Book report attractions - what's the deal?

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
They're low expectations. That shouldn't be a point of pride. Kids consume a lot of garbage and their not at all known for their choices of quality storytelling.

An adult can't just go hang out alone at Chick E. Cheese or a Legoland Fiscovery Center. It would be considered weird if an adult spent time watching watching stuff like Disney Junior without kids. It would be creepy and weird and isn't something one would proudly aspire towards.

Being appropriate for kids to enjoy doesn't make somethings for kids. The subjects and content are show how the parks were not designed for kids. No parks designed for kids turn into the sort of experiential spaces found within Disney's parks.

I think you're too concerned about what looks weird. Enjoy what you enjoy.

It's ok that some WDW attractions do not live up to adult scrutiny because the kids still enjoy it. Make peace with that and yourself. Why waste your energy criticizing theme park attractions that don't live up to adult super fan expectations?
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I think you're too concerned about what looks weird. Enjoy what you enjoy.

It's ok that some WDW attractions do not live up to adult scrutiny because the kids still enjoy it. Make peace with that and yourself. Why waste your energy criticizing theme park attractions that don't live up to adult super fan expectations?
What you describe as okay is no longer socially considered to be just weird. It is the sort of thing that can get someone arrested.

One, I'm not going to lie to myself and others. Two, fans are the people who actually enjoy a product.
 

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
What you describe as okay is no longer socially considered to be just weird. It is the sort of thing that can get someone arrested.

One, I'm not going to lie to myself and others. Two, fans are the people who actually enjoy a product.

With all due respect, I think you have issues. And if you don't understand the lines between fun / weird / arrest-worthy, I don't think we should continue this discussion.

Peace.
 

Wendy Pleakley

Well-Known Member
Defending an attraction by saying it appeals to small children is just making excuses. This isn't to say there can't be attractions geared towards a younger age group, such as Playhouse Disney.

"We believed in our idea - a family park where parents and children could have fun-together." - Walt Disney

A good attraction can appeal to a wide range of age groups.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
if there weren't attractions based on Disney movies, then it wouldn't be Disney. There's a mix of each (and eventually some original attractions became movies anyways)
So EPCOT Center wasn't a Disney park? New Orleans Square wasn't a Disney land? Mineral King wouldn't have been Disney?

Why weren't there any Disbey characters in The Little Mermaid or Frozen.
 

French Quarter

Well-Known Member
Defending an attraction by saying it appeals to small children is just making excuses. This isn't to say there can't be attractions geared towards a younger age group, such as Playhouse Disney.

"We believed in our idea - a family park where parents and children could have fun-together." - Walt Disney

A good attraction can appeal to a wide range of age groups.

This is what I was thinking when the other poster said that we all need to understand the Disney is for kids. That was never the point. It was always supposed to be an all-ages experience.
 

mharrington

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
What you describe as okay is no longer socially considered to be just weird. It is the sort of thing that can get someone arrested.

One, I'm not going to lie to myself and others. Two, fans are the people who actually enjoy a product.

So you're saying that for adults to enjoy things intended primarily for kids can get you sent to jail? And are you saying that only fans can truly enjoy a product?

This is what I was thinking when the other poster said that we all need to understand the Disney is for kids. That was never the point. It was always supposed to be an all-ages experience.

Yeah, it is not supposed to be for people who think that, when they get too "old" for anything kiddie that they are to look down at and turn their noses up at them.
 

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
Defending an attraction by saying it appeals to small children is just making excuses. This isn't to say there can't be attractions geared towards a younger age group, such as Playhouse Disney.

"We believed in our idea - a family park where parents and children could have fun-together." - Walt Disney

A good attraction can appeal to a wide range of age groups.

No argument except maybe with your first sentence.
 

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
This is what I was thinking when the other poster said that we all need to understand the Disney is for kids. That was never the point. It was always supposed to be an all-ages experience.

Yes, an all ages experience – but still kid-centric, don't you think? Especially certain attractions/areas?

My interpretation – which can always be wrong – of what Walt had in mind was a theme park geared towards children but where the parents wouldn't have a mind-numbing experience. There would be something in it for them as well. I think that's different than saying it was "meant" for adults. I don't think if you were building a separate theme park for adults you would put the current Winnie the Pooh ride. I think Epcot more precisely throws the adults a bone, especially in world showcase.

That said, original ideas and intentions morph. You can create things with certain intentions, and people will do what they will. I say all of this as an adult with no children who enjoys Disney with my spouse – and yes we will even go on the Winnie the Pooh ride LOL. I think there is something about Disney World that gives you permission in a sense to be a kid, to a degree.

And I'm not trying to have an argument, but there are a couple of things that push my buttons:

One is when people say things with absolute certainty as if they make the rules. I try to qualify whatever I say with the fact that it's my opinion and I can be wrong. When people think they know for certain the opinion of a dead man they never met based on a quote or two, I take issue with that. When they try to force their opinion as if it is a fact, that gets on my nerves.

The other is it seems that some folks are very self-conscious about this and feel the need to defend themselves in the context of this discussion. If certain people think going on "kiddie rides" puts them one step away from arrest, and apparently deep down are concerned there's something wrong with it or with themselves, then with all due respect they could probably use a session or two with a counselor. If that is the impetus pushing them to vehemently declare that Disney World is not kiddie rides but for everyone in an attempt to justify their own good time without feeling weird about it, then talking that out with a professional might be helpful.

I am an adult, and I love my trips to Disney World. I love the immersion, I love the food, and I enjoy the rides and have been on most but probably not all. Our adult trips probably look different than the average family trip. We avoid the character meals for the most part, the parades, often the fireworks at Magic Kingdom in favor of illuminations at Epcot with a cocktail or going on pirates, jungle Cruise, and haunted mansion quickly while everyone else is standing on main street.

But sometimes we have lunch at Tusker House. Sometimes we go to the Chase Visa character meet and greet. Sometimes we take a picture with Beast after dinner. And sometimes we ride Winnie the Pooh. I don't care whether or not it's considered a kiddie ride – I'm having a silly, fun kid moment and enjoying it without apology. I don't need to say it isn't a kiddie ride to make it OK to do.

And usually the context of people on these boards calling rides in general either kiddie rides or geared towards children is a reaction because some of the adults here go too far in these stringent analyses of various contradictions or lapses of continuity in an attraction, as if they were meant to be scrutinized at the adult level or at the level of something in the museum of natural history. It's fun, it's not to be taken so seriously – even if you love it. Jack Sparrow didn't ruin Pirates. Nemo didn't ruin the seas. You ruin it for yourselves when you see it through your own adult eyes instead of looking through your own child eyes.

JMO.
 
Last edited:

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
So you're saying that for adults to enjoy things intended primarily for kids can get you sent to jail? And are you saying that only fans can truly enjoy a product?
In certain circumstances, yes, an adult spending too much time focused on something intended for children can end poorly, even if there is no malicious alterior motive. There are many adult Lego fans but an adult is not allowed to visit a Legoland Discovery Center without a child.

I never said anything about "true fans." I'm just completely opposed to the idea that creative works should not appeal to their fans. Who else would they appeal to? Disney tried a theme park intended for people who don't like theme parks, Disney's California Adventure, and it was awful.
 

French Quarter

Well-Known Member
Yes, an all ages experience – but still kid-centric, don't you think? Especially certain attractions/areas?

My interpretation – which can always be wrong – of what Walt had in mind was a theme park geared towards children but where the parents wouldn't have a mind-numbing experience. There would be something in it for them as well. I think that's different than saying it was "meant" for adults.

I'm not getting into the whole pedophile discussion. I really think that's off in some weird direction that I don't want to go.

I don't think WDW is kid-centric at all. I think it is appealing to the inner child of each of us, which is a very different thing. Kid-centric, to me, means attractions where kids actively participate and parents go along and observe...like at the carnival. I think these are all age attractions.
 

WondersOfLife

Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
I find that people that go to WDW because they love all things Disney love it. People that go to WDW because they are theme park fans have a pretty negative view of the ride.
That's understandable.. But I'm a mixture of both. And I love the ride! I just think it's a good dark ride! Compared to original concept art? Nah.. Awful. But the ride as is? It's not bad. It's not AMAZING or OUTSTANDING.. But.. It IS a good ride!

To the average park guest, it's probably amazing.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
That's understandable.. But I'm a mixture of both. And I love the ride! I just think it's a good dark ride! Compared to original concept art? Nah.. Awful. But the ride as is? It's not bad. It's not AMAZING or OUTSTANDING.. But.. It IS a good ride!

To the average park guest, it's probably amazing.
Seeing that it has had to be reworked several times in its few short years of existence it seems that even Disney isn't willing to go so far as to sing its praises.
 

EnergyKing

Well-Known Member
There hasn't been a decent dark ride since the original opening day FL ones. Is anyone really going to argue that? Honestly? I'm not even crazy about PPF but at least it attempts something.
 

WondersOfLife

Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
Seeing that it has had to be reworked several times in its few short years of existence it seems that even Disney isn't willing to go so far as to sing its praises.
Hey.. At least they recognized that mermaid was worth a few re-works more than Stitch's Great Escape... Which they gave up on immediately after it opened.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom