Pavilion as a true exploration of alternative energy choices and the re-imagining of The Seas Pavilion as a place to be actively challenged with the stewardship of our amazing ocean wonders rather than challenged to merely find Nemo.

Indeed all of Future World is in dire need of a complete tone change. A high ranking executive at the very top of the Disney food-chain would be smart to bankroll a confident transition from the empty thrills and bizarre marketing agendas of Epcot's Eisnerland to the headier, hopeful and more satisfying goal outlined on the dedication plaque, where the promise of Epcot Center was not only to 'entertain, inform and inspire' but more importantly to, 'instill a new sense of belief and pride in man's ability to shape a world that offers hope to people everywhere.'

Still, knocking down that god-awful tawdry disgusting horrid filthy cheap Mickey wand is a great first step.

Bliss!

Photo courtesy Sam Eagle

Managing the Creative Factory

An old Imagineer once told me this about WED in the 50’s and 60’s:

“You had Walt, and all that great talent thrown together with him… something great was bound to happen! It was just a magical time!”

But was it just magic? Or is there some logical formula for managing the creative process to get superior results? Throughout the entertainment industry there have been many other times when just the right mix of people came together and exceptional things were created. Look at MGM during the 30’s and 40’s. We hear it was a factory that ran like clockwork, yet they produced classics like the Wizard of Oz, Grand Hotel, Philadelphia Story, Meet Me in St. Louis and so many other quality musicals and dramas.


The same type of thing happened at the Disney studio in the 30’s with the birth of feature animation and amazing films like Snow White and Pinocchio. It was also another factory with a creative product and Walt successfully figured out how to manage it. Later, he did the same thing with WED.

Today the same thing is happening at Pixar. John Lasseter knows how to manage creative talent and the result has been one mega-hit after the other. If you look back, you can come up with many other examples of the right mix of people getting together to create great films, television shows, and, of course, themed environments.

So what did these successful ventures have in common?

They all had a great leader and a commitment to quality product. And although they ran their businesses like factories, they realized that they were different than other factories that made things like paper clips. The difference was that these factories ran on the creative process.

So we can see three things those successful ventures had in common; a knowledge of how the creative process runs, a commitment to quality product throughout the organization, and a great leader. How or why did WDI stray so far from these basic concepts and is the current re-structuring considering these points?

Over time WDI began to be run more like a paper clip factory and a culture emerged where an artist or craftsperson that was better at working with administration was considered more valuable than those with exceptional talent. (Can you imagine if back in the golden days of MGM they sacked people like Vincent Minnelli or Clark Gable in favor of those who excelled in planning and scheduling meetings?) And some WDI departments are run with their own survival as the goal, rather than by the desire of producing the finest end product. It takes a special talent to manage a department that is part of a greater creative process. You can’t run it with blinders on as if paper clips are your only responsibility. One of the most important jobs of a manager is to be able to recognize talent and nurture it for the overall good of the organization.

Under Eisner’s direction the idea of producing top quality themed attractions was replaced with a commitment to product based on marketing calculations (Pressler). That’s how we got DCA. At the same time, the Oriental Land Company in Japan believed in quality product, and made the commitment to have WDI produce the fabulous Tokyo DisneySea project. So the idea of a commitment to quality product has to come from the top, and the people at the top have to know what a quality product is. Right now this is Bob Iger’s responsibility.

Finally, John Lasseter’s appointment as creative advisor to WDI makes perfect sense. But will he be able to fill the role of the great creative leader, or will he be spread too thin running Pixar, Disney Animation and WDI at the same time? With Imagineering easily being one of the biggest white elephants in the room at the Disney Company, one can only hope full-time attention will eventually be paid.

“When Mickey Comes Marching Home Again…”

It is a sparkling Southern California day as I step off the Monorail into Tomorrowland. The kind of day I associated with Disneyland as a kid, when the drive to Anaheim brought sunshine, ocean breeze and brilliant color to eyes more accustomed to the miserable grey of a Tule fog winter.

Fitting weather for a celebration. Walt Disney’s Submarine Voyage is recommissioned nearly ten years after a critical battle, when the historic attraction was torpedoed by sharp-shooting accountaneers of a tragic wartime Kingdom.

Now the fleet has returned to a hero’s welcome.

Watching the gleaming yellow subs circle though their shimmering lagoon, the future again looks bright, fading the long nightmare of an era when all life was drained from these once-vital waters. Looking across the landscape, there are further signs of that miraculous Tomorrow we were promised by Walt, a world that in recent years was left to rot and ruin for the duration.


Though the hulking skeleton of the Rocket Jets, now a dismembered mechanical corpse, still dominates Tomorrowland’s skyline to remind us of past atrocities - signs of utopia’s reconstruction are evident everywhere. The spires of Space Mountain shine white once again. Modernist sculpture graces the civic spaces of the future city. It’s a world slowly on the move and the mend.

But beneath the surface of Tomorrowland’s lagoon, renewed life is fully vibrant.

As I climb down that spiral staircase into the submarine, I'm embraced by the joy of finding an old friend lost in battle. My sense memory streams with déjà vu of the voyages we had shared. As I dutifully polish a porthole with my sleeve to remove a greasy nose-print, as I had so many times before, I'm carried back to those simple, happy times before the fall.

This is no wallow in nostalgia. Through the bubbles, a new adventure unfolds, colorful, detailed, filled with character and delight. The new voyage is not a pasteboard paradise, but a living environment of quality and imagination, to a depth we have not experienced in many years. The new “Finding Nemo” show elements fill the enormous flippers passed down by fondly recalled sea serpents, giant squid and mermaids. The unique infrastructure of the original Submarine Voyage provides an incomparable platform from which to launch new technological wonders, resulting in a fully animated hybrid that would not be possible to build from scratch today. It is worth every penny, and the smiling crowds that have turned up to greet the fleet underscore the success.

So who are the true heroes of the campaign? To whom do we dedicate this octopus’s victory garden?

We salute those who fought for the Magic Kingdom, those who risked politics and livelihood to pass Walt’s world of wonder to a new generation. Prime among them, Tony Baxter and his fellow Imagineering traditionalists, who kept the lights on in the lagoon during every blackout. And to Matt Ouimet, former President of Disneyland, who recognized the value of the shared treasure with which he was entrusted. Without their passion, dedication and perseverance through the dark decades, these waters might now be landfill; the subs scrap metal, like their Florida cousins.

Along with the submarine fleet, another long lost unit has come marching home again… the animators. And they are bringing the “Walt” back to Disneyland.

While cartoons have never strayed far from the Kingdom, in fact they have been rather persistent in expanding their reach, the specialized cartoonist's-eye and the inventive ideas that made characters into something more than franchise floggers has increasingly become an offshore import.

Walt Disney’s original voyages into theme park design benefited greatly from the taste and talents of Walt Disney Productions artists and animators, the creators of his classic cartoon features. Studio stalwarts like Marc Davis, Mary Blair, Eyvind Earle, Ken Anderson, Claude Coats and so many others that helped set the style for the films, did the same for Disneyland. These initial Imagineers knew how to tell stories visually, to art direct an environment that brought the unreal to convincing life. With personality, detail, color and corn, they took us to other worlds without a trace of irony. Their contributions helped make a trip to Disneyland like stepping into the frame of a Disney film. After all, they had created the originals.

Since the early 1990’s, when corporate gatekeepers began to close the inner-kingdom to animators, artists and other creatives of the Walt kind, we began losing portholes of imagination to MBA-holes of management efficiency. Yet that time too has passed.

In the acquisition of Pixar, Disney has bought back their wandering soul and healthy inner child – at a premium – and it could not have been a better move. Here are to be found the traditional Disney talents and ideas, the Walt spirit in exile.

While Pixar’s artists had contributed ideas and comments to their attractions in the past, their people were more-or-less peripheral to the process. Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage is the first opportunity WDI’s new creative skipper, John Lasseter, has had to fully supervise the execution of a major attraction - - and the increased level of creative spit and polish is more than evident. His efforts to “plus” the project ensured that the fleet’s return was well-worth waiting for.

On sparkling display too, is the Pixar eye for design through the efforts of “Finding Nemo” alumni, including Robin Cooper, texture art director for the film, who helped bring the look and feel of the movie environment to three-dimensional life – and “Nemo” production designer Ralph Eggleston, whose dazzling attraction travel poster at the main gate pays homage to the stylish mid-century original, while adding the fun of the film, ride and characters to the design. While only part of a larger hardworking team, the animation artists help to bring that special “Disney touch” back to the park, with colorful detail at once fresh and new, yet part of the timeless whole.

Through Pixar, we can only hope the entire Disney Company will again be animated by animators, as it has always been, as it ever should be.

As I step from the submersible with a happy heart, I catch an angle on Tomorrowland that I haven’t seen in a decade. From that vantage point, other phantoms of The Happiest Place on Earth live again in my mind’s eye. The bleak Observatron spins again with stellar Astrojets high above, the PeopleMover carries relaxed travelers of tomorrow’s highway on its slender beams, Skyway gondolas fly overhead into icy caves of the mighty Matterhorn, giving a rarified bird’s eye view of this World on the Move. And there are new wonders too, attractions that surprise and delight beyond expectation… It is Walt's utopia reborn from the depths of decay.


The union of Pixar artists and Disney Imagineers will help to further renew, revive and define that dream Tomorrowland for the next millennium, perpetuating the optimistic futurism of the founder though creative application of design and technology, visual storytelling and immersive experience. The triumphant return of the submarine fleet is only leading a pageant of promise from the past to future voyages of discovery in waters of the imagination yet to be explored.

Walt Disney’s great, big beautiful tomorrow is on the horizon once again, thanks to those who let their hearts soar above the bottom line. Though there are surely still mid-level monkeys in the machine, clinging to their spreadsheets on remote islands long after surrender, the news will reach them sooner or later - - or they will simply be left behind.

“When the world is truly ready for a new and better life, all these things will one day come to pass, in God's good time,” predicted Captain Nemo in Walt Disney’s “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.”

Maybe “God’s good time” is now...

The Nature of the Business

For decades, the relentless expanding and contracting of Walt Disney Imagineering has been explained away as "the nature of the business." WDI (formerly WED Enterprises) has existed for over fifty years, and has been conducting cyclical mass layoffs since the early 1970s. The most notable layoffs have taken place after the completion of Epcot and Tokyo Disneyland (1982-1983), after the completion of Disneyland Paris (1992) and after opening three theme parks in nineteen months, Disney's California Adventure, Tokyo Disney Sea and the Walt Disney Studios Park in Paris (2001 - 2002). Perhaps Disney's twenty-five year massive worldwide theme park expansion is taking a breather--providing us with the perfect opportunity to reevaluate the validity of the oft-used phrase: "It's just the nature of the business."

Why is it the nature of the business? Perhaps because WDI is project driven and projects fluctuate based on the needs of their clients. WDI however has only two clients; the Walt Disney Company (WDI's own parent) and the Oriental land Company (which operates Tokyo Disneyland and is beholden to the Walt Disney Company per their licensing agreement).

WDI doesn't exactly have to exist in the competitive world of independent design firms. If fact, for decades WDI held all the cards. They dictated every little detail to the park operators. But things changed and now the park operations folks are in charge. Park executives order what they want from WDI the same way a client would from an independent firm. This causes WDI to behave like an independent firm, always looking to sell its wears to whatever park executive has the money to spend. WDI is constantly begging for work, which leaves no time or motivation to prepare for the future, and no opportunity to play the role of master planner.

WDI is a reactive organization, not a proactive one.

For Your Consideration

Consider that it’s WDI's job to maintain the identity and theme of eleven parks around the world as well as dozens of resort experiences. Consider that WDI is responsible for painstakingly designing and updating minute details on a canvas that covers more than 35,000 acres of land around the world and must do so in a four dimensional environment (in addition don't forget about the basic wear and tear of time). Consider that the attention to detail, which is one hallmark of WDI, is actually what first separated Disney Theme Parks from amusement parks, and the consistency and continuity of those details creates the show that elevates Disney theme parks above all the rest (along with the contribution of a tireless front line operations cast).

Consider that the other hallmark of Imagineering is creative and technological innovation, which generates new attractions and drives repeat guests to return to Disney parks (again, with considerable help from cast members). And let's be practical here, too; this attention to detail plus innovation is what allows The Walt Disney Company to charge more for their parks than any other firm, and thus create a distinctive experience for which the public is willing to pay a premium price--wider margins and more profit.

Considering all this, if you were an executive at the Walt Disney Company and your jurisdiction included theme parks, shouldn’t it be important to make sure that Disney maintains its premium status, and shouldn’t you know the role that Imagineering plays in that maintenance?

With all that considered, let's move to the topic in hand.

Photo courtesy Bernie at disney.rocket9.net

The Nature of the Business

The decade-long cycle of layoff, rebuild, expand, reinvent, innovate, renew, release, and layoff, has had some positive effects. It allowed the addition of new blood, people from different fields and backgrounds to come into WDI and to keep the perspective fresh and vital. It allowed WDI to explore new directions. A fluid work force adapts quickly to change.

But, it also had a very serious downside. The choice to layoff uniquely talented and experienced workers is like ringing the dinner bell for the competition. Arguably the most impressive non-Disney theme park in the world is Universal's Islands of Adventure in Orlando, just a few miles up I-4 from Walt Disney World. Islands of Adventure was designed almost entirely by laid-off Imagineers and now sits on Disney's front door step siphoning off guests who could be spending an extra day of their vacation on Disney property. Add Harry Potter to the mix and suddenly the trickle of departing muggles becomes a flood.

But the concern of losing good talent to the competition is minor in comparison to the other drawback created by WDI's expand-and-contract cycle. In the wrong hands, the constant threat of layoffs can be used as a political tool by management. It enables a corrupt management to rule through fear and in doing so negate all the positive effects of a cyclical change-out of talent. Unfortunately, this is exactly what has happened at Walt Disney Imagineering for the past several years.

Dream On Silly Imagineer

Try to imagine, just for a moment, that you have, since the age of eight, wanted to work in a magical place called Imagineering. In your mind, it is a dream factory more spectacular than any created by Santa Claus or Willy Wonka, and you work your whole life to get there. Then one day the Flower Street gates open to you and you are allowed in. Walt Disney Imagineering! (For a more visceral explanation of this emotion please see the wonderful short film "Dream on Silly Dreamer" by Dan Lund. Much of what happened at Animation applies to Imagineering as well).

Now you're working, you're drawing, you're building and it's great. But then one day you discover you've said something to upset an executive. You didn't realize it at the time, because it was a brainstorming meeting and it was a free exchange of ideas. You were just trying to contribute the best input possible with no idea that saying, "We need more Audio-Animatronics figures in the parks," or, "Why don't we write original songs anymore?" could upset someone, but it did...and does...a lot.

You see, some executives at WDI believe that it is just as effective to tell a "story" by using film rather than Audio-Animatronics figures. And loads cheaper. Those executives just made an argument that the AA guys and gals need to go and the filmmakers need to stay, and your little comment is not helping their agenda. So, a friend tells you that you need to keep your mouth shut or they’ll get rid of you during the next round of layoffs. At WDI nobody needs an actual reason to fire you.

So, now you choose your words carefully in “brainstorming” meetings, you try to appear dispassionate about your work, moving silently from task to task. After all, dispassionate people are less likely to have strong opinions and are therefore easier to manage. Maybe you even try to fit in with the cool kids; best way to do that is to make fun of diehard Disney fans; call them geeks or foamers (because they foam at the mouth when they see something Disney).

And most important, you don’t suggest anything that might be original or creative. You never ever suggest building an original attraction as you now understand it’s better to just repackage an old idea (unless that old idea was created by somebody now unpopular with management, or unless it necessitates the involvement of a department management is trying to eliminate.) Hmm...maybe it’s best if you just don’t speak at all.

Welcome to WDI. Welcome to a culture of fear.

The WDI of 2001 - 2007

So let’s recap. WDI’s role is vital to maintaining the Disney Theme Parks’ position in the minds of the consumers as a premium product. The culture of fear created by WDI’s management (the guys who wear jeans and sit behind desks in Glendale) discourages innovation and creates a hostile work environment for creative people. The results of this culture of fear are quite evident. We call them Disney’s California Adventure, Walt Disney Studios Paris, Stitch’s Great Escape, Tiki Room Under New Management, DinoRama, and Journey into YOUR Imagination among others.

Unfortunately the management of the Walt Disney Company (the guys who wear suits and sit behind desks in Burbank) don’t have the time or the interest to look at the problems within Imagineering. They just see that their newest parks are losing money and that the Imagineers are spending too much. Like most of the world they see Imagineering as one solid amorphous blob, and they are more than happy to throw out the baby with the bath water. What they don’t see is the enormous talent that still exists at WDI just below the surface.

On the promising side WDI just went through yet another restructuring in the hope that a new management team will succeed where their predecessors failed. And despite what some people think, this blog’s mission is to help build a happier, healthier, more creative, more efficient WDI by chronicling past mistakes in the hope that WDI can learn from its own history to build a better future.

What could the new Walt Disney Company management do if they wanted to?

Let's return to the original question. Is the constant expanding and contracting of Walt Disney Imagineering necessary? Is it really the nature of the business? This contributor would have to say, "no". Even if it was unavoidable once, it’s not today.

The Walt Disney Company has 11 theme parks around the world, plus water parks, resort hotels, entertainment districts, a sports complex, cruise ships, a private island, and all of these things need to be held up to Disney quality. A steady stream of work should be coming into WDI from all these sources, because every one of them needs attention. Because of the aforementioned client/design firm relationship, however, this is not the case.

If WDI were given a standard budget to make improvements and enhancements (which could be as small as a flower bed or as big as an E-ticket attraction) to existing parks, the basic staff of WDI should be kept busy indefinitely. WDI would have a set amount of money to work with (adjusted for inflation each year) and the Walt Disney Company management should prioritize what work needs to be done first. When a big project comes along like a new theme park or two huge cruise ships then some of the work on the existing park would have to be deferred. If this sounds like harsh neglect of the existing parks, it's important to note that this is work not being done at all today.

Of course there is no way to eliminate layoffs completely. Economic fluctuations make that an impossibility. But given the size of the Disney empire and the constant need for updates and improvements to existing parks, a smart management team could minimize the modulation...if they wanted to. And the payoff for guests and stockholders would be enormous.

Walt Disney Feature Animation was at its best when it was only making one film a year. Those were the days of Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast, and Pixar is enjoying an incredible run making new films every 18 months. There is something to be said for restraint, especially when it comes to creative organizations. The Walt Disney Company’s decision to build three theme parks at the same time is what doomed WDI (like its decision to make multiple animated features and dozens of cheap sequels destroyed Animation a few years back). With three park projects to feed, Imagineers were promoted to lofty positions and given even loftier salaries. Labor rates soared. This was all digested into the budgets of three very large-scale projects. But when all three parks opened, WDI was left with a gaggle of Vice Presidents with no work to do. Try justifying absorbing those salaries into overhead costs.

The fatten-up-slim-down fad diet WDI has been on for the past three decades just isn’t healthy. WDI will be fifty-five years old in December, and it’s time to appreciate the value of moderation. As for the culture of fear that resides within WDI, it will take a lot more than a steady stream of work to fix that problem, but removing the constant fear of layoffs is a good first step.

