Thats awesome news! I was hoping they'd use the WOC fountains for a new years countdown/party! thanks for sharing =)Originally Posted by tahjvtec
Oh and I agree about DCA Having the better vibe for new years, DCA Has alcohol and just an overall more 'party' feeling to it. Disneyland is perfect for Xmas, but DCA is much better at New Years.
Last edited by BuenaVista28; 12-19-2010 at 08:28 AM.
They should use him more during the holidays like hong kong and tokyo. In hong kong, they just are introducing him by using him as part of the ad campaign.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.
-Aristotle
Next Trip in 2012 to see the final product
^
I think you're right that the marketing was done all wrong. They didn't try to introduce the character to us, instead they just kinda plopped him at a meet and greet and expected everyone to go nuts. Even so, I just don't get the appeal of Duffy. I have my own teddy bear, I don't need to have Mickey's too.
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
But does the Carsland mountain range really 'ruin' any of DCA's other themes? I dont think it does. Its CALIFORNIA adventure, and mountains are everywhere in California. I see no problem with those mountains being seen from anywhere inside DCA.
I think Matterhorn clashes much more with the rest of Disneyland than Carsland mountains clash in DCA. Why is a real-life Swiss mountain in FANTASYland? what does that mountain have to do with Fantasy? Walt Disney was a genius and I love his work, but he also made mistakes, I think the Matterhorn is one of them, I love the ride, but I dont think it fits well with its surrounding areas. Its been there since 1959 so everyone is just so used to it being there, thats why it doesnt seem like such an 'intrusion', but it is, its awkwardly plopped down in the middle of the park, in a land that it doesnt belong in. Now, Matterhorn has become an icon, so obviously it cant and shouldnt be taken out, but its still an awkward theme issue for the park in my opinion.
It is precisely because it is Fantasyland that it works. You talk about belonging and themeatic realism but are discussing a land of Fantasy. Your own argument stands itself on its own head. It's Fantasyland... anything is possible here. This is an example of taking theme so seriously that it becomes a detriment and starts working against itself. This was Walt's true genius... recognizing when to be a stickler for detail and when to just cut loose and have some whimsical fun.
But if you want to get thematically nit-picky, then the architectural style of much of Fantasyland is something you would expect to see near the German/Swiss alps. Matterhorn mountain is an alp. It really is that simple. It fits architecturally and thematically.
As for Carsland... I think it fits into the same place the Matterhorn does. It doesn't matter where you can see it from within Disneyland... it's a mountain, and it's reasonable to expect to see a snow covered peak from just about anywhere on Earth. California has mountains along its entire length and it's reasonable to assume that you would see distant peaks from anywhere represented in DCA. LA, check. Hollywood, check. San Francisco, check. Condor Flats, check. Paradise Bay, check... everywhere represented in DCA has mountains within site of it in reality, why not here? I see no thematic intrusion problem at all.
Last edited by mycroft16; 12-19-2010 at 11:29 AM.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, As I foretold you, were all spirits and Are melted into air, into thin air: And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, The cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces, The solemn temples, the great globe itself, Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff As dreams are made on, and our little life Is rounded with a sleep. mycroft16 on Twitter
In my opinion something like the Matterhorn belongs in Adventureland, thats the land where you travel to far off places and have adventures. To say Matterhorn fits the Fantasy theme of Fantasyland because youll never be able to visit the real Matterhorn and ride a bobsled through it, is just a stretch in my opinion. Going by that logic then just about everything in Disneyland should be in Fantasyland, I cant ride a jeep through an ancient temple, so its fantasy right? should we put Indy in Fantasyland too?
I dont think its being nitpicky, I think its a big theme issue for Disneyland. Its a real life mountain, in a land based on fantasy, in my opinion its just not a good fit. To each thier own though =)
With that said, we do agree on one thing though....Ariel IS a hottielol
I've always felt that the Matterhorn fits nicely in Fantasyland since most of the land looks like an alpine village.
By that logic, many of the attractions in Disneyland can also go in Adventureland. Boarding a flying ship and heading off to a tropical isle with Pirates and man-eating gators, being on a shuttle bound for a distant planet until we are attacked.
But I think Matterhorn losely fits due to the architecture of the land around it and the presence of Harold.
Women, they make the highs higher and the lows more frequent.
I didn't say that. I said the land is about fantasy. Fantasy is defined as imagination, unrestrained and fantastical images. Fantasyland is all about unreal things. You are never going to fly in a pirate ship to Neverland with Peter Pan and Tinkerbell... except in your imagination. You will never flee through a haunted forest where the trees reach out to grab you only to be rescued by gem mining dwarves who will later try to protect you from a wicked queen who wants your heart cut out, except in your imagination. You will never be a wooden puppet who is given life and has to save his father from the bowels of a monstrous whale while his conscience is a little talking cricket, except in your imagination... etc, etc, etc. Fantasyland is all about doing things that can ONLY be done in your imagination. They may be based on real places, but unreal things occur there. Fantasy.
