"The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Twitted by Disneyopolis

Jim Hill — Wed, 27 May 2009 06:07:25 GMT

PingBack from http://real-url.org/twitted.php?id=1932942393

re: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Jim Hill — Wed, 27 May 2009 06:26:03 GMT

Yes sir - and, this one is at a reasonable initial cost for the book (as opposed to the intial cost for the Disneyland version) and is about 50 times better than the Dland entry into the series!

Story added

Jim Hill — Wed, 27 May 2009 07:36:14 GMT

Your story was featured in DisMarks! Here is the link to vote it up and promote it: http://dismarks.com/DisneyWorld/Review_of_The_Art_of_Walt_Disney_World_Resort

re: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Jim Hill — Wed, 27 May 2009 11:44:29 GMT

Wow this book looks great. But go easy on Mary Blair, Jim! She's a Disney Legend!

re: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Jim Hill — Wed, 27 May 2009 15:26:57 GMT

I've been thinking for some time that the UK area of Epcot needs a dark ride, a la Norway's Maelstrom. A Christmas Carol dark ride would be a GREAT idea! Spooky yet uplifting. Why oh why was this idea thrown out?

Another idea for a ride would be one based on the Beatles in some way. Maybe Pepperland or Yellow Submarine. That would be extremely cool.

At any rate, Disney needs to invest money in more dark rides. There aren't nearly enough in the park IMO.

re: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Jim Hill — Wed, 27 May 2009 16:22:12 GMT

I believe that Collin Campbell art is an element of Royce Mathew's complaint against the POTC films (see disneylawsuit.com).

Disney used that same art in Jason Surrell's POTC Making Of book (with a misleading caption) as evidence that "pirates who turn to skelletons in moonlight" was always part of the POTC ride conception. Mathew makes a case that the idea was stolen from his "supernatural pirate movie" and that Disney's use of the image in the POTC book is part of a conspiracy to defraud him.

If Disney is now republishing that image in a new book with proper attribution (ie proving it was made long after the POTC ride) then it may be seen as tacit admission of guilt.

re: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Jim Hill — Wed, 27 May 2009 17:30:04 GMT

Not sure when the Collin Campbell artwork was made.....but Jim is asserting that it was created as a Treasure Island idea for WDW which would have predated the POTC films.

I wish they would turn Discovery Island into a pirate adventure island...build Tortuga and everything. A couple of the resorts have a pirate excursion activity (for a price of course)...but playing pirate at the Beach Club would be nothing compared to going to an actual island to run around and explore......dock the Black Pearl out there too....would be sweet.

http://www.raymation.net

re: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Jim Hill — Wed, 27 May 2009 18:01:31 GMT

Okie dokie - Imagineering archives have barely been tippled for what we have been allowed to see. There are concepts and artwork dating back to the 50's that prety much cover every idea that has been presented and/or thought of by anyone or everyone. Just because a piece of art is given clearance to be published does not make it a "tacit admission of guilt."

Great minds think alike. I know many creative themed entertainment designers who come up with a concept only to see it suddenly arise at a Disney park a few years later...but never had they shown the idea to Disney. Or, anyone in Disney, for that fact.

The point is, Disney has (or had) the BEST creative talents in their folds to design and envision immersive adventures and attractions for them. And, there are always people looking to hit into Disney's deep financial pockets and claim the ideas were theirs and stolen in order to get some form of compensation they feel they deserve.

Truth is, put creative people into gear and a lot of them will independently come up with the same idea in whatever location they happen to be sitting in. The Disney Studios has the ability to put money behind their film ideas or the theme park installs where a lot of people just don't. There is no way to prove intellectual property ownership in that situation. And, it is why Disney has a direct and straight forward "no acceptance of any outside material" clause. It is also why that, whenever a Disney Studio member or Theme Park Cast Member submits an idea to the studio or Imagineering, they sign a waiver releasing all rights of that concept to the company without compensation as they are a working member of that company.

In fact, the various competitions held for WDI through college design and architectural programs also have a similar waiver in that the ideas presented in the competition become the property of Disney and the original owner has no further hold upon their creations.

Basically, you know going into the game you are going to have your creative child taken from you and very probably get nothing in return. If you are feeling strong enough that it is an idea that Disney should pursue...especially as a member of the company...then, be happy that your idea was submitted and worked upon. That's the Disney mindset and way the corporation is structured. Fair or not, that is the way the inner working game is played.

Back to artwork - whatever you see you can bet was created by Disney and not in any form of intellectual robbery or justification to prove innocence of said intellectual robbery. The WDI archives are chock full of concepts that a lot of people would claim were their own but aren't. The concepts are the work of Imagineers (in the case of WDI) who spent hours and months (or longer) on various team members or independently coming up with ideas to pitch in order to plus and improve the Disney Parks.

Walt even said (and, I'm paraphrasing the quote from memory) - "the only name that goes on the product is Disney. There's a lot of people who make that name happen. But, when the public sees one of our films or comes through our Park gate, the only name they know is Disney."

And, that's the way it is still working today.

re: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Jim Hill — Thu, 28 May 2009 06:17:46 GMT

I just purchased this book at Amazon for $90. How much do they cost at the parks? Did I pay too much? Thank you for the heads up Jim. I would love to see more articles dealing with the parks and rides.

re: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Jim Hill — Thu, 28 May 2009 16:55:52 GMT

Jazzmoe - you should have tried calling the Parks first before ordering it on Amazon. If you noticed when you placed your order, the book did not come from Amazon directly, but from a third party which can always overcharge you. I almost ordered it from Amazon and noticed this and will wait until July when we're planning our trip to WDW.

re: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Jim Hill — Thu, 28 May 2009 18:54:06 GMT

The book is $50 in The Art Of Disney and bookstores at the theme parks and Downtown Disney.

re: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Jim Hill — Thu, 28 May 2009 20:16:08 GMT

Jazzmoe,

Don't feel bad; with what DelivEARs would have charged for handing, ostage, insurance etc, etc ...

you would have ended paying the same, more or less!

re: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of your way for

Jim Hill — Thu, 28 May 2009 23:26:44 GMT

Thank you all for the responses. Im not planning a trip for awhile so $90 doesn't seem all that bad.

Social comments and analytics for this post

Jim Hill — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:55:07 GMT

This post was mentioned on Twitter by Disneyopolis: "The Art of the Walt Disney World Resort" is worth going out of ... http://bit.ly/jlGmx