Unfortunately the fear of layoffs has proven such an effective tool for controlling unruly creative types so some old executives at WDI may see no reason to change it. Here's hoping some renegade executive has the courage to make a selfless decision that would be in the best interests of the company and remove the culture of fear at Imagineering; to challenge the very 'nature of the business'.

All of us here at Re-Imagineering wish them the best of luck.

.

Starry Eyed Optimism

With the recent news from Glendale last Tuesday, May 15th, Re-Imagineering may have the most compelling reason to shut its doors to date.

• Former Research and Development Vice President Bruce Vaughn just grabbed the reigns from previous Chief Creative Executive Tom Fitzgerald.

• Former Vice President of Environmental Design and Show Engineering Craig Russell is now Chief Design and Delivery Executive at WDI.

• Former WDI President Don Goodman moves out of WDI and into his new role as executive Vice President for resort development. As Bruce and Craig collectively fill his shoes, there will be no President title moving forward.

Creative executives at WDI (Joe Rohde, Joe Lanzisero and Tony Baxter among others) now report directly to Bruce Vaughn, signaling for many the best news at WDI in years, as fledgling projects will now get pitched directly to upper brass without excess or superfluous management filters.

Since the shake-up feelings over at Imagineering have ranged from cautiously optimistic to ecstatic. Regardless, the announcement is a substantial one and could signal the beginning of the end of WDI’s paranoiac, toxic and grade school culture as well as set the stage for the renaissance of WDI into the creative powerhouse and industry leader it once was.

As the days progress look for more restructuring at Imagineering. As Bruce has made clear his feeling that many in creative have been miscast, you can bet that more internal re-org memos will be hitting the inboxes at WDI for a while. And with them a much needed boost to morale at 1401 Flower.

Perhaps it is a Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow after all!

Walt Disney's Wonderful World of Watergate

First came the Dolphin & Swan, then came the Wand and Hat. Now this.

.

One of Our Dinosaurs Is Missing!

Eisner’s mid 80’s decree to avoid bankrolling new Disney attractions unless they were liberally slathered in ‘story’ (See ‘The Myth of Story’ Nov. 25 2006) may have effectively shut the door on the future development of plot-free pageants like ‘It’s a Small World’, Jungle Cruise, the original Submarine Voyage or even classics such as Pirates of the Caribbean or Haunted Mansion but certainly the creative geniuses at Imagineering were capable of capitalizing on the strengths of this new mandate rather than it’s limitations. If guests had to have literal plot points fed to them while onboard their boats, trains, subs or rickshaws then at least Imagineering could be counted on to deliver wildly original ones.

Guests would have been wise to keep expectations low.

From the late 80’s on Imagineers indeed affixed ‘story’ after ‘story’ after ‘story’ to their rides, shows and attractions. What eluded most of them, however, was originality.

While certainly WDI saw some unbridled successes under Eisner’s ‘What’s the story?’ ordinance, it seems Imagineers had little more than one ‘story’ up their sleeve. And they shamelessly told it again and again and again.

It goes something like this: a character or prop has gone missing and the guests and/or other characters are tasked with finding it/them.

1989 - Splash Mountain

Br’er Rabbit is missing from home and Br’er Fox and Br’er Bear are out to find him. We find Br'er Rabbit in the Briar Patch and escort him safely back home.

1989 - The Great Movie Ride

Our onboard guide goes missing either in the old West or old Chicago but joins us at the Raiders of the Lost Ark set.


1991- Muppet-vision 3-D

Bean Bunny is missing from the movie and it's up to Sweetums, with the help of the audience, to find him in the theater and bring him back.

1994 - Twilight Zone Tower of Terror

Five unfortunate guests of the Hollywood Tower Hotel went missing in 1939. Guests join them in the ‘Twilight Zone’.

1995 - Extraterrorestrial Alien Encounter

An alien goes missing after breaking out of his teleportation chamber. Guests are unwillingly tasked with joining him as he gets up close and personal.

1998 - Kilimanjaro Safari

A baby elephant has gone missing, probable victim of ivory poachers. Guests are tasked with helping to find him before it’s too late.

1998 - Dinosaur

A stray baby dinosaur has gone missing and guests are tasked with rescuing it before an asteroid hits the planet.

2003 - Mickey’s Philharmagic

Mickey’s sorcerer’s hat, victim to Donald Duck’s shenanigans, has gone missing. Donald is tasked with finding it.

2004 - Stitch’s Great Escape

Stitch, captive of the Galactic Federation, has gone missing after escaping during prison transport. Guests, having been tasked with guarding him, are rendered powerless as Stitch wreaks havoc and eventually runs off into the Magic Kingdom.

2006 - Monster’s Inc.: Mike & Sully to the Rescue!

Boo has gone missing in Monstropolis and guests join Mike and Sully as they try to find her.


2006 - Pirates of the Caribbean 2.0

Pirate Jack Sparrow, treasure in hand, has gone missing among the villagers on the Isla Tesoro and Captain Barbossa is out to find him.

2006 - The Seas with Nemo and Friends

Nemo is missing again so guests join Marlin and Dory as they search the seas for him.

2007 - Gran Fiesta Tour Starring The Three Caballeros

Donald has gone missing before his big concert in Mexico City so it’s up to Panchito and Jose to find him.

2007 - Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage

Nemo is missing again so guests board a submarine to help assist Marlin and Dory as they search the seas for him.

_____________

If new management at Imagineering eventually decides to stop hog-tying many of their park attractions to this same old banal formulaic story convention in lieu of truly original E-ticket attractions that dare to forgo plot for pageantry, wonder and charm then you can bet all those aliens, dinosaurs, fish, ducks, rabbits, pirates and little girls won’t be missed.

.

Thinking Inside the Box

Imagine, if you will, a Disney theme park with no centerpiece—no castle or geosphere, no ornate Chinese Theater or majestic Tree of Life. Imagine a Disney theme park with no Audio-Animatronics figures or full service restaurants or nighttime fireworks display. Impossible right?

Well, nothing’s impossible for the dream makers at Disney. Once again Walt Disney Imagineering has done what many thought impossible. They created a theme park less impressive than Disney’s California Adventure.

Walt Disney Studios Paris is basically a collection of soundstages grouped together with asphalt paths and some landscaping, everything coated in lovely shades of pale tan. It’s billed as a full-day Disney theme park but it opened with only 10 attractions, 3 quick service restaurants and 5 shops. That’s a worthwhile way to spend a day out of your expensive European vacation, n’est pas?

Okay maybe not, but it sounds like Disney saved a lot of money on the project, so at least the shareholders should be happy.

But they’re not.

On June 30, 2004 the Walt Disney Company agreed to a restructuring of Euro Disney SCA (the owner and operator of Disneyland Resort Paris) that would cost them hundreds of millions of Euros. The goal was to prevent Euro Disney SCA from defaulting on $2.9 billion of debt.

On June 9, 2004, Bloomberg Market News reported: “Euro Disney's debt problems stem at least in part from the Walt Disney Studios park, which it opened in March 2002. The park has failed to attract enough visitors to help Euro Disney meet its debt payments.”


The resort is no stranger to financial hardship. It opened in 1992 amid a recession and incurred harsh criticism from French intellectuals, the press dubbing it a “cultural Chernobyl”. Corporate management in Burbank reacted the way they always do; they found a scapegoat, fired him and then hired two guys to replace him.

In this instance they hired the right two people, Philippe Bourguignon and Steve Burke. The pair bridged the cultural gap by making concessions to the French including selling wine in the park (the French like wine, who knew?) and implementing an aggressive financial restructuring. When the dust settled, the strategy had worked. Disneyland Paris saw its first profit in 1995 and remained profitable for the next six years. In March of 2002, the Walt Disney Studios Park opened. In 2002 and 2003 the resort once again reported losses.

How does something like this happen? Disneyland Paris is one of the great ‘Cinderella’ stories of American business abroad. Just how could they screw it up twice?

Misidentifying the problem is a big problem.

In a universe defined by a spreadsheet, intangibles don’t exist. Cultural differences, taste, and emotional connections are absent. There is only investment and return. The management of the Walt Disney Company seems to have come to the conclusion that Disneyland Paris failed because too much money was invested in it. If they had built a smaller, less expensive park (see Hong Kong Disneyland) it would have yielded a better return on investment—theoretically. The Magic Kingdom at Disneyland Paris, for those not familiar, is easily the most ornate, beautifully themed, meticulously detailed kingdom of them all (there is even an Audio-Animatronics dragon living in a dungeon under the castle). This expensive theming, management decided, is the problem and refused to acknowledge other drawbacks that have nothing to do with the level of investment in the park itself.

For instance, the climate. Paris is not Orlando or Anaheim. Its latitude is farther north than that of Seattle, Washington or Augusta, Maine or even Toronto, Canada. Also, it’s in France. The French, need I point out, aren’t fond of having their culture Americanized. They’ve been very vocal on this issue for the past fifty years. Can’t imagine how the Disney executives missed it.


However, the biggest problem with the investment in Euro Disney was not due to climate or culture but was, in fact, financial. The pencil jockeys did get one thing right; the investment was too high. Just not necessarily in the theme park.

It was Disney’s investment of hundreds of millions in Michael Eisner’s newest hobby, architecture, that truly blew the bank. (Eisner, it seems, was entranced by the pastels and minimalist structural forms found in postmodern architecture. Whatever.) Michael was determined to use Disneyland Paris hotels as his foray into the world of “respectable” architecture. As a result, Disneyland Paris opened in 1992 with six hotels, all to support one park (Walt Disney World opened with two). The train ride from the park to Paris, a city with a few decent hotels of its own, takes less than thirty minutes. It seems those Harvard MBAs missed the class on supply and demand.

