Well, I finally got this classic on DVD.
I believe it has been released on DVD before, and I missed it that time around. Or I could be wrong, and this could be the first DVD release. Whatever. I have it now. I believe my boys are going to really enjoy this film.
(I'm still ruminating on some writing about the future and some ideas for both Future World and Tomorrowland.)
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Future Disney
The last post didn't seem to have much to do with Disney, and while I reserve the right to depart from Disney topics on occasion, I feel that it is actually the impetus for some thought about the future as it relates to Disney theme parks.
******
EPCOT = Experimental Prototype Community Of Tomorrow
Obviously, Walt's grand dream did not become realized in the form he wished it would. Even now, with Disney execs and Imagineers spinning it, saying that the Resort was the community that Walt envisioned, with guests, a transportation system, hotels and parks, and maybe even including the town of Celebration as part of the "vision", you'd have to agree that Disney World is not a magnet for corporate research and development in the way that Walt wanted it to become.
But what we do have is a unique theme park, with its two distinct "worlds", Future World and World Showcase. The latter attempts to present the differing cultures of the countries showcased in it. And the former was supposed to present to park guests, and perhaps even be part of, the cutting edges of research and technological achievement.
We also have a "land" in the Magic Kingdom and Disneyland, called Tomorrowland, which is supposed to give the guests the feeling of entering the world of the future. This is different from the Future World part of Epcot in that it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with reality, instead being more of a cinematic or even literary version of the future. It doesn't need to project future technologies, it needs to give the illusion of being in a far flung future that is at once optimistic and unfamiliar to the guests.
Our true near-future is probably more concerned with our fiscal and social problems. We're all concerned about the realities of our financial system, of our housing market, of our health care, of our involvement in the world. We really don't have time or resources to devote to any sort of optimistic long term outlook for humanity.
But we don't go to Disney parks to be reminded of our failing health care system, or of our lack of good employment opportunities for both our current workers and our young incoming workers. We go to escape the realities of life, to be entertained, and maybe even be inspired and encouraged about our future.
So maybe Disney could give us some lands that look forward in a positive and optimistic way. I am good with conservation and ecology and recycling and such being a part of of my park experiences, but I don't want to be hammered on the head with them as part of the experience. I want those types of things to be "background radiation", to be sort of taken for granted. Because in "my" future, I don't want those types of things to be issues. I want them to be part of that future, but I don't want to be debating the effectiveness or even validity of these matters. Does that make sense?
Instead, start with this sort of thing. Make "green" the way of these parts of the parks. And focus instead, on what sort of future we could have if we solve our problems. What will our transportation look like? Our homes? Will space be a part of our future, as I hoped it would be when I was a child? Will the oceans become a part of our experience on this planet? Both? (Don't tell me neither...)
Push Tomorrowland's future far enough out that it won't become obsolete in ten years, and then keep it fresh. Push Future World's future out just far enough to give us a taste of real cutting edge possibilities.
I'm planning on writing a few more posts on some future possibilities, and their possible inclusion as part of Disney theme parks.
******
EPCOT = Experimental Prototype Community Of Tomorrow
Obviously, Walt's grand dream did not become realized in the form he wished it would. Even now, with Disney execs and Imagineers spinning it, saying that the Resort was the community that Walt envisioned, with guests, a transportation system, hotels and parks, and maybe even including the town of Celebration as part of the "vision", you'd have to agree that Disney World is not a magnet for corporate research and development in the way that Walt wanted it to become.
But what we do have is a unique theme park, with its two distinct "worlds", Future World and World Showcase. The latter attempts to present the differing cultures of the countries showcased in it. And the former was supposed to present to park guests, and perhaps even be part of, the cutting edges of research and technological achievement.
We also have a "land" in the Magic Kingdom and Disneyland, called Tomorrowland, which is supposed to give the guests the feeling of entering the world of the future. This is different from the Future World part of Epcot in that it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with reality, instead being more of a cinematic or even literary version of the future. It doesn't need to project future technologies, it needs to give the illusion of being in a far flung future that is at once optimistic and unfamiliar to the guests.
Our true near-future is probably more concerned with our fiscal and social problems. We're all concerned about the realities of our financial system, of our housing market, of our health care, of our involvement in the world. We really don't have time or resources to devote to any sort of optimistic long term outlook for humanity.
But we don't go to Disney parks to be reminded of our failing health care system, or of our lack of good employment opportunities for both our current workers and our young incoming workers. We go to escape the realities of life, to be entertained, and maybe even be inspired and encouraged about our future.
So maybe Disney could give us some lands that look forward in a positive and optimistic way. I am good with conservation and ecology and recycling and such being a part of of my park experiences, but I don't want to be hammered on the head with them as part of the experience. I want those types of things to be "background radiation", to be sort of taken for granted. Because in "my" future, I don't want those types of things to be issues. I want them to be part of that future, but I don't want to be debating the effectiveness or even validity of these matters. Does that make sense?
Instead, start with this sort of thing. Make "green" the way of these parts of the parks. And focus instead, on what sort of future we could have if we solve our problems. What will our transportation look like? Our homes? Will space be a part of our future, as I hoped it would be when I was a child? Will the oceans become a part of our experience on this planet? Both? (Don't tell me neither...)
Push Tomorrowland's future far enough out that it won't become obsolete in ten years, and then keep it fresh. Push Future World's future out just far enough to give us a taste of real cutting edge possibilities.
I'm planning on writing a few more posts on some future possibilities, and their possible inclusion as part of Disney theme parks.
Monday, February 23, 2009
THE WORLD WITHOUT US - by Alan Weisman
Alan Weisman starts out by asking his readers to look around and imagine the world they see - houses, businesses, roads, power lines, cities, farms, etc. - without humans. Then he asks, how would nature respond to our absence? Just how long would our creations, our architecture, our art, our accomplishments, stand to leave our mark on this planet? And have some of our marks left a more or less indelible imprint on Earth?
The rest of the book examines various environments, deserts, rain forests, cities, farms, forests, and oceans and how they would possibly respond to the fact that no longer were humans maintaining any of the structures we've created. Nature is powerful, and would likely display its staying power and relentlessness over time. But what of the artifacts, like Uranium 238, that we've distilled into concentrations that would otherwise not be found? What of our chemicals, like rubber and polymers What of the emissions we've sent into our atmosphere and into our waters? What of the radio and TV signals we've sent beyond the solar system itself?
It's a very interesting, very thought provoking book. I read a lot more fiction than non-fiction, but this one kept me reading for a few days now, and whether you are a person who feels that humans can affect the planet on a macro- basis or not, it's something that will make you ask questions, if only of yourself, and perhaps make you more aware of your environment and your impact on it.
The rest of the book examines various environments, deserts, rain forests, cities, farms, forests, and oceans and how they would possibly respond to the fact that no longer were humans maintaining any of the structures we've created. Nature is powerful, and would likely display its staying power and relentlessness over time. But what of the artifacts, like Uranium 238, that we've distilled into concentrations that would otherwise not be found? What of our chemicals, like rubber and polymers What of the emissions we've sent into our atmosphere and into our waters? What of the radio and TV signals we've sent beyond the solar system itself?
It's a very interesting, very thought provoking book. I read a lot more fiction than non-fiction, but this one kept me reading for a few days now, and whether you are a person who feels that humans can affect the planet on a macro- basis or not, it's something that will make you ask questions, if only of yourself, and perhaps make you more aware of your environment and your impact on it.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Narnia films
This is sort of old news, probably, but I recently read in someone's blog (possibly Blue Sky Disney) that Disney was no longer going to be associated with the Narnia films. I assumed it was because they were flops.
I was going through a stack of old magazines (dental and waiting room publications) and came across an article comparing the first Narnia film to the film made of Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials. The suggestion was that while The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe cost the same as the Pullman film to make ($180 million), it was a huge hit compared to that other film. It earned $291.7 million at the US box office, and $453.1 million abroad, making it Disney's all time top-grossing live action film. (Apparently it's been overtaken in that honor, though I don't know by what, exactly.)
I don't know what Prince Caspian did, but it must have tanked to make Disney give up the franchise.
I was going through a stack of old magazines (dental and waiting room publications) and came across an article comparing the first Narnia film to the film made of Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials. The suggestion was that while The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe cost the same as the Pullman film to make ($180 million), it was a huge hit compared to that other film. It earned $291.7 million at the US box office, and $453.1 million abroad, making it Disney's all time top-grossing live action film. (Apparently it's been overtaken in that honor, though I don't know by what, exactly.)
I don't know what Prince Caspian did, but it must have tanked to make Disney give up the franchise.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Off Track?
Has Disney really gone that far off track?
It seems like whenever I read an article on someone's blog criticizing a Disney park there are about two responses: First, some responders who criticize the article itself while saying how good (fill in your park here) is today. And second, a bunch of people who are far more negative than the original criticism.
The first bunch are categorized as "fanboys" or something of that nature by the second group, and the second group are categorized as living in the past.
I'm probably somewhere in between. I enjoy the parks a lot. I think that Kevin Yee over at MiceAge takes a lot of flak for being negative when really he's quite positive much of the time. It's clear that he'd like things to be better: he'd like the parks to be maintained better, he would like to see good areas kept open, he'd like to see less cheap additions like snack carts and such. But he clearly loves the parks - all of them. I agree with Kevin for the most part.
Could they be better? Of course. Tomorrowland seems to be losing its identity little by little. Every time I go there it seems less fresh, and less about "tomorrow". Adventureland just looks in need of some TLC, as does Fantasyland. And Epcot would benefit from not having a pavilion completely closed, and from better designed pavilions that right now really don't have much beyond a queue for the E-ticket attraction housed there and a bit of a post-show for the attraction, a post-show that is too easily ignored and bypassed. Animal Kingdom could use some Imagineering in the Dinoland area, and could benefit from having that area down by the river reopened. I've never seen it open, but it looks nice from the vantage point of the top of the closed walkway down.
Those are just the things I notice. I'm sure there is plenty that I don't notice, that doesn't register. But does it make me not enjoy the parks, or maybe not enjoy them as much? Not that I can tell.
I think there is a problem with our generations today. We live in a far different world than we did when Walt dreamed up Disneyland, and the Magic Kingdom. We live in a different world by far than we did when Epcot was born. We're a lot more immune to the "wow" factor. Think of film. Think of the achievements in cinematography, in movies like Jurassic Park and Forrest Gump. We watched Mary Poppins last night (because we're going to go see the musical in May) and while I love the charm of the scenes combining animation and live action, it looks - well, quaint! And dated. Those scenes in a film today wouldn't wow anyone, though I bet they did when the movie was released.
A friend and I were talking about music. He was lamenting that, in his opinion, no one was doing anything new in music. The songs of today don't take music in a different direction from where it was going all along. There's no new "branch" analogous to jazz, or classical, or rock, or hip-hop. I've tried to look for an example of something that would fit his definition of "new" but haven't been able to.
Maybe it's like this with theme parks too. I mean, the future no longer seems like it's looking outward - and the advances that appear to be coming down the pike, perhaps, do not look like they would make for excitement at Epcot. I read a lot of nostalgia...you know...stuff like "I loved this ride or that ride and why can't they do something like that?" It has to be relevant, it has to be forward looking, and it has to have a "wow" factor.
What would "wow" you, as a theme park goer? I'm open to ideas.
It seems like whenever I read an article on someone's blog criticizing a Disney park there are about two responses: First, some responders who criticize the article itself while saying how good (fill in your park here) is today. And second, a bunch of people who are far more negative than the original criticism.
The first bunch are categorized as "fanboys" or something of that nature by the second group, and the second group are categorized as living in the past.
