Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1234512 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 194
  1. #16

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    1,240

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    Quote Originally Posted by JiminyCricketFan View Post
    You mention Walt, so I have to bring him into this. Walt Disney promised CHANGE to Disneyland. It was expected and anticipated. Not all of Walt's changes were successful. He once tried to introduce circus elements into Disneyland! But one could always expect that Walt would produce cutting edge attractions that were fun and fitted a fantasy of the area or "land."

    If we fast forward to today, Disney management has screwed up so many times that change is now a word that could be good or bad. So much of change today seems to be motivated by some synergy cult that believes that whatever popular today can make even more money if we do an attraction about it. New attraction selection has must have something to do with what is selling today. With that lack of long term planning, we start seeing the carefully constructed themes Walt made for his Magic Kingdom "lands" dissolve into a patchwork of recent movie themes. We walk past Buzz Lightyear and Star Tours to see Nemo Subs. The world of tomorrow becomes just a set of marquees for major movies. Experiencing New Orleans changes into promoting Pirates the Movies and the Nightmare before Christmas. Too much movie connection just sucks the believability out of the areas.

    So change can be good, just ok, or bad depending on the motives of the designers.
    That seems to be a very popular opinion that Disney Management 'screws' up. Yes there were bad things with management over the years, but happens every 10 years or so. The 70s had their bad moments, the 80s, the 90s, and so forth.

    Why would you think movie connections are bad? Yes, it's tomorrowland, the world of tomorrow, but besides that, how is it bad? So they seem to abandon the notion of Tomorrow. But think about this, if it weren't called Tomorrowland, would it be worse or better? That is a very contradictory statement because if we go over to Fantasyland, nearly all of the rides and attractions there are based off of movies. So, let's move the label of Fantasyland off and Tomorrowland off - how are these two lands different?

    I am not trying to discuss theme but change of quality. So, is BLAB a BAD ride? Is Star Tours a BAD experience? Is Nemo a bad update (can't say, haven't ridden) - but your notion of saying they are not staying the world of tomorrow brings down the quality of the attractions that are there.

    OK - synergy. So you're telling me that every change that was made was not the result of synergy? Space Mountain - it was envisioned as an adventure through space, but as I recall, when Walt envisioned it, SPACE-themed ideas were a huge syngery property. It was popular, so Disney wanted to capitalized. Would you say that is a fair statement?

    All of Frontierland, to me, seemed like synergy. The popularity of the old west - but I guess that is not fair, as like I said, times were very different than that are now. The popularity of Frontierland now is all Big Thunder Mountain, which again I can refer to synergy of roller coasters.

    Nightmare Before Christmas - a GREAT property - put GREAT new "life" into that attraction - and that is a bad thing? Oh, that is like saying get ride of the overlay of small world because Christmas is a hugely popular enterprise opportunity. Please explain more. But I really do like this discussion. Good insights.

    Also, I like to note how funny it is for people to rate this
    Last edited by TheManator; 06-04-2007 at 11:04 AM.

  2. #17

    • DL Nerd
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,360

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    Quote Originally Posted by JiminyCricketFan View Post
    With that lack of long term planning, we start seeing the carefully constructed themes Walt made for his Magic Kingdom "lands" dissolve into a patchwork of recent movie themes. We walk past Buzz Lightyear and Star Tours to see Nemo Subs. The world of tomorrow becomes just a set of marquees for major movies.



    thats a good point.....

    Where is the "house of the future" so to speak.

  3. #18

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    1,240

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    House of the Future, and I think Werner Weiss said this, wasn't exactly so popular. I really feel popularity drives what gets replaced and what does not.

  4. #19

    • Santa Barbara, CA
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,624

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    "Change" is a very dirty word at the park, in that they want all your money. No change.
    "As usual he's taken over the coolest spot in the house"- Father re: Orville 1963

    [FONT=Arial Narrow]

  5. #20

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    1,240

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cousin Orville View Post
    "Change" is a very dirty word at the park, in that they want all your money. No change.
    Very good point.
    The change of price. Sucks Disney has very little control when they want to change, because they have to remain competitive with Sea World, Magic Mountain, Knotts, USH etc etc. But very good point.