Now, the ride system itself may be much better suited to a place like Adventureland... but given the fact that 99% of the ride is concealed inside the mountain and not super visible and given the fact that the mountain is the tallest thing in the park... it is the mountain and not the ride that determines positioning. Adventureland is a land about the jungles of the world and it makes no thematic sense at all to plop a 140 foot tall snowy peak in the middle of the jungle. It does, however, make thematic sense to plot a 140 foot tall snowy peak where they did. It creates a very European backdrop (it is a real European mountain) to an area that is very heavily based in European myth, folklore and architecture.
This is taking theme too seriously and trying to be far to strict with it... which gets you into just as much trouble as being to lax with theme. Of course everything in Disneyland is fantastical. "Here you leave today and enter the world of yesterday, tomorrow and fantasy." From the moment you pass under that plaque you are in a world of fantasy... doing and seeing things you can't do while in "today." But Walt decided to break things out a little bit more within the overall fantasy of Disneyland. Frontierland gives us the American Old West, Adventureland gives us that sort of British Colonialism adventure in India, Burma, rainforests, etc sort of feel. Fantasyland was an outlet for all the fantastical fairy tales while Main Street was an idealized memory of his home and that rich American heritage and patriotism. Tomorrowland was the area of dreams as yet unrealized. Of course the whole thing is fantasy, but that does not mean everything belongs in Fantasyland.Going by that logic then just about everything in Disneyland should be in Fantasyland, I cant ride a jeep through an ancient temple, so its fantasy right? should we put Indy in Fantasyland too?
Fair enough.I dont think its being nitpicky, I think its a big theme issue for Disneyland. Its a real life mountain, in a land based on fantasy, in my opinion its just not a good fit. To each thier own though =)
I find few who don'tWith that said, we do agree on one thing though....Ariel IS a hottie
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, As I foretold you, were all spirits and Are melted into air, into thin air: And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, The cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces, The solemn temples, the great globe itself, Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff As dreams are made on, and our little life Is rounded with a sleep. mycroft16 on Twitter
wowzers this is getting a bit off topic...
But gotta say I'm PRETTY sure Fantasyland wasn't a European village when the Matterhorn was built so it seems silly to think of it as something Walt "forsaw". I'm pretty sure the whole Europe deal came with the upgrade which happened after Walts death not before, so it was more modern Imagineers fixing something random added tot he park.
The Pirates going in Adventureland argument amuses me considering Pirates IS in Adventureland in quite a few parks.
Only thing Walt designed the monorail to compliment was the subs, Also think it was built on a gaint dirt pile that was there prior? Didn't walt think it'd be cool to make that pile a real mountain?
I don't think Walt was totally above the random (also why I always say they should just label Subs/Matterhorn as its own area for the theme sticklers).
Carsland from the entrance will probably be fairly minor. Might stand out a little but it's going to be way back there and seem smaller then Tower of Terror and the much closer GRR.
I think an issue we're having right now is that with those tall trees and hubcap gone we can once again see waaaayyy into the back of the park like how it was at opening.
"We all have sparks, imagination! it's how our minds... create creations!"
You're right, it wasn't a European village until the 1983 redesign... however, it was a European medieval fair... so the theme still holds true.
The point being... the Carsland mountains are no more a thematic intrusion into the lands than the Matterhorn is and for much the same reasons.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, As I foretold you, were all spirits and Are melted into air, into thin air: And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, The cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces, The solemn temples, the great globe itself, Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff As dreams are made on, and our little life Is rounded with a sleep. mycroft16 on Twitter
One thing about Carsland that I am wondering, there are huge mountains on the "paradise pier side" for Carsland, and also at the back of Carsland. But what about the area behind Tower of Terror? will it receive some rockwork to block out the outside world on that side? it doesnt seem like anything is being done over there.
^Check the models to answer those questions.
That mountain range is a very specific style and colour not found just anywhere in California. It will all boil down to how far off in the distance it looks and how the sightlines are developed. I can't really speculate on that at this point.
I suppose so, but I'm not sure it was thought out that way even with the fair theme. And I really don't mind cause the mountain matches the park and manages to fit in from most areas even those outside the park.
I agree the mountains will be a good addition in mostly the same vein though.
I think is small quibbles to ask if it belongs in California now, I mean I was part of that discussion a year ago but honestly as far as the park goes it'll look fine. Only areas that n33d to be worried about are Paradise Pier and places outside the park.
"We all have sparks, imagination! it's how our minds... create creations!"
^Why worry about places outside the park?
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Bookmarks