I'm probably somewhere in between. I enjoy the parks a lot. I think that Kevin Yee over at MiceAge takes a lot of flak for being negative when really he's quite positive much of the time. It's clear that he'd like things to be better: he'd like the parks to be maintained better, he would like to see good areas kept open, he'd like to see less cheap additions like snack carts and such. But he clearly loves the parks - all of them. I agree with Kevin for the most part.
Could they be better? Of course. Tomorrowland seems to be losing its identity little by little. Every time I go there it seems less fresh, and less about "tomorrow". Adventureland just looks in need of some TLC, as does Fantasyland. And Epcot would benefit from not having a pavilion completely closed, and from better designed pavilions that right now really don't have much beyond a queue for the E-ticket attraction housed there and a bit of a post-show for the attraction, a post-show that is too easily ignored and bypassed. Animal Kingdom could use some Imagineering in the Dinoland area, and could benefit from having that area down by the river reopened. I've never seen it open, but it looks nice from the vantage point of the top of the closed walkway down.
Those are just the things I notice. I'm sure there is plenty that I don't notice, that doesn't register. But does it make me not enjoy the parks, or maybe not enjoy them as much? Not that I can tell.
I think there is a problem with our generations today. We live in a far different world than we did when Walt dreamed up Disneyland, and the Magic Kingdom. We live in a different world by far than we did when Epcot was born. We're a lot more immune to the "wow" factor. Think of film. Think of the achievements in cinematography, in movies like Jurassic Park and Forrest Gump. We watched Mary Poppins last night (because we're going to go see the musical in May) and while I love the charm of the scenes combining animation and live action, it looks - well, quaint! And dated. Those scenes in a film today wouldn't wow anyone, though I bet they did when the movie was released.
A friend and I were talking about music. He was lamenting that, in his opinion, no one was doing anything new in music. The songs of today don't take music in a different direction from where it was going all along. There's no new "branch" analogous to jazz, or classical, or rock, or hip-hop. I've tried to look for an example of something that would fit his definition of "new" but haven't been able to.
Maybe it's like this with theme parks too. I mean, the future no longer seems like it's looking outward - and the advances that appear to be coming down the pike, perhaps, do not look like they would make for excitement at Epcot. I read a lot of nostalgia...you know...stuff like "I loved this ride or that ride and why can't they do something like that?" It has to be relevant, it has to be forward looking, and it has to have a "wow" factor.
What would "wow" you, as a theme park goer? I'm open to ideas.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Disney's Animal Kingdom
Usually we don't do well at Disney's Animal Kingdom. Oh, we agree with all the folks who think it is a beautiful park. It is really neat to look at the lush tropical vegetation, with lots of animals in natural settings. And it has, for me and my son, the number one attraction at Disney World - Expedition Everest.
Usually, however, it's pretty darned hot in Orlando when we visit Disney, and DAK feels even hotter than the other parks. I've heard from cast members that it can be as much as 10 degrees hotter there than in the other parks, and that the beautiful vegetation helps to increase the humidity in the immediate vicinity of the park. My family does not do that well with soaked t-shirts and sweat running down the foreheads. I don't even like it, and usually stuff like that doesn't bother me that much.
But this last time, with the temps in the high 60's on the day we went to DAK, we enjoyed the park the most of any time we'd ever been there. No sweat running down the brow. No sense of rushing through the park. The crowds were relatively light that day. Everest had a long wait, but we had FastPasses, and so the lines didn't affect us much. We also had FP's for Kilamanjaro Safaris. Lunch at the Yak and Yeti was one of the higher points of our dining experiences. And the much maligned Dino Land was the source of great fun for my younger son, who discovered that he loves the Primeval Whirl. The waits for it were generally about 10 minutes. And Dinosaur ended up being a walk-on attraction when we went on.
The other thing we experienced for the first time was the Nemo musical. It was very well done, I thought. It told pretty much the whole story of the movie in the span of a half hour or so, and told it understandably, hitting all the high points of the tale. And the puppetry was very good. I suppose some day they'll adapt this thing for the stage and take it on tour, also.
We were in line to go on the train back to Rafiki's Planet Watch when they announced that the OTHER train was not running, and they wouldn't be running any more trains out there until they had that one fixed (I guess it was blocking the tracks somewhere out there), so we did not get to experience that part of the park.
All in all, I could see why others love this park so much. When you don't have to listen to kids (or spouses) complaining about the oppressive heat and humidity, it's a very enjoyable experience.
Usually, however, it's pretty darned hot in Orlando when we visit Disney, and DAK feels even hotter than the other parks. I've heard from cast members that it can be as much as 10 degrees hotter there than in the other parks, and that the beautiful vegetation helps to increase the humidity in the immediate vicinity of the park. My family does not do that well with soaked t-shirts and sweat running down the foreheads. I don't even like it, and usually stuff like that doesn't bother me that much.
But this last time, with the temps in the high 60's on the day we went to DAK, we enjoyed the park the most of any time we'd ever been there. No sweat running down the brow. No sense of rushing through the park. The crowds were relatively light that day. Everest had a long wait, but we had FastPasses, and so the lines didn't affect us much. We also had FP's for Kilamanjaro Safaris. Lunch at the Yak and Yeti was one of the higher points of our dining experiences. And the much maligned Dino Land was the source of great fun for my younger son, who discovered that he loves the Primeval Whirl. The waits for it were generally about 10 minutes. And Dinosaur ended up being a walk-on attraction when we went on.
The other thing we experienced for the first time was the Nemo musical. It was very well done, I thought. It told pretty much the whole story of the movie in the span of a half hour or so, and told it understandably, hitting all the high points of the tale. And the puppetry was very good. I suppose some day they'll adapt this thing for the stage and take it on tour, also.
We were in line to go on the train back to Rafiki's Planet Watch when they announced that the OTHER train was not running, and they wouldn't be running any more trains out there until they had that one fixed (I guess it was blocking the tracks somewhere out there), so we did not get to experience that part of the park.
All in all, I could see why others love this park so much. When you don't have to listen to kids (or spouses) complaining about the oppressive heat and humidity, it's a very enjoyable experience.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Disney's Hollywood Studios
I think that the Disney Hollywood Studios is an underrated park. I've seen it described as a half-day park. I've also read numerous complaints about the BAH in front of the Graumann Theater replica.
But my kids love the Hat. And it does sort of fit with the theme of the park, with Walt being the wizard who created all the movie magic. I believe it was Yensid's hat in Fantasia, right?
But I'm not here to defend or demonize the Hat. It wouldn't bother me if it was gone at all, but it doesn't bother me all that much that it's there, either. I'm just thinking that the park is pretty good!
First, there are the dining options. We've never tried the Brown Derby or Mama Melroses, but the Prime Time Cafe and the Sci Fi Dine-in are both great fun. And both the Back Lot Express (?) and Pizza Planet work as counter service options. We're not as crazy about the counter service options down on Hollywood Boulevard, but overall, it's a nice park to eat at.
Then there are the attractions. The Great Movie Ride wasn't as good as I remembered it (even though it was basically a walk-on attraction when we did it this time), but it was still fun. Some have said it doesn't have repeatability, but for me, it does. Toy Story Mania was sold out of FastPasses both times we made it to this park, but I know from riding it a couple times last visit that it's a bunch of fun. Very repeatable. Then there is Star Tours. Yes, it could use an update, but yet, it's still fun to ride. (The fact tha both of my kids were willing to ride it this time made it more fun for me, I think.) And the E tickets - Rock'n'RollerCoaster and Tower of Terror - are two of the better rides in the resort. (It helps that I'm an Aerosmith fan, and I like the pre-show, because the coaster itself is over pretty darned quickly...)
Then the shows: Lights Motors Action is a fun show every time we see it. Admittedly we've only gotten into it two or maybe three times so far, but it seems to be something you'd really like on repeat viewings. And The Muppets 3D - well, we've seen it several times and it's still fun. This last time, the Backlot Tour was closed, but usually the Catastrophe Canyon is good for one try per vacation. And I have never seen the Indiana Jones Stunt Show, but my wife and son and inlaws caught it this last time and they liked it a lot better than LMA! even. Next, there is the Jedi Training Academy. Both of my kids could probably watch this over and over, though most likely because they keep hoping they'll get picked. (If they ever do, that will be fun!) Even Voyage of the Little Mermaid is pretty fun.
One of our favorite things to do when at the park is visit the Animation Academy. This short drawing class is a ball, and you get to come away with your handiwork. We do this a couple times every visit. And I can't leave out One Man's Dream. It's an interesting look at Walt's life, and we didn't even have time to get to it last time.
And I didn't even mention Caspian or Americal Idol or Playhouse Disney, both because we didn't do either of them and neither one exactly pop OUR corks...but I'm sure they interest plenty of guests
The park is spaced out nicely, has a lot of eye candy, and a very good mix of dining, shows and rides, and we don't seem to have any trouble hanging out there for more than one day of a vacation.
But my kids love the Hat. And it does sort of fit with the theme of the park, with Walt being the wizard who created all the movie magic. I believe it was Yensid's hat in Fantasia, right?
But I'm not here to defend or demonize the Hat. It wouldn't bother me if it was gone at all, but it doesn't bother me all that much that it's there, either. I'm just thinking that the park is pretty good!
First, there are the dining options. We've never tried the Brown Derby or Mama Melroses, but the Prime Time Cafe and the Sci Fi Dine-in are both great fun. And both the Back Lot Express (?) and Pizza Planet work as counter service options. We're not as crazy about the counter service options down on Hollywood Boulevard, but overall, it's a nice park to eat at.
Then there are the attractions. The Great Movie Ride wasn't as good as I remembered it (even though it was basically a walk-on attraction when we did it this time), but it was still fun. Some have said it doesn't have repeatability, but for me, it does. Toy Story Mania was sold out of FastPasses both times we made it to this park, but I know from riding it a couple times last visit that it's a bunch of fun. Very repeatable. Then there is Star Tours. Yes, it could use an update, but yet, it's still fun to ride. (The fact tha both of my kids were willing to ride it this time made it more fun for me, I think.) And the E tickets - Rock'n'RollerCoaster and Tower of Terror - are two of the better rides in the resort. (It helps that I'm an Aerosmith fan, and I like the pre-show, because the coaster itself is over pretty darned quickly...)
Then the shows: Lights Motors Action is a fun show every time we see it. Admittedly we've only gotten into it two or maybe three times so far, but it seems to be something you'd really like on repeat viewings. And The Muppets 3D - well, we've seen it several times and it's still fun. This last time, the Backlot Tour was closed, but usually the Catastrophe Canyon is good for one try per vacation. And I have never seen the Indiana Jones Stunt Show, but my wife and son and inlaws caught it this last time and they liked it a lot better than LMA! even. Next, there is the Jedi Training Academy. Both of my kids could probably watch this over and over, though most likely because they keep hoping they'll get picked. (If they ever do, that will be fun!) Even Voyage of the Little Mermaid is pretty fun.
One of our favorite things to do when at the park is visit the Animation Academy. This short drawing class is a ball, and you get to come away with your handiwork. We do this a couple times every visit. And I can't leave out One Man's Dream. It's an interesting look at Walt's life, and we didn't even have time to get to it last time.
And I didn't even mention Caspian or Americal Idol or Playhouse Disney, both because we didn't do either of them and neither one exactly pop OUR corks...but I'm sure they interest plenty of guests
The park is spaced out nicely, has a lot of eye candy, and a very good mix of dining, shows and rides, and we don't seem to have any trouble hanging out there for more than one day of a vacation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