    Plus, the economy has to do with that.

    No change could be a bad thing too.
    Like, the pay of the hourly waged CMs. What's that about?

  6. #21

    • Hiding in the shadows
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, United States
    Posts
    2,545

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheManator View Post
    I really feel popularity drives what gets replaced and what does not.
    This is true, the problem is when they make a change to drive popularity and make poor decisions about that change. Take the CBJ to Pooh change. CBJ had dwindeling attendance (I assume, I dont know). So they put in a very cheap Pooh ride, that draws attention for a bit, and now is almost 100% walk on at any time of the day. I don't have the numbers to know if Pooh is currently pulling higher attendance that CBJ was when it closed, but I doubt its all that much more. Obviously its not because Pooh isn't popular because I have a Tigger / Piglet backpack I carry every day that says otherwise. The ride isn't great (its barely good, but is a must ride for my kids, as CBJ would have been).

    Honestly, all that money trading Superstar Limo out for Monsters Inc, and for what...a bit of hype and a merchandising opportunity? Both of which I believe has beyond died down now, and all you have is a shabby ride that doesnt fit into the theme of its land. Where as you take an awesome attraction like ATIS and replace it with Star Tours and although I totally was sad, I wasn't mad because ST rocked (still does, just needs a bit of a revamp).

    I am all for change, when its done correctly and fits the area. I am excited for the Nemo Subs, I think it will be fantastic, and am only upset that it took so long (the fact that Nemo doesn't belong in TL does bother me because Subs do). Other changes though which are based on fads (PLoTSI for instance) may not last the test of time. They could have totally revamped the island as TSI with totally cool new stuff, interactive features, etc and a show and I think gotten the same attendance boost we have seen with TSI. Which BTW I will fell after summer will be back to what it used to be.

    A little piece of heaven

  7. #22

    • Rock Star Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    13,382

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    Quote Originally Posted by MollyTrolly View Post
    Honestly, all that money trading Superstar Limo out for Monsters Inc, and for what...a bit of hype and a merchandising opportunity? Both of which I believe has beyond died down now, and all you have is a shabby ride that doesnt fit into the theme of its land. Where as you take an awesome attraction like ATIS and replace it with Star Tours and although I totally was sad, I wasn't mad because ST rocked (still does, just needs a bit of a revamp).
    Well, I had a good 20-minute wait for Monsters in March (a Sunday). And SSL was the lamest ride I've ever thought about committing suicide on just to end it faster.
    "Here You Leave the World of California Today and Enter the World of, um, er, California Today."

  8. #23

    • Hiding in the shadows
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, United States
    Posts
    2,545

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    Quote Originally Posted by sediment View Post
    Well, I had a good 20-minute wait for Monsters in March (a Sunday). And SSL was the lamest ride I've ever thought about committing suicide on just to end it faster.
    When the parks get busy enough I am sure all rides can have a wait (it wasn't cheerleaders was it ). I agree that SSL needed to go, but they could have done so much better, and themed a ride for that area that fit in Hollywood. I don't hate Monsters Inc, Its a nice break, but to me it was still swapping out a crappy ride for a low budget ride. Throwing good money after bad so to speak.

    A little piece of heaven

  9. #24

    • Rock Star Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    13,382

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    Quote Originally Posted by MollyTrolly View Post
    When the parks get busy enough I am sure all rides can have a wait (it wasn't cheerleaders was it ). I agree that SSL needed to go, but they could have done so much better, and themed a ride for that area that fit in Hollywood. I don't hate Monsters Inc, Its a nice break, but to me it was still swapping out a crappy ride for a low budget ride. Throwing good money after bad so to speak.
    Well, it was right after Aladdin was finished.
    And it is a step up. No, it is not anywhere near what could be done (POTC exists, HM exists, Pooh in Tokyo exists), but it fits in perfectly with DCA's philosophy of always letting the guest know that DL is next door.
    "Here You Leave the World of California Today and Enter the World of, um, er, California Today."

  10. #25

    • Knight that says Nee!!
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Northern CA
    Posts
    2,647

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    Quote Originally Posted by MollyTrolly View Post
    When the parks get busy enough I am sure all rides can have a wait (it wasn't cheerleaders was it ). I agree that SSL needed to go, but they could have done so much better, and themed a ride for that area that fit in Hollywood. I don't hate Monsters Inc, Its a nice break, but to me it was still swapping out a crappy ride for a low budget ride. Throwing good money after bad so to speak.
    Low budget ride? The Monsters Inc ride is (qualitywise) on par with most of the other dark rides in Fantasyland. I agree that thematically it is way off for the "hollywood" area it is in, but I see nothing low budget about it. It is a dark ride, a quality dark ride, perhaps you were hoping for a different kind of attraction than a dark ride? That's fine and not an unreasonable hope, but that doesn't make the ride they did put in "low budget."

  11. #26

    • DL Nerd
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,360

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheManator View Post
    House of the Future, and I think Werner Weiss said this, wasn't exactly so popular. I really feel popularity drives what gets replaced and what does not.

    I meant that Tomorrow land doesn't feel so Tomorrow-ish

  12. #27

    • Hiding in the shadows
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, United States
    Posts
    2,545

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goofy Daddy View Post
    Low budget ride? The Monsters Inc ride is (qualitywise) on par with most of the other dark rides in Fantasyland. I agree that thematically it is way off for the "hollywood" area it is in, but I see nothing low budget about it. It is a dark ride, a quality dark ride, perhaps you were hoping for a different kind of attraction than a dark ride? That's fine and not an unreasonable hope, but that doesn't make the ride they did put in "low budget."
    Maybe its just me...and maybe I am hard to impress, but it doesn't feel well thought out, things to me seem cheap (like the bathroom scene for instance it just doesn't seem to flow, the story seems jumbled (which btw is why I rarely go on Snow White...the ending or lack there of freaks me out). To me Monsters Inc isnt a quality attraction, no matter what land it is in, for the age of technology and the space they had, there was so much more that could have been done.

    A little piece of heaven

  13. #28

    • Knight that says Nee!!
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Northern CA
    Posts
    2,647

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    Quote Originally Posted by MollyTrolly View Post
    Maybe its just me...and maybe I am hard to impress, but it doesn't feel well thought out, things to me seem cheap (like the bathroom scene for instance it just doesn't seem to flow, the story seems jumbled (which btw is why I rarely go on Snow White...the ending or lack there of freaks me out). To me Monsters Inc isnt a quality attraction, no matter what land it is in, for the age of technology and the space they had, there was so much more that could have been done.
    Fair enough but that doesn't make it a cheap ride or "low budget." I agree something else could have gone into that space, but they choose a dark ride. As far as dark rides go, MI s a pretty good quality one and it (to me anyway) flows just as well as the others. comparing it to PotC or HM isn't fair...it's not that type of ride. When compared to its peers (Pinnochio, Snow White, Peter Pan...ect) it holds up well.

    I agree with you though in that I would have loved to see an attraction more along the lines of HM or PotC go in there...DCA sure could use something like that.

  14. #29

    • DL Nerd
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,360

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    allthough.... Just thinking about it...


    not every change will make people happy and other people will still think that "THAT attraction need to be changed.


    can't make everyone happy.....

  15. #30

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    4,092

    Re: "Change" - a dirty word for Disneyland?

    >>Country Bears bearly got any attendance. They change it. Pooh gets more attendance, but is a low-quality attraction.<<

    Actually, my understanding is, even toward the end, Country Bears was more well-attended than Pooh has turned out to be. It was a high capacity attraction.

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1234512 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [Question] "Disneyland will never be completed." - Why the resistance to change?
    By ManaByte in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 130
    Last Post: 03-16-2009, 04:21 PM
  2. The Definitions of Disney's Buzzwords, "Relevant" and "Change"
    By animagusurreal in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 04-27-2008, 11:01 PM
  3. What "one" word describes Disneyland?
    By Barbaraann in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 08-01-2005, 07:56 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •