Brazil World Showcase Pavilion? (Rumor)

[rhino4evr]

@Marni1971 has said the Christ the Redeemer statue has been cut.


There are religious symbols all over world showcase...

Not a Giant Christ though...

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Maybe? Maybe not? I’ll believe it when I see it open.

But if it is built and it doesn’t have a Christ the Redeemer Statue then what will I drunkenly exclaim to when the smallest issue happens?

 

[Nick]

Not a Giant Christ though...

It’s also the most recognizable landmark of Brazil. Building Brazil without it would sort of be like building France without the Eiffel Tower.

Now as I said, current rumor is the statue not happening, though.

 

[Teebin]

Disney owns the film Rio now doesn’t it? Or has this already been hashed over...

 

[Nick]

Just to remind everyone, the rumored location of the pavilion would be in between Italy and Germany. It has been home to Disney Performing Arts for quite awhile.

Disney owns the film Rio now doesn’t it? Or has this already been hashed over...

Yes, they own it now through owning BlueSky. Rio isn’t really a strong brand though.

 

[Brian G.]

I understand the cut, but I don't know what else really represents Brazil like that statue. Maybe that Opera House? IDK...

If they can't do it, maybe they should move on to another safe play and go to another country.

 

[Nick]

I understand the cut, but I don't know what else really represents Brazil like that statue. Maybe that Opera House? IDK...

If they can't do it, maybe they should move on to another safe play and go to another country.

India and Spain have been lined up as well as potential additions after Brazil, but Disney wants Brazil mostly because they have corporate sponsors on board with the project (read: corporate, not government).

 

[Andysol]

I wonder if they are still planning on turning the Mexico ride into Coco? If so, the animatronic Three Caballeros could end up in the Brazil pavilion in some form.

Lol. Three Caballeros has always cracked me up. They take a Mexican and a Brazilian bird and Donald and force the Brazilian one to speak Spanish. No doubt it was a room full of writers in the 40s who said “they speak Spanish everywhere down there” Caballeros isn’t even a word in Brazil.

I would still be shocked if Disney put a giant religious symbol in any of their parks...

Exactly. Could you imagine if they told the story of Jesus’ birth as the Messiah and built an entire festival around it? That’d be crazy, right?

As @Nick said, it would be like building France without the Eiffel Tower. If they nix the Christ the Redeemer statue that would be a major black mark for me.

 

[Brian G.]

Lol. Three Caballeros has always cracked me up. They take a Mexican and a Brazilian bird and Donald and force the Brazilian one to speak Spanish. No doubt it was a room full of writers in the 40s who said “they speak Spanish everywhere down there” Caballeros isn’t even a word in Brazil.

Exactly. Could you imagine if they told the story of Jesus’ birth as the Messiah and built an entire festival around it? That’d be crazy, right?

As @Nick said, it would be like building France without the Eiffel Tower. If they nix the Christ the Redeemer statue that would be a major black mark for me.

I think the difference is that a statue can't be "skipped". You can skip the Processional. I'm guessing Disney felt the statue was a bit too on the nose in terms of religious symbolism.

 

[Nick]

I think the difference is that a statue can't be "skipped". You can skip the Processional. I'm guessing Disney felt the statue was a bit too on the nose in terms of religious symbolism.

The problem is the statue is a real thing that exists in Brazil and the biggest tourist attraction. These are the problems you run into when dealing with real world locations.

For those that haven’t seen it (it’s on page 1 of this thread), this was the original proposal for the pavilion. Concept art was leaked in 2014.

 

[fryoj]

Without the statue, they better put a big "Brazil" sign up or most people will not know what it is. Theres really no other recognized landmarks for the country.

 

[Brian G.]

The problem is the statue is a real thing that exists in Brazil and the biggest tourist attraction. These are the problems you run into when dealing with real world locations.

For those that haven’t seen it (it’s on page 1 of this thread), this was the original proposal for the pavilion. Concept art was leaked in 2014.
View attachment 9752

I get that.... and am not arguing that.... I don't understand your point here?

 

[Nick]

I get that.... and am not arguing that.... I don't understand your point here?

I mean, I was mostly agreeing with you.

