Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 44
  1. #1

    •   
    • Blind to His Own Faults
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Near
    Posts
    8,059

    The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    Before any question is actually considered in this thread, I would urge all to take time to read some posts in MasterGracey's 'The Difference between Escape and Distraction' thread (http://www.micechat.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70498) as well as this well thought-out counter-point argument from Mr. Liver regarding 'quality':

    "You may think the quality is gone. Merlinjones may think the quality is gone. 100 other people on this message board may think the quality is gone. But the type of quality you describe is completely intangible. It's based entirely on your personal opinion.

    There were folks back in the 1970s that cried foul when Nature's Wonderland bit the dust for Big Thunder. There were folks who complained that Disney lost its way when they built the Kid Friendly Toontown. You can go through the whole history of Disneyland and find people who said the park was destroying itself at every turn. You want to go back to the thread on a.d.d. 10 years ago when people said the park was destroying itself because they built that McDonald's Fry Cart?

    The park isn't destroying itself anymore now than it was back in the 1970s or 1980s. The park ALWAYS changes. The sky is NOT falling.

    At the same time that folks like you are getting fed up with the perceived lack of quality, there's a whole new generation of fans out there experiencing the park for what it has to offer, and enjoying every minute of it. There are new fans being created everyday. You may think that it's not as good, and that the next generation will never understand, but I'm sure there's someone out there who swears up and down that Disneyland will never be as good as Knott's was in the 1940s, or Space Mountain will never be as good as the old woodie at the Pike."

    My question(s) for you to consider and answer: what constitutes 'Quality' to you when appraising an attraction at Disneyland?

    Could there be a term more vague, more amorphous and ethereal than 'quality'? 'Quality' is on par with 'better' in regards to clarity of definition in my opinion. So let's all define what 'quality' is to us, personally.

    When I comment on Disneyland's 'quality', or the decline thereof, I have little criticism with the Park's entertainment value. Most all attractions are well-crafted, and well-executed. My argument regarding 'quality' is centered around these attractions being either ill-fitting, or poorly-conceived within the context of the Lands they inhabit, and the disturbance of the thematic backdrop each individual Land provides. Does the attraction support and enhance the thematic structure of the Land? If the answer is no, to myself personally, this means a departure from 'quality'. Consider this excellent post from 2DieFR, quoting The Nickel Tour on the subject of 'Bear Country':

    " What happened? Well, it turns out that Bear Country marked a significant deviation from the other lands that made Disneyland magical - deviations that were philosophical as much as they were physical.

    On the physical front, the winding paths and tunnels that had marked the entrance to the old Indian Village were removed for Bear Country. In their place was a broad straight road that cut a broad, straight swath through the countryside, looking like it was carved with a truck-load of dynamite. The roadway was urban renewal at its worst, and it was an unconvincing entrance to the Bears' retreat.

    Over on the philosophical front, the question had to be asked: just what was Bear Country? The buildings that made up the land - including the Country Bear Jamboree theater itself - were too new and well maintained to have been abandoned by their human owners. Yet the theater seemed to have been taken over by the bears. Where were the people who started this town? For gosh sakes, shouldn't someone tell them about the bears?

    All this may sound unimportant and even kind of silly, but it brings to bear (so to speak) an important concept: Disneyland survives by creating a consistent illusion of fantasy, without contradictions or distractions.

    Any good fantasy world can exist only as long as the fantasy in that world is true to its own internal rules. If a story talks of wicked witches and fire-breathing dragons, you know what their magical powers will be, because they're based on centuries of carefully established rules. But the moment those rules are violated - no matter how outrageous they might have been in the first place - the fantasy collapses.

    Walt knew it well. It's these internal consistencies that have kept fantasy stories alive for centuries and made Disneyland unique among the amusement parks of the world.

    And it's exactly those same internal consistencies that Bear Country lacked.

    Over the years, the problem would reveal itself in the most concrete of terms: the guests simply stopped going to Bear Country. By the end of the decade, it was obvious that something would have to be done. "



    Is it a nit-picky set of criteria I employ to appraise Disneyland's new attractions/refurbs? Many would say 'yes' I suppose. To some, I imagine, this standard of measurement is stilted, and far too rigid; demanding too much. So what is your definition of 'quality'? What is most important to you when evaluating a DL attraction, and (most importantly ) WHY?

