EPCOT Project Gemini?

[the101dalmation]

Has Project Gemini been aborted?

A few years ago, the WD Co. announced that it was completely refurbishing Epcot to re-inject the excitement the park had when it first opened. The massive project was code-named Project Gemini (since Epcot comprises two parks); the refurb would culminate in a grand reopening in 2006. Plans included adding Soarin', an undisclosed attraction, and Time Racers. We know that Soarin' is opening soon, and the "undisclosed attraction" was probably Mission: Space. Also, Time Racers has been shelved--which is good, because it was probably going to replace SE.

Nevertheless, Eisner was committed to pouring millions into Epcot to ensure its success. Yes, he was actually going to spend a lot of money on quality! But has Project Gemini been abandoned? The park does need an extensive update (I brought this up on my thread "What Would You Like to See at Epcot?"); but how far was the company planning to go? Furthermore, many areas at Epcot are closed for refurb, such as the information area at the end of SE; is the 2006 grand reopening still planned?

Any information would be greatly appreciated.

P.S. Simply removing the awful arm and airing commercials with Mickey on top SE again would pique interest in the park. Hey, it worked before! Considering the conversations I've had with people, Epcot still has a reputation as a "very cool" park for older people. WDW needs to focus on that again, and stop trying to cheapen it with lame attempts at "Magic" (the arm, the Berlin-wall like photo area in front SE). The park has a unique magic on its own.

[LeslieM]

the Berlin-wall like photo area in front SE

That's exactly the feeling I get at the Leave a Legacy area - well put !

[leeharrell]

Project Gemini, as a whole, is dead.

Instead of a major overhaul of the park, look for smaller, more focused renovations.

[Iceman]

Project Gemini, as a whole, is dead.

Instead of a major overhaul of the park, look for smaller, more focused renovations.

Exactly right. Make no mistake--they're still investing millions (actually, hundreds of millions) in EPCOT. Like so many companies, though, it's hard to get single, huge outlays of cash approved. This approach brings most of what Gemini had planned, just in a more phasd approach.

[the101dalmation]

I prefer the phase-in approach. If Disney tried doing it all at once, budgets would have to get cut somewhere (even in Disney, money doesn't grow on trees), and Epcot might turn into a Floridian DCA.

Incidentally, I'm also glad that Project Gemini is . Some of the plans, such as splitting Epcot into two parks, would have destroyed the only park of its kind.

[Mark Goldhaber]

Project Gemini, as a whole, is dead.

Instead of a major overhaul of the park, look for smaller, more focused renovations.

Beat me to it. Thanks, Lee. Good to see you here again.

Side note: As will be noted in Monday's WDW Update,

…Despite rumors to the contrary, Imagineering is still looking at a possible renovation/refurbishment/rehabilitation of Spaceship Earth.

[JEFFJAGUAR]

Of what possible interest in Florida would there be for Soaring over California? What about a soaring over Florida? or perhaps a Soaring over America.

[Mark Goldhaber]

Soaring over America

Coming in 2006 or 2007.

[the101dalmation]

Incidentally, I'm also glad that Project Gemini is

Why did the word "abor-ed" get edited out? It was obviously referring to a plan of action.

As for the SE refurb, it desperately needs one. But SE has one of Epcot's last remaining ORIGINAL shows, and it needs to stay there for historical value... after all, imagine the chaos if Imagineering changed all the classic attractions at the Magic Kingdom to thrill rides: "Hang on to your hats, 'cause this here's the bumpiest, wettest coaster in the jungles of Africa, Asia, and South America!" Each park needs to retain classics.

...But I wouldn't mind seeing a cutting-edge coaster in Epcot, as long as it weren't in or around SE.

[Andrew]

No idea. The word appears in your first post in this thread and is obviously not on the system's censorlist. It's always a good idea to preview your posts before submitting them.

[Crispy]

I don't think it is so much that SE needs to be preserved for "historical" sake, but because it is the remaining attraction in Epcot of that type. That is, an omnimover/audioanimatronic based attraction. That used to be the key type of attraction at Epcot.... Spaceship Earth, World of Motion, Journey into Imagination, and Horizons. Spaceship Earth is the only of that type left.

Cris

[the101dalmation]

You're right, Crispy; I thought the same thing after I posted the "Historical Value" note. Epcot needs to revive the Omnimover/AA-style attractions. It is true that when Epcot first opened, too many attractions were based on this system; and as a result, many attractions seemed to mimic one another in some way. Now Epcot has one, and the ride system is new again. WDI needs to focus on the system's possibilities instead of on thrilling everyone that walks through the gate.

[Crispy]

the101dalmation, I think you are right. It once seemed all of Future World was based on the omni-mover/animatronic concept, and because of that all the attractions seemed to mimic one another. Now, Spaceship Earth is the lone example left of that type of Attraction in Epcot. I too think there is the need for that sort of attraction to make a return. A type of slow-moving attraction that tells a story and moves you. One that can appeal to everyone. However, I am pessimistic about the development of these type of attractions being developed in the future for a few reasons.

1) Marketability. Disney seems to be looking for attractions they can market that will be a "draw" to get guests to the park. These tend to be things like Mission Space, or Expedition Everest.

2) The WOW factor. It seems that recent Disney attractions (many of which I enjoy) rely on a tactile experience or on assaulting the senses. This may be in the terms of thrill rides, or in the form of the effects in Honey I Shrunk the Audience, or A Bug's Life. There seems to be less focus on Pirates or Haunted Mansion type of attractions. That is, environment/atmosphere based attractions that draw you in.

2) Cost. Anmatronic attractions are expensive. One of my all time favorite attractions is "The American Adventure" in Epcot. Golden Dreams at DCA was meant to be an American Adventure type of attraction, except telling the story of Californian history instead of American history. Golden Dreams was reduced to a movie based attraction. Pretty sad when you consider that Epcot began construction in 1979 and Disney is unable to duplicate attraction on the same par as those. (animatronic show based attractions like American Adventure, Carousel of Progress, Country Bears, and Cranium command seem to be on their way out too, but that's a different topic)

3) Perhaps the Animatronic based attraction is a lost artform. I've wondered this with the new Imagination ride at Epcot. You would think Disney would be able to top what they did in 1982. Maybe that type of storytelling and character based attraction is something that current Imaginerring staff are not trained to handle. I've often wondered how many current Imagineers would be able to dream up something like Horizons or Spaceship Earth. How many currently in Imagineering have worked on animatronic/atmospheric based attraction in the past? Although animatronics have been used in fairly recent Disney attractions, I would day the last slowmoving animatronic based attraction produced was The Great Movie Ride which opened in 88.(rumors have abound for many years of plans for its demise). I will add that some of the attrractions developed for Disney Seas do give me hope, however.

Well, that's my bit of Disney philosophy. Maybe things will change in the future. Until then, besure to keep the turnstyles moving at Spaceship Earth!

Cris

[USofA]

just to throw out a thought. The omnimover attractions all have "been there, done that" feel to it. Disney has been building them for almost 40 years. The general public (extreme Disney fans excepted) are wanting something new and different.

Don't believe me, look at what attractions the guest line up for. This is most ovbious at WDW where there are many more first time guests in the crowds. They go straight for Test Track and Mission Space, the MK Mountains, etc. The first priority of guest (and thus the most desired) rides are the thrill rides. Yes, they will still ride them if time allows, but they are not a priority to guests.

[the101dalmation]

You're right. The Omnimover/AA systems have been around a long time, and they are outdated. But my point is that instead of using new technology to complement the older, current Disney management simply throws out the old and replaces it with the new. Now the parks are full of stage shows and thrill rides. Some, such as those in WDW are quite good; others, especially those in DCA, are not.

What WDI should do is combine the older, proven ride system with cutting-edge special effects and a 3D immersive environment. Consider how spectacular (yes, I know that's a superlative for a ride) Journey Into Imagination could have been if Imagineers would have retained the original ride's plot and AAs but added a 3D element similar to IOA's Spiderman. Imagine ducking as Mr. Dreamfinder and Figment opened cans of paint in the Art sequence, or screaming as Figment's nightmares swirled around and chased you. Instead, we got the pathetic Journey Into YOUR Imagination and the almost-as-lame Journey...with Figment. The Imagination Institute already seems outdated.

Since Project Gemini , with its ridiculously short deadline, has been abandoned, WDI should take their time to fully develop each attraction that they add or refurbish in Epcot. Disney was once the theme park leader; now they follow in others' footsteps. Mission: Space is impressive, but centrifuges have existed for a while. Nothing like Pirates of the Caribbean existed when Walt "imagineered" it. It's time for Disney to be at the forefront of ride design again.

[DISNEYloon]

Of what possible interest in Florida would there be for Soaring over California? What about a soaring over Florida? or perhaps a Soaring over America.

Soarin' over America would be a great idea.

Having been on Soarin' over California serveral times........it's AMAZING!
I had no idea what to expect the first time, and MAN, it's just......WOW!

[Disney Vault]

They could just call it Soarin' and leave off the California park. It has just so many different scense so it could feel like you are going all over the country.

[Mark Goldhaber]

They could just call it Soarin' and leave off the California park. It has just so many different scense so it could feel like you are going all over the country.

Um, that's what they're doing. Also, that way they don't have to change the name of the attraction when they change the film in 2006/7.

[the101dalmation]

To Mark:



Thanks for the laugh.

[Iceman]

Some, such as those in WDW are quite good; others, especially those in DCA, are not

This is off-topic, but I feel the need to defend the oft-beleagured DCA. Do you think the Aladdin show and California Screamin' are not great attractions? Do the Tower of Terror and Grizzly River Rapids not fit your definition of thrill rides that people line up for?

WDW has had its share of duds (I'm not saying that's necessarily all bad--they have to take risks, some of which won't pan out in the end), but DCA is not the unadulterated failure many paint it out to be.

[the101dalmation]

Those rides in DCA are quite impressive, but the park as a whole lacks the high-quality, imaginative edge that the older parks have.

I know that some people aren't going to agree with me, but I think that the best solution for DCA would be to focus on thrill rides. Disneyland already has classic attractions; DCA should focus on the new (which they have done with California Screamin' and Grizzly River). But three good attractions (including ToT) in an entire park don't make it an excellent park; and it certainly isn't traditional Disney-quality! "Aladdin" is an exception; as the only good show in DCA, it deserves recognition. Overall, however, DCA is currently a half-a-day, half-hearted attempt at a theme park.

I'm not as pessimistic as I sound, though; I believe that DCA has kernels that, if properly cultured (i.e. financed), can make it into a world-class park. I really don't hate it; I just don't think it measures up to anything else in the U.S. Of course, it far surpasses Disney Studios Paris!

Anyway, my point is that if Disney continues to replace older attractions with copycat thrill rides (California Screamin' is not a unique concept in roller coasters) and mediocre shows (no matter how enjoyable it is, "Aladdin" is not "Beauty and the Beast"), Epcot and other exceptional parks will become cold, just like DCA is.

[Disney Vault]

DCA doesnt just need thrills, it needs more themes. They need to make it looks like effort was put into the rides.

[Mark Goldhaber]

To Mark:



Thanks for the laugh.

What laugh? They will be changing the film in 2006/7 to a "Soarin' Over America" version. Since the attraction name will be Soarin', there's no need for new signage when it happens.

[Crispy]

the101dalmation, I agree with what you said about using the same "format" and using new technology. The ideas you mentioned for Journey into Imagination is something like I expected when they closed the attraction for rehab. I certainly didn't expect them to get ride of the animatronics. The current Imagination simply doesn't have heart like the previous attraction... and most importantly atmosphere or an emmersive environment. I don't think the animatronic themed attraqctions are "old hat." What are the staples at Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom? ... Pirates, Mansion, Small World. And with new technology those type of attractions can be made even more amazing. For example, I was blown away by Pirates at Disneyland Paris. And those sword fighting pirates are simply amazing. But the technology is nothing without the imagination. And keep in mind that when Mansion opened in 69, the effects it used were those used by magicians for hundred of years, and they are still impressive today.

Also, I don't think an attraction has to necessarily be technologically advanced to be impressive. I especially enjoy Small World at the Magic Kingdom. No, it doesn't have anything technologically in it that makes me go "wow," but it moves me and takes me to another place. I get off with a smile on my face. In a way, I always viewed the previous Imagination ride as "Epcot's Small World." I would very much like to see those type of attractions stay around.

Cris

[MikeScopa]

Um, that's what they're doing. Also, that way they don't have to change the name of the attraction when they change the film in 2006/7.

It will be interesting to see if Dave Smith's comment about the film is true.

Dave was heard to say very strongly that the film will be "Soarin' Over America."

We'll see.

Mike