Was DCA a disaster?

[Markos]

Was a parking lot better than DCA? In my opinion, possibly not, but I also think DLR would have been better served if DCA were never to have seen the light of day. What a piece of misguided, budget driven, pile of horsemuck it turned out to be. When has a relatively new theme park needed such a giant makeover in such a short period of time? Was everyone with a vote just stupified from counting money and popping Prozac? Aside from ToT, and a good, but nowhere near Disney level attraction in the coaster, the rest was crap. Dollywood and various parking lot carnivals talk poo about DCA. If it could be shuttered with some semblance of financial integrity, I think it would've been done. I personally believe the park is so irrevocably and fundamentally flawed that it will never amount to anything more than a side note. Really, if it were feasible, the park would be shutdown, reimagined, and rebuilt completely. This was a major blunder and should be taught in undergrad business and MBA curiculums as what not to do with a brand. Also see "New Coke".

[explodingboy]

I think (and I think that everyone else will agree) that DCA 1.0 was awful. Anything that is across from Disneyland really doesn't stand too much of a chance anyway, but it was just really bad. I do miss the old parking lot and it has become sort of an inside joke amongst myself and my friends that it was better than DCA 1.0. The fact of the matter is that it just couldn't stand up on it's own. Most of the things that opened in 2001 were closed within the first few years, theming was not good, and it looked like it was just thrown together all too quickly. They really needed to go back to the drawing board and re-theme the whole place - which obviously is exactly what they did. I have a lot of faith for the new and improved California Adventure and what we have seen so far looks amazing. It's just a shame that it took them over 10 years to get it right.

[Mr Wiggins]

Was everyone with a vote just stupified from counting money and popping Prozac?

Where did you get the impression anyone had a vote? You see, once upon a time there was a Troll who lived on the top floor of a big building in Burbank, the roof of which was so heavy that it took Seven Giant Stone Dwarves to hold it up...

[MrLiver]

DCA wasn't really a disaster. At least not yet.

You have to remember that there were many people in Burbank and on Wall Street too that didn't believe it was worth any money to try to expand out Disneyland. Walt Disney World really does represent Disney's theme park business and comparing the two, Disneyland just didn't compete.

Building DCA the way they did really was the only way to get a second gate built in Anaheim and the fact that they accomplished that is really amazing with the corporate culture being what it is.

The real disaster will come if the expansion doesn't pan out and bring in any extra people. If that happens, I would assume Disney's days of spending money in Anaheim will come to an end.

[BigThunder]

Not a disaster, just a major disappointment to those who expected a lot more from Disney.

I will always miss the anticipation and slow reveal that the old parking lot created, but would I prefer it to the nicely themed little park they seem to be creating now? Nope.

[nish221]

Superstar Limo. Worst. Disney. Ride. Ever.

[TylerDurden]

I'd say as long as there are people at DCA it's nota disaster. I actually rather enjoyed DCA when I first visited and spent more time there than at Disneyland because I didn't go in with the state of mind that it needed to be compared to Disneyland--so I had a blast. Any park across from the greatest theme park in the world was bound to draw negative comparisons especially upon opening it just so happened that DCA was more disappointing than the plans for WestCOT and Port Disney. So no, I'd say it wasn't a disaster, it just didn't make the best of what was always going to be a bad (uphill battle sort of deal) situation.

[noleafclover1980]

Yes, but let's not forget Disneyland itself had a few facelifts in it's first decade or so also. Sad thing is DCA's 10th Anniversary came with a whimper and no acknowledgement at the parks.

[TodAZ1]

Aside from ToT, and a good, but nowhere near Disney level attraction in the coaster, the rest was crap.

I enjoyed GRR when DCA first opened and totally LOVED Soarin' that first time too. I believe it's one of the most popular attractions to open since ToT or Indy.

Oh, and ToT wasn't there when DCA first opened.

As to the original question, was the parking lot better than DCA? Absolutely not! It was a parking lot. That's about it.

[noleafclover1980]

I enjoyed GRR when DCA first opened and totally LOVED Soarin' that first time too. I believe it's one of the most popular attractions to open since ToT or Indy.

Oh, and ToT wasn't there when DCA first opened.

As to the original question, was the parking lot better than DCA? Absolutely not! It was a parking lot. That's about it.

GRR is one of the better attractions in the park IMO. A few people have complained at the lack of story, but not every ride needs one. It's an ommersive exprience on par w/ the Matterhorn. The detail they put into the actual ride is great.. I never really feel like I'm on a rapids ride more than I feel like I'm on the rapids, whipping through caves, etc.

[Mr Wiggins]

When has a relatively new theme park needed such a giant makeover in such a short period of time?

Certainly not in the history of Disneyland. Compared to the accomplishments of DL's first ten years, DCA 1.0 was a bad joke. Even worse when you consider that Disney had 45 years of experience in theme park design, construction and operation before DCA. They literally wrote the book on how to do it right -- then Eisner burned it.

[TodAZ1]

GRR is one of the better attractions in the park IMO. A few people have complained at the lack of story, but not every ride needs one. It's an ommersive exprience on par w/ the Matterhorn. The detail they put into the actual ride is great.. I never really feel like I'm on a rapids ride more than I feel like I'm on the rapids, whipping through caves, etc.

Totally agree! Though I do think GRR could use some 'plussing'.

[noleafclover1980]

Totally agree! Though I do think GRR could use some 'plussing'.

I agree with that, but as long as it's a bonus and adds to a ride, I think every ride can benefit from "plussing". That's one thing we can actual say Walt WOULd do.

[Poisonedapples]

no. I do not agree that DCA was a disaster.It's a great park, has great rides and attractions.. it's not for everyone's liking and that is ok because there is a whole other park across the esplanade!!!

but really, its a great park to me and i like it and never have or will feel it's a Disaster..

[Krack]

Superstar Limo. Worst. Disney. Ride. Ever.

I've always wondered about Superstar Limo. I never got to ride it. How bad could it have possibly been? Yes, I realize there was the issue with Princess Diana, but otherwise, it was just a dark ride with celebrities. I couldn't have been that bad.

As for DCA as a whole? It was terrible. The problem as I see it was three fold:

1. The park concept is bad. Disneyland's guests are made up of far more locals than Orlando. These locals don't want to go to DCA to see Hollywoodland when they can just go to Universal Studios instead. Ditto Paradise Pier (Santa Monica). Ditto Golden State (California's national parks).

2. They didn't spend enough. They cut the budget so much that the park had no attractions. All they were worried about was getting it open, they didn't care if what was inside was a top-quality experience. Which leads to the final problem ...

3. DCA wasn't EPCOT. People were expecting the second California gate to be a mind-blowing revolutionary experience (ala EPCOT Center 1982). It wasn't. There is nothing more depressing than a Disney attraction (or park) that sucks on the day it opens because you know it's going to be a decade before they spend any money to fix or change it. DCA's opening had a depressing effect on the fanbase.