 

[Andysol]

I'm guessing Disney felt the statue was a bit too on the nose in terms of religious symbolism.

Which, if true, is freakin’ ridiculous and spineless. And what’s worse would be anyone who would complain. Are we supposed to pretend that entire cultures and societies weren’t formed on religions? If they went with an India pavilion instead, are they not going to have any statue of Ganesha? Should we tear the Buddha statue down in China? Or is it exclusive to Christianity.

Heaven forbid someone get offended and need a safe space because they wouldn’t know how to react. It’s a flippin’ statue. If it ain’t your god, it’s just a cool piece of art and a window to a religion that helped define that particular country. Much like every other religious temple out there that I visit (going to a Buddhist one today, in fact).

 

[Brian G.]

I mean, I was mostly agreeing with you.

Ah, sorry!

Which, if true, is freakin’ ridiculous and spineless. And what’s worse would be anyone who would complain. Are we supposed to pretend that entire cultures and societies weren’t formed on religions? If they went with an India pavilion instead, are they not going to have any statue of Ganesha? Should we tear the Buddha statue down in China? Or is it exclusive to Christianity.

Heaven forbid someone get offended and need a safe space because they wouldn’t know how to react. It’s a flippin’ statue. If it ain’t your god, it’s just a cool piece of art and a window to a religion that helped define that particular country. Much like every other religious temple out there that I visit (going to a Buddhist one today, in fact).

Maybe the statue's age plays a part? We're not talking about something that was built in the 1500s and inspired the growth and culture of the city. The Redeemer isn't even 100 years old yet. To your point about other countries/religions, other than the small area of Buddha statues to buy in China (in which the religious aspect is a bit downplayed), there isn't anything regarding religious deities in the other countries (i.e. Buddha, Muhammad, etc.). They have churches, temples, and religious symbolism - but not anything on their respected main deity. I'm guessing it could cause a "Why Jesus, and not ours?" with others.

IDK, honestly, It's a weird situation - which is why I think they should avoid building it because both sides have good reasons.

 

[Andysol]

IDK, honestly, It's a weird situation - which is why I think they should avoid building it because both sides have good reasons.

You bring you good points on their reasoning, but I disagree here. I don’t think both sides have good reasons. Only one side. That stuff is important to the people of those countries; and albeit challenging, we shouldn’t view it through our American lenses.

There really isn’t anything for Muhammad or Judaism for that matter. At least one smaller Hindu statue in an India pavilion should be a must as well. Buddhism and Christianity are the two that really play into a singular specific symbol. And I would love a Buddha statue in either China or Japan. Truthfully, that should happen anyways- Brazil pavilion or not. I’m hoping it’s because they were built decades ago that one wasn’t included.

There really isn’t 2 right sides here. One mindset needs to get over their biases (which ironically is from both sides- Christians who would be offended at a Buddha or atheist/agnostics/non Christian religions offended by a Christ the Redeemer).

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Or, hear me out, Disney’s cheap and uninspired now for anything that’s not spearheaded by a Brand or approved by the Board of Directors?

 

[belloq87]

@Marni1971 is also reporting that the (currently shelved) attraction for the pavilion would have been IP-based.

I'm suddenly feeling less annoyed about the pavilion not including an attraction. Given the lack of options, that would lead me to believe it may have indeed been themed to RIO, and I don't want that anywhere near Epcot.

 

[Nick]

@Marni1971 is also reporting that the (currently shelved) attraction for the pavilion would have been IP-based.

I'm suddenly feeling less annoyed about the pavilion not including an attraction. Given the lack of options, that would lead me to believe it may have indeed been themed to RIO, and I don't want that anywhere near Epcot.

That’s a silly reason to be annoyed about no attraction.

Currently we’re rumored to get 0 rides, whereas it was planned for an E-ticket originally. IP-based or not, this is a major downgrade.

And don’t fool yourself into thinking sometime in the future they might build an original attraction. Anything that happens here was and will always be IP-based. Disney & Epcot are done with creating original rides.

Sorry, but that’s the brutally honest truth.

 

[Alicia]

Move over Christ, hellllooo giant Soccer ball!