  2. #2

    • Closed Account
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,897

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    Not going to reply to the query just yet, but I wanted to comment on the nature of the post itself.

    You just don't find these deep, philosophic threads on other Disney fan sites. Whether you agree with them or not, Swab, PragmaticIdealist MasterGracey and others are a credit to this community, providing us with really thought-provoking subjects to discuss. Thanks, guys!

    Now, back to your regularly-scheduled discussion.

  3. #3

    • Pilot EdForceOne
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    15,649

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    I think 'theme' as you two love to bring up is not the point of an attraction... but rather a supporting element. It's role is to help suspend disbelief, set the tone, etc. It is not the end all measuring stick. If they can pull off the end result and god damn I walked down a straight paved road vs a moccasin worn wooded path... I don't care. If I can still feel the immersion or the tone... if there is some element that did NOT distract from it that doesn't fit 'theme'.. I don't care.

    I think in the terms of Disney... 'quality' has established itself as

    - unique - it shouldn't be a clone of something you find at Six Flags... even if it is more themed or drapped with something
    - it should have wide appeal - it shouldn't necessarily appeal only to an extreme edge of the population (why I say Disney doesn't build extreme coasters)
    - it should have staying power - this one is two fold
    • it should be timeless - It should not date itself quickly... don't build on a trend or pop-culture.
    • it should have repeat value - for some attractions this would be randomness..but it doesn't have to be that. some of that can be detail... whatever it is that makes each visit slightly different - enough that makes you not feel 'been there, done that, why would I go again'

    - it should attempt to strike an emotion chord of cheer or good - This just is the tie back to Disney fantasy or Disney optimism of the world

    I think those are the benchmarks of what establishes a quality attraction that will have staying power and draw. Everything else is a supporting component. The queue, the sounds, the visuals, the ride system.. those are all specific means to the end goals... not the things that should be measured alone in a vacuum.

  4. #4

    • Ohhh baboo :(
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    10 miles from the DLR. AP Holder for 9 years.
    Posts
    776

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve DeGaetano View Post
    Not going to reply to the query just yet, but I wanted to comment on the nature of the post itself.

    You just don't find these deep, philosophic threads on other Disney fan sites. Whether you agree with them or not, Swab, PragmaticIdealist MasterGracey and others are a credit to this community, providing us with really thought-provoking subjects to discuss. Thanks, guys!

    Now, back to your regularly-scheduled discussion.
    Read: "Please stop making threads viewaskewniverse. I fart in your general direction!"







    I keed, I keed.

  5. #5

    • Senior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    5,357

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    Quote Originally Posted by fo'c's'le swab View Post
    Is it a nit-picky set of criteria I employ to appraise Disneyland's new attractions/refurbs? Many would say 'yes' I suppose. To some, I imagine, this standard of measurement is stilted, and far too rigid; demanding too much. So what is your definition of 'quality'? What is most important to you when evaluating a DL attraction, and (most importantly ) WHY?
    Creativity is the thing I seek most in movies, books, shows, etc. And, despite Mr. Liver's misguided opinion to the contrary, a good idea can be objectively judged and is often self-evident.

    I'm reminded of a story that someone who worked on "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" once told about the ability Walt Disney had to "amplify" an idea to a point at which everyone would come to agreement about that idea.

  6. #6

    • Beach Expert
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    A beach town that Harbor Blvd was named after
    Posts
    10,635

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    IMO quality does not equal "E-ticket". I think that term has been way overused and by now really is frivolous and may actually create attractions that are counterproductive to the Disney quality that we have grown accustomed to. "E-ticket" mentality creates an assumption that in order for a ride to be put in Disneyland it has to be perfect from the second you step into the queue with perfect themeing, to the ride experience, to the exit of the ride. Indiana Jones (fortunately) for example does this quite well.

    The difference between Disneyland and other parks as far as quality is concerned is its ability to transport people to another dimension (apologies to the Twilight Zone) of fantasy. If a ride does this well, then IMO it is a good quality ride. Take the subs for example. Sure the queue was never elaborate, and they never were back in "the day". But the experience in and of itself of seeing the subs in the lagoon and then being able to actualy walk down those stairs inside of them does more to remove a person from the everyday world than anything else.

    Sure, E-ticket type rides are important to get guests through the gates, but C or even D ticket type rides must continue to be built and accepted in order to continue Disneyland's main purpose that sets itself against the others. To me, this is the litmus test of whether or not a ride is good or not -- As long as the ride continues to provide a sense of escapism, Disney quality will continue.
    Last edited by DisneyIPresume; 07-11-2007 at 06:41 AM.

  7. #7

    • a wind to shake the stars
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    935

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    You know, personally I don't like these deep philosophical threads. They're better than "What's your favorite churro!" repeated ad nauseum, I suppose, but when I go to Disneyland I like to enjoy myself and that doesn't involve meticulous analysis of every little perceived thematic problem.

    Honestly, I don't care. I'm not saying you shouldn't, but personally I (and I suspect that the 'average' guest doesn't either) could hardly care less about the small "theme violations" that seem to get so much discussion here. Yes, I would probably complain if they put a Star Wars ride in Critter Country, but at this point there's nothing outrageously wrong that would make me care enough to complain.

    Of course I go to Disneyland because it's well themed. I'm not saying I don't care about the theming at all, just that the origin of the buildings in Bear Country isn't even on my radar screen, and I like it that way, because it lets me enjoy the two or three times a year I do visit the parks much more, I think, than I would if I found problems everywhere.

  8. #8

    • Beach Expert
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    A beach town that Harbor Blvd was named after
    Posts
    10,635

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    Quote Originally Posted by The International View Post
    You know, personally I don't like these deep philosophical threads. They're better than "What's your favorite churro!" repeated ad nauseum, I suppose, but when I go to Disneyland I like to enjoy myself and that doesn't involve meticulous analysis of every little perceived thematic problem.

    Honestly, I don't care. I'm not saying you shouldn't, but personally I (and I suspect that the 'average' guest doesn't either) could hardly care less about the small "theme violations" that seem to get so much discussion here. Yes, I would probably complain if they put a Star Wars ride in Critter Country, but at this point there's nothing outrageously wrong that would make me care enough to complain.

    Of course I go to Disneyland because it's well themed. I'm not saying I don't care about the theming at all, just that the origin of the buildings in Bear Country isn't even on my radar screen, and I like it that way, because it lets me enjoy the two or three times a year I do visit the parks much more, I think, than I would if I found problems everywhere.
    I have lived within 20 - 30 minutes of Disneyland for my entire 38 years. Speaking for myself, it is a way different experience for locals than it is for people who may live farther away or who may not go all that often. I am always asking myself, just what is it about this place that it has survived for almost 52 years? And how does it interact and contribute to our culture both on a local and global level?

    If Disneyland didn't have exceptional quality the place would be quite boring and we wouldn't be sitting here talking about it.

  9. #9

    • It's all nonsense
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    You'll never guess
    Posts
    2,552

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    Quote Originally Posted by fo'c's'le swab View Post
    So what is your definition of 'quality'? What is most important to you when evaluating a DL attraction, and (most importantly ) WHY?
    Quality is a very subjective term. It is on par with calling something the best, it changes from person to person.

    Personally, quality begins with whether or not I like something at the parks (For example someone can make me taste all the 'quality' wines in the world, but if I don't like wine then they won't ever be quality to me). After I've deemed something likeable, the only other factor for me is if the attraction/place transports my imagination to some other place, time, or state.

    This is my criteria for quality at DLR because I believe this is the goal of the parks...to transport you away from your everyday life.

  10. #10

    • Senior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    5,357

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    One of the reasons Disneyan culture is so broadly enjoyed is because emotionality is an essential component, and humanity, in general, can appreciate things that elicit emotional reactions, whereas not everyone is as demanding about artistic works or experiences whose appeal is, at least partially, cerebral.

    Disneyan culture, historically, has been able to work on all levels because it satisfied everyone regardless of his or her intellect and the degree to which he or she demands something mentally-engaging.

  11. #11

    • Sorcerer Supreme Bean
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,123

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    Quality is a tricky term, and is subject to personal opinion more than anything. People who think the quality of one attraction is excelent while others think its a thematicly inconsistent piece of garbage. True quality is something everyone can enjoy, something that isnt built on fads or popularity. Something who's popularity doesnt fade with time and isnt built on the cheap, but most importantly something that entertains.

    Think of it this way, a quality car isnt the most expensive, best made german/asian/american engineering marvel that'll shave your face and rub your shoulders while it drives itself, no. A quality car is a car that you are comfortable with, that gets you from point A to point B with the least trouble offering dependability. Anything else is irrelavent. A old beat up junker that still runs on its original parts with minimal problems is much higher quality than the most expensive flavor of the month that breaks down all the time.

  12. #12

    • a wind to shake the stars
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    935

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyIPresume View Post
    If Disneyland didn't have exceptional quality the place would be quite boring and we wouldn't be sitting here talking about it.
    Obviously.

  13. #13

    • Mousketeer
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    627

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    To answer the swabs question, I look at quality in an attraction on several levels. is it well made, does it offer something unique? does it feel like it is falling apart, uncared for, neglected? has a temporary fix with duct tape been made permanent? Is the story of the ride reflected in the theming and integrity of the line, show building, and guest experience.

    To me quality is Disney setting high expectations for themselfs, and then backing it up with the money to build it right, and maintain it properly. not just to passing standards, but to standards that are more than the minimum people expect.

    Not all attractions can be e-tickets, and not all attractions will have universal appeal to a guest, any one individual may think that the bear country entrance, for example, is too wide and doesn't meet thier expectations. Quality has to also be judged by the purpose, cost, and what can be done on a realistic budget.

  14. #14

    •   
    • Blind to His Own Faults
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Near
    Posts
    8,059

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    Quote Originally Posted by The International View Post
    You know, personally I don't like these deep philosophical threads. They're better than "What's your favorite churro!" repeated ad nauseum, I suppose, but when I go to Disneyland I like to enjoy myself and that doesn't involve meticulous analysis of every little perceived thematic problem.
    Then why waste everyone's time, including your own by responding? You must like them a bit, judging from the length of your post.
    Honestly, I don't care. I'm not saying you shouldn't, but personally I (and I suspect that the 'average' guest doesn't either) could hardly care less about the small "theme violations" that seem to get so much discussion here. Yes, I would probably complain if they put a Star Wars ride in Critter Country, but at this point there's nothing outrageously wrong that would make me care enough to complain.
    The discussion is not about advancing one idea of 'quality' over another. I simply shared my definition as it relates to DL attractions. This thread is not about defending or attacking the defenders of 'theme'; or even thematic complaints. I was sharing points of view that differed on the subject of 'quality' in order to stimulate and encourage others to share theirs.
    Please, anyone who wants to turn this into yet another argument for or against stricter theme, use the search function, dig up an old battle and post there.

  15. #15

    •   
    • Blind to His Own Faults
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Near
    Posts
    8,059

    Re: The 'Quality' of Disneyland

    Quote Originally Posted by Yendorb View Post
    To answer the swabs question, I look at quality in an attraction on several levels. is it well made, does it offer something unique? does it feel like it is falling apart, uncared for, neglected? has a temporary fix with duct tape been made permanent? Is the story of the ride reflected in the theming and integrity of the line, show building, and guest experience.

    To me quality is Disney setting high expectations for themselfs, and then backing it up with the money to build it right, and maintain it properly. not just to passing standards, but to standards that are more than the minimum people expect.

    Not all attractions can be e-tickets, and not all attractions will have universal appeal to a guest, any one individual may think that the bear country entrance, for example, is too wide and doesn't meet thier expectations. Quality has to also be judged by the purpose, cost, and what can be done on a realistic budget.
    (BOLD mine) A very important point. Each attraction does have its own 'job'...its own role in the Park. Functionality is a huge factor in the appraisal process.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Proving that Disneyland is a quality experience
    By VeganPrincess in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-11-2007, 10:10 PM
  2. Current Air Quality @ Disneyland :(
    By snappy in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-26-2007, 01:45 AM
  3. Quality of CMs - DL vs. WDW
    By VeganPrincess in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: 06-16-2007, 04:07 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
  •