But the mistake could not have been their fault, they reasoned; it must be the fault of those annoying creative people. They spent too much building the park. So, the MBAs decided that they would not let the creatives make the same mistake twice. Many of the creative folks responsible for the original Paris park were slowly weeded out over time and were replaced by “more cooperative” creative executives--possibly the most serious result of the whole debacle.


Fast forward to the late 1990s when the clearly defined corporate strategy was for all Disney resorts world wide to become “destination resorts” like Walt Disney World. Destination resorts are marketed to out-of-town tourists who spend significantly more than locals on everything from theme park admission to jacket potatoes to ice-lollies (the Parisian equivalent of turkey legs and Dole Whip). Plans were set in motion to add “second gates” to Anaheim, Tokyo and Paris. An executive decision was made. Without regard to local conditions, a blanket statement set a series of events in motion that would reverse all the good work done in the mid-1990s.

The Walt Disney Company vowed that the “mistakes” of ’92 would not be repeated. They believed that a second gate would extend the average guest’s length-of-stay and help fill up Eisner’s aging hotel rooms. But since the second gate, built by that new breed of more cooperative Imagineers, was far from a full day experience, it did nothing of the kind. The second gate became a tremendous drain on the resort's bottom line.

Euro Disney SCA spent about $550 million on the park; whereas an E-ticket ride would have cost him less than $200 million and would have been a more cost-effective way to bring additional traffic to the resort (evidenced by the attendance boost the park received when it added Space Mountain in 1994).

They were caught up in the notion that “two parks are better than one.” Instead of looking at the simple fact that 15 million guests a year are better than 10 million guests a year, regardless of the number of parks. The first gate wasn’t filling to capacity. It could easily take on an additional four to five million people a year—the stated goal of Walt Disney Studios Paris.

The extra-park-extra-day trick only works if the new park is both enormously appealing and is perceived to be a full-day experience (as Epcot was in 1982). The experience of Disneyland Paris can be seen as a microcosm for the problem with the entire company; a company so obsessed with growth that it was ignoring the foundation that growth needs to be built on.

No where in the world is the descent of Imagineering more evident than at the Disneyland Resort Paris. The most spectacular and the most banal of theme parks sit side by side in pasture outside of Paris; a contrast so striking that it’s nearly impossible to imagine they were birthed by the same company.


Ultimately Disney Studios Paris stands as a sad testament to the folly of designing from a spreadsheet.

Fixing WDI

The entire problem with Walt Disney Imagineering (WDI) can be summed up in one word, “Accountability.”

At WDI, promotions are given out based on ones willingness to support management decisions, not ones ability to achieve results. Before any progress can be made, the WDI executives responsible for failures like Disney’s California Adventure, Disney Studios Paris and Hong Kong Disneyland need to be held accountable. So far, no one at WDI has taken any responsibility for these gargantuan errors in judgement. The fact is, nobody at WDI feels responsible. They all claim that they were just following orders, and on the surface this appears to be true. At WDI, the unofficial motto is, “to get along, you have to go along.” This means going along with bad ideas, inefficient production methods, poor casting choices, artificially inflated budgets…basically everything management dictates. To do otherwise is to risk your job.


However, there are those who did not simply keep quiet in order to protect their jobs, but actively supported many recent blunders. Some of them were rewarded with promotions, raises or choice assignments. These yes men and women should be called on the carpet by the new CEO. They are just as responsible as their bosses for the sorry state of the Disney Theme Parks and the tarnished reputation of Walt Disney Imagineering. Mortgaging the future of the company for a larger salary and impressive-sounding title can not be excused by the phrase: “I was just following orders.”

Accountability is the first step. The second is a shift in the corporate culture that rewards innovation and allows for a more open exchange of ideas. This is the foundation of any successful creative institution. After these elements are put in place, WDI will be on the road to becoming a healthy working environment again—with employees who are actually motivated to create value for the company.


Here are a few tips for the future management of Walt Disney Imagineering on how to foster a positive working environment:

1. Smaller, smarter management. Currently, WDI has a very top-heavy reporting structure. This needs to be reversed.

2. The integrity of the product should be more important than membership in the old boys’ network. WDI isn’t Hollywood. There is no need for WDI to imitate the worst business model in the country.

3. Reward those who achieve results.

4. Open communication with Walt Disney Feature Animation. WDI rarely takes advantage of its shared history and close proximity to Feature Animation. There was a time when the two creative groups worked together for mutual benefit. But today, WDI management has deliberately restricted communication with the Animation department (as well as many other divisions of the company).

5. Trust your people, and work to earn their trust.

6. Do not hire or promote slick Hollywood types or charcoal gray MBAs who think Disney is corny or sappy. People who are emotionally committed to Disney will stick around for the long-term and will make choices with the future of the company in mind (not just the next fiscal quarter). Emotional commitment and good business practices are not mutually exclusive. For a practical demonstration, see Pixar.

7. Do not rely on guest polls, surveys, and trend studies. They are never perfect and are easily slanted to produce a predetermined result.

8. Remember, not taking any risks is the biggest risk of all.

The New Nostalgia

Walt Disney never minced words. He loved the nostalgic and knew the value of celebrating the ‘things of the past’ in his films, television shows and later Disneyland.

It was from this appreciation for the nostalgic that Main Street U.S.A. was born, the central thoroughfare by which park visitors enter the lands of fantasy, adventure and tomorrow at Disneyland. Here Walt hoped the older generation of the day could relive their “fond memories of the past”.

It cannot be over-emphasized how much these senior Disneyland citizens delighted in this loving recreation of their childhood days gone by during the first couple decades of the parks existence. Nor can it be overstated how revolutionary the concept of catering to older visitors alongside younger ones within an outdoor amusement enterprise was.

And, being that Grandma and Grandpa weren’t staying at home while the kids played, how profitable.

The generation of Disneyland guests who were alive during the turn of century and took special pleasure in Walt’s nod to it are long gone now and consequently the very cornerstone philosophy that welcomed them to the Magic Kingdom as well. As the years progressed Disneyland stopped catering to the grandparents altogether, valuing more the thrill hungry teen market and the attention deficient kiddy quotient. Today Grandma and Grandpa are more likely to stay home.

Power players at Imagineering would be wise to lure this long ignored yet vital market share back to Disneyland. But how? What’s the Main Street equivalent for the Baby Boomers in the here and now? What could Disneyland do to embrace their nostalgia for days gone by?

One need not look any further than Disneyland itself.

Here’s the living embodiment of mid century mainstream; a park built on the back of that wild new gadget, the television, and exploding into the American consciousness alongside coonskin caps and Mickey Mouse ears. Those 60, 70 or 80 would remember that time fondly. For them Disneyland IS today’s nostalgia.

Or was.

Seems that along with the death of Walt’s generation, so too went much of the entertainment that catered to their high regard for whimsy, charm and nostalgia over visceral thrills. Current management would benefit immensely by bankrolling attractions that take their cue from these neglected classics; Circlevision 360, The Golden Horseshoe Revue, the Peoplemover, Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln, America Sings and many more.

Though much of the appetite for Disneyland nostalgia was sated with Disneyland’s 50th, a few thousand cans of paint isn’t enough. Those that grew up watching Annette grow out are going to need the reassurance that if they visit the park much of that corny flag-waving because-we-love-you Disneyland will still be there, a place happy to make room for Rocket Ships and Pirate Ships, singing birds and singing bears and leisurely rides high in the sky.

To embrace the heritage of Disneyland today is to embrace a long neglected member of the Disney family as well, individuals who would spare no expense to reconnect with some of those fond childhood memories of the past.

It’s time to give seniors their Disneyland citizenship back.

"You know, I have the strangest feeling I've seen that ship before - - a long time ago, when I was very young."

-Mr. Darling

Peter Pan

Cannonballing Down Through the Sky...

Could it be? Yes, it could.
Something's coming, something good,
If I can wait!
Something's coming, I don't know what it is,
But it is
Gonna be great!

- Stephen Sondheim 1957

Re-Imagineering Celebrates Year One!

Congratulations one and all on the first year anniversary of
Re-Imagineering!

It was one year ago today that a rag tag team of Disney Park aficianados, fueled by the announcement of John Lasseter's new post as Principal Creative Advisor at Imagineering, inspired this online forum for positive change at Imagineering.

Since then an incredible group of professional, talented and informed voices have come onboard from all corners of the Disney Experience to fervently challenge the status quo here at Re-Imagineering.

Thanks to the incredible contributors to this site. Your thoughtful analysis, wisdom and passion has been an inspiration.

Thank you to all the professional colleagues who championed the cause, providing ideas, discourse and encouragement every step of the way. You kept the fires burning.

Thank you to the insightful souls at WDI who continue to care deeply about the company's esteemed legacy. Hang in there.

Thank you to the readers who have offered up perceptive and challenging debate throughout. Ultimately Re-Imagineering owes it all to you. Keep the comments and suggestions coming!

And a final reminder to all those who read and participate. Though it may seem counter-intuitive, we assure you that all of us at Re-Imagineering do what we do because we sincerely care about the Disney parks; places that have informed and influenced each of our lives profoundly.

Congratulations and thanks to all of you. It's been an incredible E-Ticket Year.

Now, back to the good fight!

Be Yourself

There’s a story, well known to Disneyphiles, which tells of the origin of the now somewhat infamous practice of updating classic Disney attractions. It goes something like this...

Walt was roaming Adventureland disguised as a floppy-hatted tourist when he overheard an authentic tourist quip, “We don’t need to go on this ride. We’ve already seen it.”

The guest was referring to Walt’s beloved Jungle Cruise. Walt then decided to change a very serious African Queen-esque river excursion into a Bob Hope road show picture. The initial change was greeted skeptically by some purists at first, but the light-hearted cruise soon won over the lot.

And why shouldn’t it? It fulfills the most important tenets of Disney entertainment. It appealed to all ages, it enveloped the audience in an immersive environment and it demonstrated world-class showmanship via whimsical character design, clever staging and good-natured humor--delivered, with varying degrees of success, by Disneyland’s driest wits.


Fast forward to the mid-1990s. Another of Walt’s classic attractions was getting snubbed by guests and on both coasts no less. The Enchanted Tiki Room at Disneyland and its almost identical cousin, “Tropical Serenade” at Walt Disney World’s Magic Kingdom, were regularly receiving the ultimate insult in show business. Large portions of their audience were actually standing up and walking out in the middle of the show, a problem even more pronounced at the tourist heavy Florida property. Disneyland’s solution was to cut the show time and drastically reduce operating hours (a trademark solution of the Pressler era). Though difficult to believe, Walt Disney World management had more old-school Disney types in power at the time who had no problem asking the much maligned question “What would Walt have done?” They decided to do the right thing and update the attraction, shortly thereafter putting a call in to Walt Disney Imagineering.

Walt Disney Imagineering was hip deep in their hip-and-edgy phase. ExtraTERRORestrial Alien Encounter proved WDI could live on the edge; the “boring” subject of Energy was given the Hollywood treatment with Ellen Degeneres, Bill Nye and Jamie Lee Curtis; even food rocked in the mid-90s. This ultra hip band of Imagineers decided WDW’s Tiki room should get the same treatment, and Tiki Room Under New Management was born.

The premise is that Aladdin’s Iago and Lion King’s Zazu have taken over the show because Jose, Michael, Pierre and Fritz can’t keep butts in the seats. Talk about literal storytelling.

Iago: You are boring Tiki birds. I'm a big cele-birdy. That's why I'm gonna go and change your show. Ain't it great to have a friend like me?

Jose: But señor, we've done the same show...

Fritz: Ya, since 1963.

Iago: My, how time flies. Get a life, you guys! You're ancient history. Can your tails do this? Can your wings do that? Can you bad birds sing, in punk or rap? Can ya rock and roll? Well, listen here. It's a whole new world, so ya better get hip, Or your audience will disappear.

“Abrasive,” “Rude,” “Disrespectful,” “Disgraceful,” “Obnoxious,” were some of the less colorful adjectives used in the torrent of guest comments flooding City Hall when the attraction reopened in 1998.

It’s important to note, however, that the original announcement to add Iago and Zazu to the Tiki Room received no protest of any kind, no guest complaints, nothing (later that same year the Save Toad campaign was organized to prevent Toady’s eviction from the vacation kingdom). Repeat guests and cast members were genuinely excited about the addition of two characters from their favorite films.

That is, until they saw the show.

Once the show opened, it received one of the most negative guest responses to any in Disney history. But guest response wasn’t Walt Disney World’s only problem. Front line managers discovered they had a problem with some cast members making fun of certain Disney attractions in front of guests. The cast members cited Iago’s behavior as an excuse. (Iago says at the end of the show, “I think I’ll head over to Hall of Presidents and take a nap”.)

A very angry Walt Disney World management team forwarded these concerns (from guests and management cast members alike) on to WDI. Those hip-and-edgy Imagineers read, digested, discussed and then concluded, “We will need to be more careful when updating classic attractions.” So, lesson learned. The End.

Well, maybe there’s a little more to it than that. There was no denying repeat guests wanted the update; they were excited about it. It wasn’t simply that Disney messed with an attraction they loved. It was that Disney messed up an attraction they loved.

WDI took away only a very superficial version of the lesson they could have learned. The lesson they learned was superficial because their relationship to the attraction was superficial. The evidence? A year and a half later they took the beloved Journey Into Imagination and beat it into submission--yielding Journey into YOUR Imagination. But that wasn’t the end of it. The Hip and Edgy division of WDI transformed their own creation, Alien Encounter, into Stitch’s Great Escape four years after the Imagination train wreck. Hip and Edgy Inc. didn’t think of Journey Into Imagination or Alien Encounter as classic attractions, so, both of them were fair game. Those who do not learn from their mistakes are condemned to repeat them.


Let’s see if we can learn the lessons of the Tiki Room Under New Management now. The heart of the Tiki Room was very much intact before the refurbishment. The character design, the art direction and the music were excellent. (In fact, 50s tiki kitsch saw a resurgence around the turn of the century, which Disneyland’s Tiki room benefitted from.) So, what was the problem?

To start with the show was too long. Disneyland made the right move by cutting the Offenbach piece. And the technology was dated (obviously). When the show premiered, it felt like magic. That’s why it was called the Enchanted Tiki Room. It needed new technological enchantment. It needed something that made the guests ask, “how’d they do that,” just like they did back in 1963. But, and this is an important ‘but,’ any changes must be consistent with the mood, style and flavor of the original attraction. This can only be done by someone who understands why the attraction was charming to guests in the first place; it can only be done by an artist who understands the original artist’s intent.

The good-natured humor at the Jungle Cruise was, and is, a winner. The abrasive crude humor of Iago (and Stitch) is, well, abrasive and crude. Who out there enjoys having a huckster parrot call them suckers for 10 minutes? And for that matter, who really wants to smell Stitch’s chili-dog breath or the odor of synthetic skunk in the Imagination Institute? A comic relief character like Iago, without any drama to require relief from, is pointless. Stitch without Lilo is heartless. And Figment without Dreamfinder is just sad.

When Disney tries to be hip, it looks like a good-natured dorky kid trying to act cool. The good kid always comes off looking like a jerk. We like the good-natured dorky kid; he reminds us of ourselves. (That’s why audiences fell in love with Mickey Mouse, isn’t it?) The kid needs to grow and change, but if he changes into another person, if he isn’t true to himself, we won’t like him anymore. I’m sure the Imagineers who made Tiki Room Under New Management saw the film Aladdin. Did they miss the message? It’s very simple.

Be yourself.

Just be yourself.

Be Disney and be proud of it.

Gilding the Lily

Visit Disneyland’s Haunted Mansion and you’ll notice the faceless bride with the beating heart in the attic has been replaced with Bride 2.0. Her name is Constance and the technology that brings her to life is state of the art. Before her, Leota 2.0 was unveiled now floating freely along with her table.

Just down the path from the Mansion, Pirates of the Caribbean sports a spiffy new dry for wet waterfall illusion, more vibrant splash effects in the fort bombardment scene and a souped up sound system to complement the recent addition of all things Captain Jack Sparrow.

In Tomorrowland, Space Mountain 2.0 arrived in July of 2005 with a smoother ride, a handful of eye-popping lighting effects and a considerably darker interior. On it’s heels the temporary 2.0.1 version, Rockit Mountain, debuted, a bewildering tumble through a Red Hot Chili Peppers psychotropic hallucination replete with teeny bopping projections, swirling multi-colored kliegs and a pulse-pounding heavy metal soundtrack (not to mention a day-glo view of the once mysterious track layout).


It would be disingenuous to poo-poo all of these recent additions. At the best these touch-ups are delightful steps forward in the art of Imagineering, especially when they remain in their original creative context and don’t significantly alter classic scenes, characters or staging. At their worst they come with the promise of being mercifully temporary.

Still, there is a troubling current running beneath this trend to pimp up classic E-ticket adventures. With millions of dollars being allocated to these projects, what validates the cost of modifying attractions that aren’t broken?

Save for Pirates, where the addition of Jack Sparrow tied in with the marketing of the movie franchise, the justification for creative embellishments to the Haunted Mansion and Space Mountain is virtually non-existent.


Were these attractions in need of Sistine Ceiling level restorations? Other than the necessity of switching out Space Mountain’s track for safety concerns, annual refurbishment budgets should be more than enough to address blown speakers, chipped paint and burned out lights.

Were these attractions failing aesthetically or creatively? Most assuredly not. None of them truly needed additional or upgraded effects. The cannonball splashing in Pirates of the Caribbean may be more spectacular today, but the original splash effects were still operational and entertaining.

Were these changes instigated to bring guests back to attractions they’d grown tired of? Hardly. There isn’t a shred of evidence to suggest these bad boys, three of the brightest stars in the Disney attractions firmament, were seeing dwindling numbers. Arguing that the public was losing interest in these classics doesn’t hold up.

Was there an effort to drive up over-all attendance at Disneyland? In the case of the Haunted Mansion, no. Not a single television, radio or newpaper ad made mention of it's upgraded effects. As for Space Mountain's re-opening in '05, promotion placed more emphasis on the coaster's return than its make-over.


And despite Jack Sparrow's much ballyhood addition to Pirates of the Caribbean neither the movie nor the attraction needed any help getting noticed. Had it only been an issue of letting guests bond with their favorite new pop culture heartthrob, Jack Sparrow would’ve served the same purpose doing a meet and greet out in the queue.

The lack of justification for these expensive pet projects is made all the more distressing when there are myriad areas at Disneyland that could benefit from a few dollars being thrown at them.

In lieu of writing the Red Hot Chili Peppers a big check why not spruce up the currently closed Sleeping Beauty Castle walk-thru with cutting edge special effects instead?

What about that dead fountain in Tomorrowland? The resuscitation of that giant corpse called Innoventions? Electro-shocking the Peoplemover back to life?

Should funds be allocated for an axe wielding bride or instead be used to address the neglected space in Carnation Plaza, the under-performing Petting Zoo, the exposed florescent lighting along the track of the Casey Jr. Circus Train, the ‘eerie’ canals of the former Motor Boat Cruise? The list of Disneyland real-estate in dire need of tender loving care is extensive.


Perhaps the most egregious example of misallocated funds can be found back at the Magic Kingdom in Florida. While Imagineers fine tuned the effects on the new free floating Leota, Disney World’s Haunted Mansion continued to lay in ruin. Torn scrims, faulty animation, out of sync show tracks and static filled speakers only hint at the aggressively bad show this has become.

And while they erect giant Mickey Wands and Sorcerer’s hats throughout the property, the classic Bear Country Jamboree is left to wilt and die. Visit it today and you’ll witness torn and faded fur, arthritic animation and a sound system so off kilter the show is now nearly incomprehensible.

Is this trend really a matter of misguided Imagineering priorities? Is there some developmental desire for today's creators to make their own mark on the classics, whether or not it is needed or warranted. Are Imagineers just trying to stand proud next to Walt's ghost in the absence of opportunities to shine with their own stellar E-tickets. Or are some trying to make work for themselves on the only assets management deems worthy of reinvestment?

After an earlier series of highly subjective alterations to Pirates of the Caribbean, creator and Disney Legend Marc Davis noted that it was better the way they had originally designed it.

It’s time for Disney Management to take a hard look at budgetary priorities, to start using funds to reinvigorate orphaned real-estate rather than to gild yet another lily.

To stop fixing what isn’t broken and start fixing what is.

Walking in Walt's Footsteps (Part 2)

"You guys get down there at least twice a month. For God's sake, don't eat off the lot. Stay there... lunch with the guests... talk to them."

-Walt Disney

For the sake of argument, let’s assume you’ve been given a reasonable level of influence at the Disney Theme Parks. You immediately decide to take on the guest experience on a regular basis. For your first on-the-job visit to Anaheim you decide to only address your experiences leading up to your entry into Disneyland’s Main Street, having recognized that this is the very experience a vast majority of the Executives within Walt Disney Parks and Resorts choose to bypass.

What would be some of the things you would encounter?

You have always understood that waiting in lines at Disneyland is one of the most oft heard guest complaints on record. What you didn’t fully realize is that the waiting game begins well before entering the park. In addition, you're shocked by exactly how many of these lines there are; five in all, with each wait feeling more substantial than the last, especially if you’re arriving with the morning rush.

The first line is for the entrance to the parking lot/structure. Unlike the lines inside the Park, this one asks you to surrender $11.00 for a regular vehicle. Your first impression of the “Disney Magic” is decidedly less than magical.


Relying on cones and Cast Members, having been stripped of your common sense approach to finding the best space available, you secure your spot and leave your vehicle. Immediately you take note of the land of enchantment Disney designers have laid out for your all important initial greeting (and later farewell) at the Disneyland Resort. If first impressions count for everything, this one leaves much to be desired.

In the case of the Mickey & Friends parking structure, it is cold, unpainted concrete surfaces and sticky stained floors often littered with trash. Off-model Disney characters adorn pillars to categorize which level you’re on. If you’re fortunate enough to be in the minority parked close to the escalators, you have access to trash cans and a brief walk to the trams, but the rest must traverse a near endless dark maze of cars while on their way to that location. Even with the Parking Lot days of yore, frequent tram stop locations guaranteed a short walk for anyone not willing or capable of making the longer journey on foot. You are bewildered by why that is not an option for guests anymore.


The second line you encounter is for the tram itself. Other than open spaces between planters, you are immediately struck by the lack of order here. Guests are left to proactively ascertain which horde of fellow guests is grouped smaller, and then join them. For those with a wheelchair or a stroller, their options are narrowed, and the line they’re required to join is larger and slower.


The third queue is at the security checkpoints. Camping out here for a while, you immediately recognize how extremely rare it is to find all queues being utilized at any given time. The crowds squeezing in to this bottleneck are numerous and, once again, there is no perceived structure or conformity to rules here. If you do not create intentional organization, chaos becomes the common default and chaos is what is too often present here. You are struck by the irony of it all, being that this is the one spot at the Disney Resort that should work overtime to put guests at ease but instead seems to actively solicit anxiety, frustration and sometimes even anger.

Photo courtesy Mouseplanet.com

The fourth location is the ticket booths. Fortunately, these locations have a change in approach, as the queue is a chained switchback. More care is taken here, as you are about to be asked for a very large sum of money depending on the size of the group, $63.00 being the smallest amount an adult could expect to pay here for entrance into Disneyland. Still, this is often one of the longer pre-entrance lines and it is served up without shade and without a clear sight line of the very Park(s) you’re shelling out for. In addition, nothing has been done here to assure guests that their monetary sacrifice is well worth the wondrous day of joy and happiness ahead of them.


The fifth and last line is for entrance into the theme park itself. You are immediately aware of what a zoo this area is. Just like the lines for the parking lot tram there’s no clear sense of where to queue up. Where’s a friendly Cast Member guiding guests into the least filled line? Why aren’t all entry points being utilized? Having already spent upwards of 30-60 minutes waiting in lines, having to traverse a several acre mass of anxious hyper-caffeinated guests only to end up in yet another line is not your idea of a dream coming true.

Photo courtesy Mouseplanet.com

Finally passing through the turnstiles you pause to search for Mickey, Minnie or even Tweedle-Dee. No such luck. Instead you take note of a very serious minded survey taker and a somewhat pushy photographer.

Regardless, you have finally arrived inside the Happiest Place on Earth, thrilled to be wrapped up in the real land of Disney, honored to be entrusted with spearheading proactive change at the park; to be truly ‘walking in Walt’s footsteps’.

You close up your note pad and decide to take a quick bathroom break before heading to lunch.

Spotting the restrooms by City Hall, you head on over and get in line.

Foundations for the Disney Business

The following vintage Walt Disney Productions article remains a relevant reminder for today's Re-Imagineers.

Foundations for the Disney Business

Disney entertainment speaks an international language that spans oceans, boundaries and cultural barriers. To people of all ages, everywhere around the world, the Disney name immediately communicates three things: Quality, Uniqueness and Value. And the Disney organization communicates a vivid understanding and relationship with its family audience, friendliness, and a dynamic inter-related diversity. Walt Disney's legacy for the future is far greater than the physical assets of our company. It involves a sacred public trust...an intangible that can't be bought at any price...an integrity that must be protected at any cost.

1. QUALITY

"When we consider a new project, we really study it - not just the surface idea, but everything about it. And when we go into the new project, we believe in it all the way. We have confidence in our ability to do it right. And we work hard to do the best possible job."

—Walt Disney

Today, the subject of Quality concerns itself with everything we do in the Disney organization. Disney is the only studio left in the world where a team of animators shun the gimmicks of cut-rate animation so prevalent elsewhere and adhere to the meticulous, painstaking, costly Disney approach to cartoons.

At Disneyland and Walt Disney World, extraordinary efforts are made on a daily basis to be the best by maintaining the quality of our show...guest service, food, merchandise and the thousand other factors which together make up a Disney theme experience.

Throughout the entire world-wide Disney organization, we try to do the best possible job with good taste in everything we do. To maintain these high standards, we monitor ourselves according to the toughest possible internal and external standards.

2. UNIQUENESS

"You hate to repeat yourself. I don't like to make sequels to my pictures. I like to take a new thing and develop something. There's really no secret about our approach. We keep moving forward, opening up new doors and doing new things, because we're curious... and curiosity keeps leading us down new paths. We're always exploring and experimenting."

—Walt Disney

Exploring, experimenting and pioneering. They were all a part of the Disney tradition of Uniqueness that began on "day one" in 1923. Walt took the medium of animation and gave it a voice, introduced color, added depth to the visual dimension with the multi-plane camera, and finally proved that if done with Disney quality it could even be expanded into full-length features. Never to be content with the status quo, however, he then expanded the audio dimension with the first stereophonic sound.

Dissatisfied with "run-down" amusement parks, he bet his entire organization on a new idea...a unique concept called Disneyland and revolutionized American outdoor entertainment. He brought his animated characters "to life" through an electronic pixie-dust called Audio-Animatronics®. He proved to a nation that color television programming was a viable means of entertainment. And he started to prove to the world that the problems of man could be solved by the technology of man...someone just needed to pull it together. And the project would be the most unique of all...Walt Disney World.

These are just the highlights of the remarkable list of unique accomplishments and projects generated throughout the Disney organization during its relatively young history.

And we have always protected that Uniqueness...protected every character we created from outside misuse and duplications. And we keep our product unique...we don't franchise Disneylands across the face of the earth although we've had ample opportunity. Uniqueness will always be Disney.

3. VALUE

"We're not out to make a fast dollar with gimmicks. We're interested in doing things that are fun - in bringing pleasure and especially laughter to people...it's proven it's a good business policy. Give the public everything you can give them..."

—Walt Disney

Throughout the organization, we always try to provide the best possible value to our public while maintaining reasonable profitability within good business sense. Like many other entertainment organizations often do, we could command far higher prices from our "captive audience" at our theme parks, or through our films which today practically have a monopoly in the "G" rated sector. However, there is an absolute Disney policy against "price-gouging." Our paying guests must feel that they have gotten their money's worth...they must feel that they have received good value. We want them to keep coming back...it's not a one-time shot. We want our guests telling their friends, "It was worth every cent." The greatest Disney advertisement strength is "word-of-mouth."

4. UNDERSTANDING THE DISNEY AUDIENCE

Disney entertainment is not aimed toward the intelligentsia. You can take all the PhD's and CPA's, all the philosophers, psychiatrists and psychologists and all the intellectuals and pseudo-intellectuals in the U.S. and together they wouldn't keep Walt Disney Productions in business for one week. The American families do. Everybody always said that Walt had some magical sixth sense for how something would be accepted by the public. Actually, he kept sight of who our public was. He said:

"Movie makers are often too introverted about their production. They tend to build up myths about audiences and to prattle glibly about shifting public taste and its unpredictables. In considering one thing: Americans are a sociable folk, we like to enjoy ourselves in crowds, at sports arenas, at picnics, fairs and carnivals, at concerts and at the theater."

"Above all, we like to laugh together - even at our own shortcomings. I don't like to kid myself about the intelligence and taste of audiences. They are made up of my neighbors, people I know and meet every day. Folks I trade with, go to church with, vote with, compete in business with, help build and preserve a nation with."

5. FRIENDLINESS

"Most of my life I have done what I wanted to do. I have had fun on the job. I have never been able to confine that fun to office hours."

—Walt Disney

Walt Disney Productions has been something of an anachronism in major industry by adhering to a first-name, open-door, informal code of behavior for its employees. And yet, these are the proven factors that lead directly to having fun on the job, maintaining a sense of humor and strong sense of internal friendliness. Ultimately, as Walt and Roy knew, it would lead to a strong external friendliness...a friendly efficiency with the public that would pay off in large dividends. No one can create the kind of friendly entertainment product we demand in a formal, unfriendly atmosphere. This important aspect of the Disney philosophy is universally recognized today by the public and press alike. The Wall Street Journal recently wrote that "You can see more respectful, courteous people in Disney World in an afternoon than in New York in a year."

6. THE DISNEY DYNAMIC: SYNERGETICS

"My greatest reward is that I've been able to build this wonderful organization."

—Walt Disney

Walt Disney developed the most diversified and synergetic organization the entertainment world has ever seen. Walt Disney Productions is actually what the conglomerates attempt to be...that is, where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. This is because the Disney diversification is completely inter-related within our Disney product.

One sophisticated author writing for the Nation magazine as far back as 1967 put this diversification in excellent perspective, calling Disney a "ship of fantasy that is now a flotilla, all vessels controlled from a single port but each a separate identity and cargo. Until Disney, horizontal diversification was unknown in show business. In fact, it has a tighter logic than the fingers on one's hand. Disneyland advertises Disney movies and animal personalities. Disney TV plugs the park, where commercial exhibits by TV advertisers reduce overhead and raise profits. And the same golden symbiosis applies to publications, comic strips, toys and 2,000 other products."

Further, elaboration on the Disney synergetics and breaking it down even further, a long-time WED Imagineer said, "The individual things we do in Walt Disney World or Disneyland don't have to stand as separate profit entities like in other companies. We tell outsiders this and they think we're crazy, but that's the real secret to how it all works. We're looking for the total effect on the guest. That's the payoff. There's not a thing in either place that could be placed on the outside and stay in business. Not the Jungle Cruise...not the Liberty Tree Tavern...and not even our popcorn machines. But when you put it all together, and mix in the employees, the whole effect becomes something that creates the "Disney Experience."

"And frankly, you can apply that to our entire organization. Every Disney company and division draws strength from the other parts. It's a curious, in fact, a downright incredible phenomena." —Walt Disney

Uniqueness... Quality... Value... three vitally important aspects found throughout Disney entertainment. Understanding the Disney Audience...Friendliness...The Disney Dynamic of Synergetics...three vitally important aspects found throughout the Disney organization. All of these make up the basic foundation of our Disney business; producing "The Finest in Family Entertainment."

Japan, Morocco, FWAN?!

When did it all begin? When did the creative control Imagineering had enjoyed for years begin to get wrested away by the whims of its corporate overlords?

Some would venture that it all started when Michael Eisner signed off on the addition of two giant resort hotels to be located behind World Showcase at the tail end of the 1980s. Mr. Eisner, a champion of ostentatious and flamboyant displays of power and wealth, found a kindred spirit in architect Michael Graves and lauded the grandiloquent statement his work consistently made. So impressed was Mr. Eisner, infact, that Mr. Graves became the master architect for the Disney Studios corporate headquarters in Burbank, a leaden vault of a building more kin to the Bank of London or an Egyptian tomb, the enormous sculpts of the seven dwarves holding up the roof now cast as foreboding all powerful ogres.


The work of Michael Graves is many things- bold, dynamic, utilitarian, decorative, innovative.

One thing it’s not, however, is very Disney.

It wasn’t merely the fact that The Dolphin and The Swan were antithetical to the architecture of reassurance the Disney Company pioneered in the 50’s and 60’s that troubled Imagineers however; certainly Michael Grave’s work had enough whimsy, grandeur and innovation to land a spot somewhere on Disney Property. What really concerned Imagineers was exactly where the Dolphin and Swan were to be located.

One needn't have been a rocket scientist to realize that once the miniatures of these Vegas style hotels (owned and operated by Tishman Hotel Corporation) were placed on the scale model of Epcot Center at WED’s Model Shop the sight lines behind World Showcase would be severely compromised.

It certainly wasn’t a secret that one of the reasons Epcot Center was built six miles away from The Magic Kingdom was so that these very sight lines, the silhouettes of the World Showcase pavilions playing against a clear sky, would be unadulterated.

Despite the grumbling of much of the Imagineering staff at the time, Eisner’s super-sized ego wasn’t going to budge so the 27 story Dolphin and 12 story Swan Hotels, their requisite gargantuan rooftop animal sculpts adding an additional 56 and 47 feet respectively, rose behind the more modest four stories of the French Pavilion.

From that point on the pristine outline of Disney's romantic recreation of the Eiffel Tower would forevermore be tarnished, an all the more heartbreaking development because senior creative management at WED knew well what was happening and were powerless to stop it.

It was the tail end of the 80’s, however, and Imagineers had reason to believe that this architectural anomaly was only a hiccup in the grand scheme of things. Certainly once it was clear how damaged the World Showcase skyline had become even the most out of touch executives at Disney Corporate would make sure it never happened again. And so Imagineers looked the other way.

Over the last 15 years, however, paying guests of Epcot’s World Showcase haven’t had that option.

The Myth of Story

The entertainment industry seems a slippery business to Wall Street. It’s difficult to explain in words why one entertainment property succeeds while another fails. Communicating with Wall Street and other influential laymen may very well be the most difficult part of an Entertainment CEO’s job. How does one quantify intangibles? How does a CEO convince investors and the public that his or her company has the winning formula? For Michael Eisner in the mid-1980s, the solution included an easy-to-remember sound byte: “It’s all about story.”

These four words were sent out to all corners of the Disney empire like a royal decree. At Walt Disney Imagineering, the decree arrived at a pivotal moment in its history. The old guard (Walt’s guys and gals) were retiring and the new generation was stepping up. They were young and eager to make their mark. Like their counterparts in the motion picture industry, they were looking for a standard against which to judge new ideas--a litmus test for creative ideas. And it wouldn’t hurt if they could find a way to curry favor with their new boss in the process. The answer dropped right in their laps.

The phrase, “What’s the story?” became a ubiquitous part of the Imagineering lexicon. Nothing marked the transition from WED to Imagineering better than the arrival of the new dogma of story. Attraction concepts were killed for lacking it, careers were made for those who embraced it, and destroyed for those who denied it. Screenwriters were hired and visual artists were laid off (ironically, some of these artists would have been called “story artists” had they worked in animation). Imagineering was transformed and the message went out to the world. Every Imagineer who sat down for an on-camera interview repeated Eisner’s mantra, “it’s all about story.” Imagineers literally began to believe their own press as a sound byte (originally designed to simply differentiate Disneyland from Six Flags for laymen) became doctrine. New Imagineers, laymen themselves, were indoctrinated into this new culture of story and a revisionist history was born.

Some claim the story culture began long before the mid-1980s--that it started with Walt. This is hard to prove and still harder to disprove (statements made by different Walt-era Imagineers contradict each other). Certainly "Story" was Walt's most-repeated mantra for the success of animation and live-action films. But in the context of theme park attractions, this was not the case. It is undeniable that during the mid-1980s linear storytelling was embraced by Walt Disney Imagineering with an unbridled enthusiasm never seen in Walt’s day.

Think about some of the classic Disneyland attractions--Pirates of the Caribbean, Haunted Mansion, Matterhorn Bobsleds and “it’s a small world.” How would they fare against the story litmus test? Do they have a beginning, middle and end? A clear antagonist or protagonist? Would they be better if they had a clearly defined inciting incident, conflict and resolution? Without these things an attraction has no story, and therefore is no good--according to the current dogma.


So, has the injection of story in recent years improved the quality of theme park attractions? Well, sometimes. The immersive backstory created for the Twilight Zone Tower of Terror adds layers of depth to the experience--heightening the sense that the guests are visiting a real place with a real history. However, in Kilimanjaro Safaris at Disney’s Animal Kingdom, a tacked-on story about a baby elephant makes the experience seem less credible, more contrived and altogether artificial. It disrupts an otherwise beautiful and realistic experience.


Unfortunately, it seems that in recent years the trend has been toward story at the expense of all else. Simple easy-to-read sight gags like those found in Pirates of the Caribbean (three guys in jail with a bone and a little dog outside holding the keys) have given way to traditional three-act structure with an inciting incident, conflict and resolution. Complicated and overly talky premises dominate attractions such as “Honey, I Shrunk the Audience,” Journey Into Imagination (versions 2 and 3), Dinosaur, Sounds Dangerous, and Stitch’s Great Escape.

Spending time and money obsessing over how to communicate story details at the expense of creating a unique immersive experience may seem blatantly foolish, but that’s what comes from close adherence to an unquestionable dogma. Like any dogma, it exists to serve the ruling faction. If you consider the fact that a handful of “creative executives” at Imagineering have built their careers on the myth of story, it becomes apparent that the true audience for these carefully-crafted stories are not the millions of paying guests who visit Disney theme parks every year, but the executives who constantly ask, “What’s the story?”

Marc Davis’ quote at the top of the page (from “What Can You Learn From Disney’s Work,” Sales Meeting Magazine, July 1969) speaks of a series of experiences building to a climax--these are the trappings of story, as are setting, character, dialogue, action and reaction. Disney attractions have story elements, but they are not literal stories (it may seem like splitting hairs, but this is an important distinction). In other words, the story mantra is not wrong so much as it is imprecise. Failure to use precise language is not a crime, but deliberately manipulating language to suit a selfish political agenda is, at best, questionable. And anyone who suggests that Walt insisted on “story” as the central element to all of his attractions, is presenting a potentially damaging revisionist history.

The word ‘story’ like the word ‘art’ means something different to everyone and can not be used as a litmus test for creativity. Nothing can. Walt-era imagineers inherently understood how to entertain people. They understood the effects of story so well, they knew when not to use it. They were chosen by Walt personally because he recognized that they “got it.” No litmus test required. No artificial formula.

Just hire people who get it.

The Magic Door

A central concept in Pixar’s hit “Monsters Inc.” is a magic door through which the workaday spooks of Monstropolis can travel to the human world to collect the screams of children.

These dimensional portals instantly captivate the imagination. What viewer does not come away from the film with a secret wish to step through such a door, to be instantly transported from one exotic location to another? And with a warehouse full of magic doors stored like dry cleaning on a moving/hanging conveyor, the possibilities for a personal journey through a raucous dimension-hopping Disneyland attraction are endless.

Like the plunge into Alice’s Wonderland rabbit hole or the leap from the Darling nursery into flight with Peter Pan, here is a truly visual and experiential story conceit, ready-made for Imagineers to exploit.

When California Adventure’s only dark ride, the shockingly ill-conceived “Superstar Limo” - - a bad acid-trip chase through the Touchstone Hollywood of cheesy B-celebrities (and Cher) - - was retrofitted as a “Monsters Inc.” ride, there was cause for celebration. Even on a limited budget and with a locked track layout, a C or D level dark ride through those magic portals couldn’t help but tickle the wishbone of our fancies. After all, it wasn’t the extravagant budgets of the old Fantasyland rides that made them favorites for 50 years, but their ability to convincingly transport the rider to Never-Never Lands of our imagination.

Yet, when the awkwardly titled “Monster’s Inc: Mike and Scully to the Rescue” attraction opened to the public, it was many things: cute, pleasant, mildly amusing, sure to charm the kiddies, a huge improvement over the prior tenant - - but, well, yet another dark ride disappointment that falls short of its promise.

Though we see magic doors, pass magic doors, even find a warehouse of magic doors, we are never taken THROUGH one single magic door.

During the ride, we are teased with, but never actually given the wish, the desire, the key experience. It’s foreplay without penetration. Monstropolis Interruptus.

(Well, there IS a colorfully painted plywood door on the exterior facade that “transports” us from the sidewalk to the queue, but this is somehow less than magical…).


Rather than traveling through dimensional portals – an experience we are unlikely to have outside of Disneyland – we find ourselves stopping to “interact” with a cranky secretary robot spouting custom insults (already a daily annoyance for most of us in industrialized nations).

Like so many of the Disney dark rides of recent years; “The Many Adventures of Winnie-the-Pooh,” “Journey Into Imagination,” “Superstar Limo,” “Roger Rabbit’s Cartoon Spin,” “Buzz Lightyear’s Astro Blasters,” “The Great Movie Ride,” even the neo-classical “Splash Mountain” - - we are carted past stagey, episodic, distant set-pieces like tourists in a Disney Store wax museum.

We become mere passive spectators of a contrived scenario, burdened with more plot than necessary (“Help save Boo from blah, blah, blah…”). We are watching a mini-version of the film, not participating in it.

It’s a marked contrast to the original Fantasyland dark rides in which the guest was plunged into a first-person experience AS Snow White or Mr. Toad - - or the pinnacle 60’s triad of “Pirates of the Caribbean,” “The Haunted Mansion” and “Adventure Thru Inner Space,” which took voyagers on extravagant first-person journeys to fantastic other-realms of the historic, supernatural and psychedelic.

Walt wanted “Pirates” to make people feel like they were in the middle of a cocktail party, tuning in and out of the enveloping action. We were not passive-viewers at a modern amusement park, but part of a fantastic story come-to-life! The action is not confined to static sets on the right or left, but surrounds us in every way. We are lead in, on, over, under and through the story, not just past it.

This of-the-moment approach has proved to be far more durable and repeatable than the complex, episodic storylines and overwritten backstories of more recent creations. These elements seem to help the writers more than the riders.


Who cares what the dead bride’s silly maiden name might be - - why Boo is being kidnapped - - or why our vehicle is being hijacked? Talky exposition always hits the Omnimover like a lead balloon. When poorly written or staged, it can all-too-easily remind us that this is an artificial experience.

If the ride is so un-involving that I care to crick my neck trying to see the nostalgic remnants of a former, superior attraction - - or to spot kitschy design trivia - - there is a big problem. Do the storytellers really believe in the illusion at hand? If they don’t, we won’t.

Walt’s original Imagineers had all cut their teeth on that most completely visual of all filmmaking genres, the cartoon, and that experience clearly made a difference in their more elemental approach to theme park story. A simple situation with a visual/thematic progression and climax would suffice, much as it did for a cartoon short or a single sequence in an animated feature.

While cartoonists undoubtedly contributed gags and ideas to “Monsters, “Pooh,” or “Splash Mountain,” the overall product doesn’t feel much like it belongs to them, but more to a committee. Those show designers more experienced in technology, engineering, architecture, real-estate, marketing or theatre lack the same gift for immersion, non-verbal showmanship and elegant simplicity. Their priorities lie elsewhere.

It’s not obtuse theme park logistics and theory that matter to guests, but a transcendent emotional and visceral payoff. Those early Imagineers seemed to know instinctively what part of the story a rider wanted or needed to experience - - whether that concept was derived from a film or an entirely original situation. They could convincingly visualize themselves into the role of protagonist on an epic adventure. And we would follow them gladly.


As one wag put it, “Watch Alice go down the hole… or go down the hole? I just can’t decide.”

The magic for Disneyland guests was always the ability to travel THROUGH dimensional doorways to other worlds.

Disneyland needs more Magic Doors and fewer Hidden Mickeys.

The Sacred and the Profane

One of the most revolutionary aspects of Walt’s breakthrough park in Anaheim was its attention to comforting visual transitions from one disparate themed area to another. As guests moved from the Victorian gingerbread of Main Street to a time worn Bazaar on the edge of a distant jungle the connecting rooftops, fencing and plantings gradually transformed. The goal for the early Disneyland designers was to never jar the guests eye as they moved from one ‘story’ to another; the concept much like a cross dissolve between scenes in motion pictures.

This uncanny attention to visual harmony became a cornerstone philosophy in the design and execution of Disney’s theme parks for years to come, not only serving to keep guests in the park for an entire day but assuring they'd come back for more year after year.

Once the Accountaneers stormed the castle, however, not only did the clever visual transitions between fully realized worlds bite the dust but the very worlds themselves did as well.


Nowhere is this tragic reversal of fortune more apparent than at Disney’s Animal Kingdom in Orlando. Most of the theming here is of the highest caliber, often surpassing even the best efforts of the finest Walt era Imagineers. Joe Rohde and his team have created beautiful worlds within worlds that verge on spiritual epiphanies. From the eye-popping authenticity of a meticulously recreated African or Asian village to the intimate beauty of the Pangani Forest and Maharajah Jungle trails this is a park that deepy understands the worlds its creating, wrapping the guests not only within a convincing environment but within a distinct feeling.



But then there’s Dinoland U.S.A., specifically ‘Chester and Hester’s’ Dino-Rama’, an area so sharply out of step with the rest of the park that it borders on blasphemy. Stumbling upon this loud kiddy playground after a peaceful stroll around the wondrous Tree of Life is like tripping into a pool of vomit after leaving St. Peter’s Basilica.



Blaring, vigorously repellent, patronizing, cheap and visually offensive, this carny hell-hole appears to have taken its theme from traveling fun-fairs; the kind that are quickly loaded and unloaded from the back of U-Haul trucks. One can only imagine that this addition was bourn from the spreadsheets of some Strategic Planning MBA who figured the kiddy quotient wasn’t getting it’s full share of yuks from a park that appeared to skew too ‘adult’, Walt’s admonition to entertain adults and children together long forgotten.


Though Dino-Rama might elicit pained smiles in Peoria, it severely cheapens Disney’s Animal Kingdom; a park that, at its best, reminds guests once again what the ‘theme’ in theme parks really means. That it appears in any Disney park is sin enough, but the fact that it’s butted up against some of Imagineering’s most sublime work in recent years is deeply heartbreaking.

Taking a Seat

When Roy E. Disney accused the Eisner regime of building Disney's California Adventure "on the cheap" it was very clear what he was talking about. Here was a park filled with off the shelf amusements contracted out to less than stellar vendors, no distinct themed areas and nary a penny spent on new show technology, save perhaps Soaring Over California's remarkable hovering benchseats.

But what the park's few guests may not realize is that the 'cheap' across the street from Disneyland went far deeper than Wal-Mart style thrills, mall esthetics and empty sightlines. When it came to the comfort of patrons, DCA proudly demoted the guests to third world refugees by not fully budgeting for one of the most rudimentary of theme park provisions: Outdoor seating.

We all know what happens to guests non-plussed by their stroll along Paradise Pier. They leave and never come back. But what about the few remaining souls who haven't yet given up the faith? What happens when, after searching vainly for any element of charm in the park, guests now need a quiet place to rest their weary feet?


It appears that when it comes to taking a break from your glorious California Adventure Disney would rather you please remain standing.