Thoughts on EPCOT's Future

I have a lot of thoughts regarding EPCOT and the direction that Disney is taking the park. While I won't share all of them in this post, there are three aspects of the park's update that bother me most.

1) Disney's lack of regard for sightlines. 

The Guardians Warehouse, as seen from across World Showcase Lagoon, January 2019

The new Guardians show building and the Harmonious infrastructure will stain the park's atmosphere for years to come, and it's such a shame. When EPCOT Center opened in 1982, the pavillions that housed attractions were designed to be seen from all angles throughout the park. They were wonderous and beautiful, and as I'm sure most of you know were meant to evoke the feeling of the World's Fairs of old. It's a shame that Disney was more interested in saving money than in continuing the tradition of the original EPCOT Center Imagineers when planning for the park's future.

The HARMonious barges on World Showcase Lagoon, courtesy of Blog Mickey.

2) The division of Future World into 3 "neighborhoods." Part of EPCOT's beauty was it's simplicity. While it's true that the original EPCOT Center Imagineers divided Future World by topic (Hard Sciences in FW East, and Soft Sciences in FW West), this division was subtle. It was implied by 1) the topics found on each side of the land and 2) the aesthetics that made up each side of the land. FW East was rigid--planters and walkways were angular and designed in straight lines. The walkways and planters of FW West, on the other hand, were curved and bordered by water features.

Not only do EPCOT's new "neighborhoods" have silly names, they needlessly complicate the park.

The new EPCOT "neighborhoods" feel artificial. While the subtle differences between East and West will remain, nothing is being added or changed to actually differentiate the "new" lands. Imagineering is simply drawing a line on a map and declaring that the neighborhoods exist. In other words, there is no reason--or Story--for the change from FW to Worlds Celebration, Discovery, and Nature other than to do away with the "Future World" name (and the "future" theme it implies) and to claim that the park is "new." Given that fact, a much better solution would have been to rename Future World, "Discovery World." This would maintain the park's simplicity while simultaneously doing away with the expectation that guests will experience "the future" when visiting EPCOT.


3) The demolition of Innoventions West. I am perfectly willing to accept that Epcot was/is in dire need of an aesthetic makeover. I'm even willing to entertain the argument that the Communicore/Innoventions buildings looked dated and that the center of Epcot needed drastic change. What I don't understand is why Imagineering settled on destroying the symmetry of the park; demolishing Innoventions West while leaving Innoventions East largely unchanged and the same shape.

Innoventions: Before and After, shared by @bioreconstruct on Twitter

If Imagineering believed that the old Communicore buildings had no place in the new EPCOT, then they should have either 1) demolished both Innoventions West and Innoventions East, or 2) kept the Northern sections of the Communicore buildings (closest to Spaceship Earth) and demolished the two Southern portions (formerly Fountainview, Club Cool, and MouseGear--now Creations Shop). By doing away with what I'll call, "Innoventions South," EPCOT's symmetry would have remained, and the park would have been better for it.