Saying Goodbye to Social Media

I recently took inventory on all the photos I had painstakingly scanned and uploaded into the photo sharing site that is Tumblr, and noticed that many people had posted comments on some photos.  While the majority were people sharing their enthusiasm over old photos of Walt Disney World, many others were correcting the captions with their own misinformed knowledge about Disney World, or simply fishing for followers.  I looked at my followers, and about 90% of them were high school students who were obsessed with Disney.

A love for Disney is one thing that everyone should embrace, because it fills a great deal of us with an overwhelming joy.  One thing I noticed, which was very peculiar, was the amount of young people who were obsessed with rides and attractions that were no longer there.  Kids yearning for the original Journey Into Imagination, or Horizons.  The insufferable part is not them loving it, because they are magical and charming rides, but that they take ownership and are adamant about their unwavering love for such an extinct attraction.  Most of them were not even born when they were about to be demolished, so it's hard to understand how they can love a ride they've never been on and only experienced it through a low-res home video shot in 1988 and uploaded YouTube video.

Just look at that video quality.

Although I was not old enough to remember America Sings, I understand you can have an appreciation for it and enjoy it through a home video, but I would not go so far as obsessing over it relentlessly and spew some sort of tired rhetoric about how Disney should bring back the classics or not tamper with the classics or how Frozen is ruining the parks.  What it boils down to is that teenagers need to feel like they are the only one's among them to be different and stand out.  While it's almost normal for your one friend to only be into obscure bands and hate everything mainstream, so too do these self-proclaimed "Disney Nerds" seek out to attain an affiliation with a vintage-era Disney World.

And since I cannot stand teenagers or hardcore Disney fans, I decided to delete it, and post all my Walt Disney World photos here.  I know it's not much different than uploading everything to Tumblr, but at least here I do not have to worry about random comments...

Disney's Corporate Sponsors: A Creative Partnership

We are all well aware that corporate sponsorship goes hand in hand with Walt Disney Theme Parks (Coca-Cola is still going strong).  Creating an attraction is expensive, as is general maintenance and upkeep.  We saw the potential of it in Disneyland, with Monsanto sponsoring attractions such as "Adventures Thru Inner Space" and "The House Of The Future."  An equally parasitic relationship, with Monsanto wanting to put their name on an attraction so the world will know "Monsanto," and Disney going along with the ride to secure funding for said attraction.

I hear they're doing great things.

We view things differently today than people did 50 years ago, not surprising.  When we think of corporations today, we think of greed, dishonesty, lack of empathy, and a billion other negative adjectives.  50 years ago, the cynicism and distrust of corporations weren't at the level we have experienced now, so I would imagine that the average park guest at Disneyland who walks past "America The Beautiful," presented by AT&T, is not giving them the finger for being a large corporation.

Because we liked to see progress, back when AT&T meant progress.

Corporate sponsorship is more or less still existent in Disney Parks, not to the varying degree that it once was back in the 1960s all the way throughout the late 90s, but it is still there.  Siemens has a stake in attractions at Epcot and Disneyland (Spaceship Earth and It's A Small World, respectively) and Chevrolet is with Test Track, but the majority of attractions are without sponsors.  One might ask if this is a good or bad thing; do we really want to sully the image of a Disney attraction with a company plastering their corporate logo on every square inch of a ride they have a stake in?  Yes and no, but mostly yes.

I really don't mind it at all.

Corporate sponsors act as a "checks and balances" system for Disney.  Without them (in the early years of Walt Disney World) the rides would be cheap and uninteresting, as the Walt Disney Company was suffering financially in the 70s and early 80s.  They needed sponsors to help maintain the rides to keep them presentable for the public, and in the late 70s, were needed to develop new ideas and technologies to showcase in the burgeoning EPCOT Center.  It was also Walt's dream to partner with major industries and use their cooperation to help build his future city.  Under the direction of Card Walker, corporations like Exxon, Bell System, Sperry/Univac, Kodak, Kraft, United Technologies (to come later), GE, GM, American Express, and Coca-Cola were present to sponsor the rides, albeit with some input on showcasing their company to the public, but also keeping with the theme of forward thinking and new ideas, which we were ready for in the 80s.  In the era of a new way to space travel, and all the new ideas and innovations in energy, agriculture, communication and transportation, EPCOT Center embodies the ideals of truly remarkable thinking.

Disney and NASA partnership in the 80s?  Talk about an unstoppable force.

The ideas presented in these attractions were dry and outdated by today's standards, and as Disney has a penchant for entertainment, they were tied down to their corporate benefactors, who wanted to keep the tone informative, as well as entertaining.  Walking that fine line proved to be disastrous, as EPCOT Center suffered in its first few years.  The public wanted Mickey Mouse and his cadre of furry friends, not this so-called "info-tainment."  EPCOT Center became an example of class field trips and learning, and not until 1986 (after the Eisner inauguration) that we got any sort of E-Ticket attraction of any kind, in the form of Captain EO.

And what an E-Ticket that was.

EPCOT Center stayed on the straight and narrow path, retaining its wonder and excitement of what lies ahead in the future, and all the great things we are discovering.  Wonders of Life and Maelstrom gave us a reason to stay in the park, with attractions that are thrilling and fun, but the message EPCOT Center was sending out was pure hope.  Since the park was bound by their sponsors, it would be hard for Disney to change rides without consulting them.  As time and progress and technology progressed, or at least the rest of the world caught up with the technology EPCOT Center was producing, it became outdated quick.  Now it was time to ride out the clock until 1994, when the majority of the corporate sponsorship contracts were about to expire.  Seeing this as a way out of being bound by corporate restrictions, Disney and/or the sponsors did not renew the contracts, and in a way they were free.  The sponsors were not bound by obligation to Disney to help maintain the rides, and Disney was allowed to update attractions with their characters and ideas, instead of being bound by their sponsors.  And in some cases, the sponsors needed to know how to play ball with Disney and let them do whatever they wanted, but still have their name attached.

I doubt Nestle had any objections in letting Disney create the ride without any of their input.

As years passed on and rides became outdated and sponsors knew they needed to up the ante, so began the tumultuous 90s that paved the way for very lackluster and novelty attractions, using broad comedy strokes to paint the picture of the tone that the Walt Disney Theme Parks would adopt in the coming years.  Comedy and lightheartedness juxtaposed with a convoluted message vaguely tying in with the theme of the ride.  Universe of Energy moved to a lighthearted approach with popular entertainers of 1996, in an attempt to make energy fun, which lends itself to a contradiction of its intent.  The idea of the Universe of Energy is to understand where energy comes from, how we use it, and ways we can conserve or find new ways to harness other potential energy sources.  Ellen's Energy Adventure doesn't so much tell us of any new technologies or improvements in the search for new energy ideas, but rather tells us what's out there, how much we have left of it, and a cop out answer that supposedly solves the energy crisis, with brain power being the only energy source that will never run out.

If this ride didn't have air conditioning or being able to sit for 37 minutes, it'd be the worst ride at Epcot.

This is an example of the sponsor changing from Exxon to Exxon-Mobil and Disney wanting to go for more commercial appeal, and working together with this new sponsorship to change a great attraction.  Horizons, on the one hand, was destroyed because there was no sponsor to step in and say, "This ride is fine as is, it showcases our product, and an attraction refurb would be to costly."  Claiming structural issues (maybe), with Disney unchecked by GE, the ride was gone and so were the many dreams and memories of people all over the world.

As Disney came out of the economic slump of the 80s and back on top (especially now with the success of the animated films and owning the rights to our favorite childhood memories), corporate sponsorship wasn't as necessary as it once was.  Now with most contracts expired and Disney picking up the bill, there is no stopping their enterprise of synergy and cross-promotion.  Disney doesn't have to answer to any other higher authority.  They are not bound by their corporate benefactors anymore.  They have created a one-stop shop entertainment empire, fulfilling dreams and wishes for anyone who comes across them, and the need for satisfying a curious or intellectual craving we might have is now all but obsolete.  Just as the wonder of exploring the world of communication with SMRT-1 became outdated, so did their desire to make us wonder or dream anymore.  The grandeur and epic scope of Epcot is now laughable, and is indistinguishable from any other theme park.

These are different times, when the site of a space shuttle launch, or the sheer magnitude of a Circle-Vision 360 film wowed and dazzled us, now the general consensus is that we'd much rather see a Disney cartoon mascot or a Disney Princess than whet our appetites for the wanting to explore our lives and the world we live in, and try to make it better through advances in various fields.  There is so much yet to explore in our world and beyond, and yet we look to the television screen to see what's coming next to Disney World.

Disneyland v. Walt Disney World Part II: The Guests

Take in all the factors of Southern California: smoggy, congested, crowded, large, you get the idea.  Disneyland is a small space, so trying to fit these people in there is definitely going to be difficult, and making sure they don't lash out at the world is an even bigger challenge.  What follows is an item by item account of everything that happens when you are visiting Disneyland.

1) You have a family you have to get into a minivan (default) at the wee hours of the morning.  Kids quantity ranging from 2-4, and ages ranging from 1-15 (a very BROAD guess)
2) You have to brave LA traffic to get to Disneyland.  On average you are at least 30 miles away.
*If you have an annual pass, skip #3 & 5
3) Parking.  Get ready for $17 dollars you will never see again (you're really paying for the parking attendants being very on point in directing you on where to go so there is no need to endless circling).
4) The tram.  Unless you want to walk and push a stroller and drag a screaming ad/or crying kid, you wait for that tram.  Not enough room?  There will be another one just around the corner.  Or maybe in 15 minutes.
5) Park tickets.  A whopping $96 dollars (don't worry, that price will go up soon) to get into ONE park.  Add on another $50 or so to get into both.
6) Waiting.  You'll be waiting to do everything.  And remember, you have kids to deal with, plus a cranky/dehydrated spouse.  And while you might be all business, remember there are still tourists in the park who do things at a different pace.  And some retards who are unaware of their surroundings.  Be ready to deal with all manner of crazy people.
7) Food.  Disney's gotta make money, too.  Lots of it.  Food for your family from a quick service restaurant will run upwards of $40-$50, and that's at the low end.  Say you want to have a nice sit down meal?  It's gonna be rough.
8) The endless sun.  This will bring out the worst in everyone.
9) More food.  Because you have ravenous little mouths to feed.
10) Souvenirs.  Gotta capture your memories somehow.  And your kids must have the latest Frozen merchandise.  And it's gonna cost you...
11) The end of the day.  You're physically and mentally exhausted, $300 in debt.  You hear the screams of children and the echoes of annoying people, you're still mad at that overweight person who knowingly tried to get on Big Thunder, and in turn caused you to wait an extra five minutes.  You just want to get home.  It's another 30 miles home in more LA rush hour traffic.

Now by #7, you're at your breaking point.  At this moment you want to murder someone.  And people watching at Disney parks is depressing.  Take a parent who's been subjected to this level of torture, all in the name of wanting to provide your family with something fun, and it's a recipe for disaster.  Californians are generally easy going people, somewhat lax in their attitude, but when they snap, it's on a whole other level.  It ranges from passive aggressive anger to straight up child abuse.  Dads pushing around their kids like it was a prison yard, the most awful scorn a mother could give in the MIDDLE of a walkway; it's all terrible and horrifying to watch.

Disneyland can be stressful, when you want everything to be perfect and get your money's worth.  You can't have it all, though, because too many variables exist within Disney Parks.  You have to go in with few expectations and be wowed if they are exceeded.  Cramming everything in one day is a recipe for disaster, and leaves little room for the fun and enchantment.  And when you can't get alcohol in Disneyland and no one wants to go over to California Adventure, it only will make matters worse.

Walt Disney World, in contrast, offers a different feel: it is your vacation.  It's something you planned months in advance, had time to reel from the sticker shock of the high prices, and it's something you look forward to, building up anticipation, as opposed to Disneyland, where it's more done on a whim or with little planning.  Walt Disney World feels more complete, more organized and better run.  It's that well-oiled machine that makes it truly a dream come true.  They take the stress out of the experience.  The only stresses you might have are on food prices and souvenirs in terms of monetary issues, and maybe waiting too long for a ride.  And the crowds.  Maybe it's not all that different.

You may have stress on a plane, but it would't be a plane ride to Orlando and stopping in either Dallas/Fort Worth or Atlanta without stress.  To counterbalance the stress, Disney will shuttle you to your hotel for free.  Not staying at a Disney hotel in order to save money?  You're only cheating yourself.  And I have no sympathy for you if you have to pay extra for a Mears motorcoach (i.e. a shitty bus).  Check-in is a breeze, unless you're staying at the lower-middle class hotels and there's a giant line to check-in.  But they take your bags up and give you a guide to WDW and you feel like you're in heaven.  Your hotel is usually nice, and to top it all off, you get hours of entertainment with the Disney Information Channel.

Buses come get you frequently and drop you off at the park, for free.  No need to deal with parking.  And the only thing that awaits you is more fun, expensive food, and tacky souvenirs.  And some long lines in peak seasons.  And Brazilian tour groups.  When you weigh this vacation verses the Disneyland vacation, you get an overall more pleasant experience.  And you don't have as much blatant child abuse.  Sure Disney World is more of a premium, but that experience is far more worth it than the stress of Disneyland.  And that negative energy rubs off on everyone, cast members and guests alike.  And the cast members pick up on it, and you have a different experience at each park.  Disneyland Resort employees react to this negative energy, and when you're in a bad situation, you don't react well to it.  The tenseness, the claustrophobia, it all eats away at us, and sucks our energy.  After a few hours at the park, you're ready to get out of there because it just becomes too much to handle.

The cast members do their best, as they are instructed to ensure that everyone has a magical experience in the park, so you have applaud them for the level of commitment they have to the job.  It's not easy working at a theme park, and under the umbrella of a huge corporate infrastructure, but they make it work.  And these irate guests are just reacting to many other factors occurring in their lives, coupled with the added stress of Disneyland.  The trade-off of paying a premium to produce, preserve, and protect the brand and the image may alienate and anger guests, but it is done for a reason.  Just look at Six Flags, Universal and Knott's Berry Farm: they come nowhere near as close to Disneyland, and it is reflected in their price.  Half the price does mean it's any more fun and magical.  And Disney knows this.  And that's why they succeed and will continue to succeed.

Disneyland v. Walt Disney World Part I: The Cast Members

There is no doubt that both are amazing.  Each experience is tantamount to pure ecstasy.  Growing up in the Bay Area, an hour plane ride south to Anaheim, my parents opted a different route: annual vacations in Walt Disney World.  Disneyland was reserved for every couple of years; it wasn't as frequent as Walt Disney World.  Nevertheless, I experienced both, but had a tendency for the latter.

Disneyland was the "Happiest Place On Earth," yet Disney World was the "Most Magical Place On Earth."  Two very distinct claims.  Different people cling onto different parks as their favorite, and usually is rooted in childhood.  If you lived in California, Disneyland was your favorite place.  If you lived on the east coast, Disney World was your park of choice.  Simple enough, your geographic location usually dictated where you'd be spending your summer vacations and spring breaks.  There are obviously exceptions to every generalization, but I enjoy speaking broadly.

When you compare the two, certain red flags pop up when you are describing them: one is bigger often comes to mind.  Disneyland has the Matterhorn, Magic Kingdom does not.  Magic Kingdom has Peoplemovers, and Disneyland just has a vacant reminder of what used to be.  The list drags on.  When you start comparing it on another, more socioeconomic and interpersonal level, subtle differences start to present itself.

For every visit I've made to Disneyland, I've made at least five trips to Walt Disney World.  I'd say I've been to Disneyland about 5 times in my life, at various ages: 5, 10, 16, 23, 28.  My most recent trip to Disneyland was October 3rd, 2014.  My last trip to Walt Disney World was January 18th-25th of 2014.  Both times I was paying my own way, and not on a family trip, and it allowed me to view the experiences from an adult's perspective.  You see how things transpire in the real world, and not just in a euphoric state eating churros in a stroller and paying with your Figment toys.

The experience is broken down into three sections: how we interact with cast members, and how we see others interact at the parks, and a ride comparison, and the last will be explored in another post.  Right now, the workers that make up Disney Parks and the interaction of the park guests.

Disney guest service is unmatched by any other competitor.  The feel of Disney cannot be felt anywhere else.  A Six Flags park feels cheap; there is nothing special about it except a slew of roller coasters and uninspired rides based off Looney Tunes characters.  The sights, the smells, the experience of Disney is truly unique.  Both offer great service, even when you start to wander into Downtown Disney territory, when it can get questionable.  But for the most part it is still quite pleasant.

The majority of workers in the theme park industry are largely young kids/college students and the elderly.  You'd think employing kids would cause the customer service to dwindle, but alas, it remains consistent.  Disney has that unparalleled guest experience that cannot be beat.  Once while in line for ordering a $10 mediocre burger and fry combo (drink sold separately) at the Liberty Inn for 10 minutes, I peeked to see what was taking so long (from the counter, of course, not trying to get kicked out of EPCOT by sneaking into the back) and saw a sign.  It was a funny little sign, and I forget the exact words, but the jist of the sign was as such: no matter what you are doing, if a guest asks for something or needs help, stop what you are doing and help them.  That sentiment is what makes Disney truly one of the best theme parks that has ever existed.  They make it no secret that they strive for the best customer service.  And while ornery guests still exist and berate the cast members, they all take it, and deliver a smile back to you.

In Disneyland, the majority of employees live in the Orange/LA County area.  Southern California is huge and densely populated, obviously, so that's who you have to work there.  And they're nice people, who seem to enjoy their jobs.  Disney World is more of a destination employment center; it relies on people from all over the world to power it.  People from different countries who have different work ethics than those who live in the US.  This creates an interesting dynamic when you visit Disney World.  Disneyland employs Californians, who's attitude and work ethic is different.  They are not as sharp and on point as their WDW counterpart.  And a majority of the workers in Disneyland are young, so you see a difference in customer service than you would at Walt Disney World.

Walt Disney World requires a lot of people to make it work.  A lot of your employees come from all over the US, but you see a lot of people from the east coast.  Some of the best service I've had have been from people originating from New York and New Jersey.  You start to see a difference in attitude from people who come from the east coast versus the west coast.  Career waiters at Walt Disney World are among the best, and if you can get Tony from Long Island at the Sci-Fi Dine In Theater, you'll see why.  The two parks have the same agenda and purpose, but two very different styles in which things operate.  Simply put, people make a career out of Walt Disney World, and Disneyland is more of the "summer job while I'm in school."

Another reason why I see the quality of service unmatched at Disney World is due in large part by the fact that these career waiters are career waiters, exclusively for Disney.  The longer you work there, you are guaranteed to get a certain raise per year (I am aware it's not as cut and dry as that, so work with me on this one as I make more generalizations), so when you have those people who have worked there since 1971 (the real characters of Walt Disney World), who have job security and know the game, they're gonna keep on delivering that great service.  The great customer service and friendly interaction is still there, but it's a different experience.

Disneyland, in a general sense, is a commuter destination.  Sure, families will fly in from all over to visit Southern California, but for the most part, it's somewhere you go when you're bored and want to hang out with friends or family.  And since Southern California's population is around 24 million, they've gotta go somewhere to enjoy themselves.  Walt Disney World, in a broad sense, is a destination city.  Central Florida is one-eighth of the population of Southern California, so you're not going to get as many locals there than in Disneyland.  So when you bring in all sorts of outside people to Disney World, you get an amalgam of tourists from all walks of life to experience it.  Bring in people from Southern California to Disneyland, you get pretty much a lot of the same kind of people: Californians...

To Be Continued.

Why We Need Journey Into Imagination

In the wake of the massive changes being done around the Disney Parks, it is hard to ignore the massive outcry against these changes.  And in some circles, people welcome them with open arms.  Any die hard Disney fan knows that removing or even refurbishing an attraction is sacrilege, and changing it to fit the mold of a profitable Disney property is even more aggravating.  To the rest of the population who isn't obsessed with Disney Parks, they see it as something new and exciting to experience with their families, so they can keep up the family tradition with that annual trip to Disney World.

Except this.  No one is looking forward to this.

For better or worse, these changes will continue to exist.  Walt said it himself, "Disneyland will never be completed.  It will continue to grow as long as there is imagination left in the world."  So the core belief of Disney Parks is something we all don't want to see.  It's a contradictory nature, as these attractions are part of our identity, part of our lives, yet in order to believe in the concept of the Disney parks, we have to accept that they will always be changing.  Now we get into a quantity v. quality issue, where there isn't much thought put into decisions in terms of sustainability, but wholly based on profits and figures, so to speak.

Not pictured: Eisner dancing on Disney's grave.

With the closure and refurbishment of many classic attractions in the past 15 years, we catch a glimpse into the way EPCOT works.  It was the awkward but very bright and intelligent theme park that struggled, but impacted all of us on a whole other level.  Having a theme relating to technology is tricky, as technology advances faster than Imagineers can dream up new dreams.  Rides become outdated, the crowds dwindle, and the execs see that something needs to happen to keep the families spending money.  So you jazz it up, and don't look back at anyone who might be alienated by these decisions.  Soarin' has about as much to do with the Land as, well, the The Caballeros has to do with Mexico.

I suppose Mexico is close enough to South America.

At a certain point, Disney decides to take the ride in a new direction, and runs with it, the wrong way.  The need to update certain attractions makes sense: CommuniCore is technologically outdated, The Universe Of Energy & Symbiosis are very dry and heavy-handed (but still totally and utterly AMAZING), and World Of Motion was... I don't know, were there too many omni-mover attractions so they wanted to jazz it up with a fast thrill ride?  Maybe.  All you had was Body Wars and Maelstrom for a thrill, and they weren't even that thrilling.  Just jerky.

I blame this ride for my achy back.

Journey Into Imagination is a curious little attraction.  Delayed opening, yet it gave us Figment as a mascot for the park.  Since they initially tried to shy away from incorporating established characters from the Disney echelon, it was unique to see a separation of Disney characters.  If you wanted Mickey, Minnie, Pluto, Goofy, and the like, you had to go to Magic Kingdom.  If you wanted to drink around the world and hang out with the elderly, you went to EPCOT Center.

Turning World Showcase into a joke, one drink at a time.

Journey Into Imagination transcended all the rides at EPCOT Center, as it presented us with an abstract idea: imagination.  All other rides were based upon research and actual, physical things pertaining to their corresponding theme.  Topics of transportation, energy, communication, agriculture, and the colonization of new frontiers were more or less tangible and concrete ideas; they had a basis in reality.  Journey Into Imagination dealt with a topic that is very abstract, and putting those abstract ideas into a ride was certainly a challenge.

But they did it.  They succeeded.

When you recall the original attraction, it played out very nicely: setting you up with the Dreamfinder touching on several aspects of imagination, and then experiencing them in various sections of the ride.  There was no forced conflict or dilemma; it simply just explored imagination.  Of course, when something works at Disney, it means it needs to go through a change after fifteen years.  And its subsequent incarnations are nothing more than a downward shame spiral.  Instead of feeling inspired, you feel like you're stuck with a stuffy imagination professor and an overbearing purple dragon.  And the latter version does not make you feel inspired.  Just confused.

Why is he such a dick to Figment?

Since most attractions are getting face-lifts, persistent rumors emerge about Journey Into Imagination.  We've all heard them, so I won't venture down that avenue.  But in all our wishful thinking, we want to see a return to the original Journey Into Imagination.  Not only to fulfill and satisfy our own needs and desires of restoring a piece of our childhoods, but for a greater good.
  Journey Into Imagination, simply put, is timeless.  When you revisit it, there's nothing dated or old about it.  The ideas it presents are universal, therefor does not have a time limit on its ideas.  When you look at how rapidly technology and ideas change, imagination does not, and something from 30 years ago still feels as fresh and exciting.

Seeing your picture on the screen is still amazing.

The idea of refurbishing or re-purposing an attraction at Disney is, we all know, very costly and time-consuming.  It's got to be a hit, and they are not taking any chances.  Curiously, the thought of reinstating Journey Into Imagination isn't all too far-fetched in certain circumstances when you analyze certain evidence.  There has been an entire D23 exhibit based on recreating the ride through various forms of media, which looks like there is a consistent interest in the original attraction.  To a lesser extent, there was a campaign to bring back Figment in the second iteration of the ride, but we got a less than equitable compromise: more Figment in a ride that shouldn't have existed in the first place.

Stop teasing us.

"I don't think Figment is going anywhere any time soon, I promise." -Bob Iger

Hearing is not believing, obviously, as was the case with the Phineas & Ferb rumor circulating around, but it is known that the higher-ups at Disney know Figment is popular, and people young and old like him (we hope).  And let's not forget the resurrection of Captain EO and The Enchanted Tiki Room.  Granted, the former was due large in part to the public's overwhelming demand for Michael Jackson after his death, and it didn't take Disney too long (13 years or so) to realize that the latter was utterly awful and should never have been (or due to a fire, depending on who you ask).

Please let Disney not change it by inserting more characters from Aladdin and/or Lion King

So Disney has the capacity and the intentions of bringing back old rides that they deem popular enough to satisfy the masses, they've been hinting at it, and all signs seem to say, "We can bring back Journey Into Imagination," but I won't be holding my breath until then.  So make it snappy.

The Spirit Of Norway

"I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened."

Maybe that's being a little too dramatic.  Disney Parks Blog made it abundantly clear what is happening to our beloved Maelstrom.  And I, for one... am not shocked.  At all.  Disney has a penchant for this sort of thing.

Case, and motherfuckin' point.

This is to say that the closure of Maelstrom isn't a travesty.  It is.  I've seen the Internet implode upon itself with the uproar of protest.  Maybe not implode, but the voices are being heard.  The closure of Maelstrom will signal the end of the original rides that have not been changed since their opening (Impressions De France being a notable exception).  A little piece of semi-original EPCOT Center will be removed from our collective consciousness forever.  We will no longer have the pleasure of encountering trolls, semi-terrifying polar bears, and the piece de resistance, this:

Because when I think of Norway, I think of cruise directors.

And some other gems that the ride offers, like the smell of "Disney Water," which is one of my favorite things about Walt Disney World, no joke.  The biggest loss, of course, is the short film, "The Spirit Of Norway."  A wonderful film that captures Norway as it existed in 1988, and strangely does not look dated some 25+ years later.  With all the broken hearts over the loss of a beloved attraction, there is a strange thing occurring on forums other than Tumblr.  For instance, in the comments section of Disney Parks Blog, the news is met with arms wide open (although the idea of Disney censoring unfavorable comments from irate fans could be plausible, but I don't care much for that facet of thinking).  There are people out there who genuinely favor a Frozen-themed attraction at EPCOT.  I can't align myself with agreeing with them, but it does shed some light on a few things.

Disney knows what the people want.  They know what the families want.  Families love Frozen.  Naturally there is a correlation there and Disney is making the most out of it.  As mentioned prior, we are but a small minority among the Disney echelon.  A lot of people out there who frequent the parks are happy to see an update to Maelstrom.  And as much as we despise the idea of dumping Disney properties in the middle of a theme park that was originally intended to bridge the gap between cultures, it is an ugly truth that we must live with.  Like, well, The Seas With Nemo.

Any way you look at it, Maelstrom was the first attempt at bringing in a "thrill" ride to EPCOT Center after the inauguration of Michael Eisner in the mid-1980's.  So it doesn't quite fit into the mold of EPCOT's original mission.  When you dissect the ride, it's a little jilted.  You get a gentle boat ride with a glimpse into the life of seafaring explorers fearless of no body of water (or Vikings), a part of Norwegian history, but then you get a spell cast upon you by trolls (the obligatory Disney spin to create conflict within a situation that does not warrant such), and then you get to see polar bears (debatable whether you can find them on mainland Norway, as opposed to Svalbard), then to the base of an offshore drilling platform (part of Norway's heritage when it comes to paying the bills) and then into a quiet coastal town where you disembark from your Oseberg ship.

The true spirit of Norway.  Don't let the trolls fool you.

The inclusion of the trolls doesn't fit into the feel of the ride in the context of "original EPCOT," although if you take it out, then you're left with just a gentle stroll down various fjords and into the North Sea.  And that can't be too exciting, unless you play up the forces of nature to invoke some sort of response.  In that case you'd just be on the Norwegian version of El Rio Del Tiempo.  But the ride itself tries to add a bit of excitement to an otherwise benign ride, and to the execs of the Disney Corporation in the 80's, when you had a theme park that wasn't as profitable as the Magic Kingdom, you need something to bring the families in so they don't go Sea World.

Frozen is here to stay, whether we like it or not.  We've heard the song to no end, and you can guarantee that you'll be hearing some permutation of that song in one way, shape, or form in the ride.  Yes, it's a passing fad, and might suffer the same fate as The Seas With Nemo.  There is a force more powerful than all of us, and as much as we want Maelstrom to stay and not change, it is going to.  I know it sounds hopelessly pessimistic, but I've come to terms with the direction EPCOT is headed in.  They've broken my heart many, many times.  It's borderline an abusive relationship, with all that I give them (money & years of dedication) and in return they take the things I love away from me.  All one can do is remember it, take lots of pictures before it's refurbished, and constantly watch the Spirit Of Norway film, because it is amazing.  And shot in glorious 70mm by Paul Gerber, of Symbiosis and The Seas fame.

So marks the end of an era.  I am saddened by this news.  I'm not shocked, but still saddened.  I can see why this upsets people.  Just let me know it's last date of operation so I can ride it one last time, see the film one more time, and drop a single rose on its doorstep, in memory of another fallen ride at Walt Disney's EPCOT Center.

That'll do, rose.  That'll do.

Disney News Magazine 1988 (Winter)