News PHOTOS - Cinderella Castle at the Magic Kingdom to receive enhancements this summer

TTA94

TTA94

Well-Known Member
MansionButler84 said:
I like it but I must like tacky things. After all, I‘ve always liked seeing a castle at the end of a circa-1900 Midwestern town main street, which is objectively tacky.

I believe the medallion is set to be installed overnight on 9/30. It’s an easy job with the mounts in place.
Click to expand...

If they are not installing the medallion until 9/30… is that needed to be installed for projection adjustments? I guess that would be a easy fix though.

Have you heard if the front turrets will remain undecorated?
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
jrhwdw said:
I'm sorry! But who in in their right minds think the Castle and Main Street are tacky?!?!?!?! Do we want to go here???????
Click to expand...
Anyone who has any artistic sense?

Walt Disney World is very tacky, and I love it. So are most tourist destinations. The only castles that aren’t tacky are the real ones. The old ones.

But, we are talking about a theme park. One with plastic hippos, singing chickens, a fat bear dangling from a ceiling, elephants with poles in their sides, and a rocket that “launches” into space at 4 mph. Don’t take it too seriously. It’s all just for fun.
 
TikibirdLand

TikibirdLand

Well-Known Member
MansionButler84 said:
Anyone who has any artistic sense?

Walt Disney World is very tacky, and I love it. So are most tourist destinations. The only castles that aren’t tacky are the real ones. The old ones.

But, we are talking about a theme park. One with plastic hippos, singing chickens, a fat bear dangling from a ceiling, elephants with poles in their sides, and a rocket that “launches” into space at 4 mph. Don’t take it too seriously. It’s all just for fun.
Click to expand...
Oh, Sleeping Beauty's Castle. I agree, it's not tacky!
 
J

jrhwdw

Well-Known Member
MansionButler84 said:
Anyone who has any artistic sense?

Walt Disney World is very tacky, and I love it. So are most tourist destinations. The only castles that aren’t tacky are the real ones. The old ones.

But, we are talking about a theme park. One with plastic hippos, singing chickens, a fat bear dangling from a ceiling, elephants with poles in their sides, and a rocket that “launches” into space at 4 mph. Don’t take it too seriously. It’s all just for fun.
Click to expand...
True, sorry! Not a good day today!
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
MansionButler84 said:
Anyone who has any artistic sense?

Walt Disney World is very tacky, and I love it. So are most tourist destinations. The only castles that aren’t tacky are the real ones. The old ones.

But, we are talking about a theme park. One with plastic hippos, singing chickens, a fat bear dangling from a ceiling, elephants with poles in their sides, and a rocket that “launches” into space at 4 mph. Don’t take it too seriously. It’s all just for fun.
Click to expand...
Honestly if you have any "artistic sense" you would see the complex design and fabrication and not simply dismiss it as plastic hippos and elephants with poles in their backs... And while I agree it is fun to be snarky, The original Magic Kingdom is pretty well designed... It was fantasy architecture, beautifully designed to evoke moods and places...It was most certainly not "tacky"...though I will say some of the added embellishments over the years have been. The parks were designed by visionary architects and artists in collaboration... Not a carny roustabout... If you look at the breadth of Cinderella Castle, the composition as a whole is quite beautiful, balanced, and elegant. That was the Disney Difference in that age... None of this was tacky. It was designed for beauty, great amounts of time and thought went into everything to avoid the judgement of those like you who dismiss it as "tacky".
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
Honestly if you have any "artistic sense" you would see the complex design and fabrication and not simply dismiss it as plastic hippos and elephants with poles in their backs... And while I agree it is fun to be snarky, The original Magic Kingdom is pretty well designed... It was fantasy architecture, beautifully designed to evoke moods and places...It was most certainly not "tacky"...though I will say some of the added embellishments over the years have been. The parks were designed by visionary architects and artists in collaboration... Not a carny roustabout... If you look at the breadth of Cinderella Castle, the composition as a whole is quite beautiful, balanced, and elegant. That was the Disney Difference in that age... None of this was tacky. It was designed for beauty, great amounts of time and thought went into everything to avoid the judgement of those like you who dismiss it as "tacky".
Click to expand...
Disney does tacky better than anyone else, but it is still a fiberglass (gypsum plaster, really) castle in Missouri. And I adore it.
 
IMDREW

IMDREW

Well-Known Member
E0gvrNyVUAUGhP8.jpeg

E0gvrOTVEAAOdKz.jpeg


I almost forgot how nice and beautiful the castle with the old colors used to look from across the lagoon. Makes you wish.
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
LittleBuford said:
“Fanciful” is the word I’d use, not “tacky”. Perhaps @MansionButler84 understands the term differently from the rest of us (to me, “tacky” implies something that is shoddy and tasteless).
Click to expand...
I am trying to imagine I live in a Missouri town 120 years ago and walk into town and see that at the end of the street. I would find it tasteless, yes. But, again, it is an amusement park. I think some people take it too seriously. Magic Kingdom is meant to look rather fantastical. You would not see a random castle in Harambe, World Showcase, or at the end of Hollywood Blvd. as they are meant to evoke real places. And that’s my issue with the castle—Main Street, USA is meant to look like a real place and time. With a cartoony castle at the end of the street.

As for a cheap look, compared to a real castle, it looks cheap. Certainly when compared to the castle showcased on Soarin’. But again...it’s fantastical. At least they had the sense in DLP to fully-embrace that in its design and avoid having it kinda sorta inspired by real buildings.
 
LittleBuford

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
MansionButler84 said:
I am trying to imagine I live in a Missouri town 120 years ago and walk into town and see that at the end of the street. I would find it tasteless, yes. But, again, it is an amusement park. I think some people take it too seriously. Magic Kingdom is meant to look rather fantastical. You would not see a random castle in Harambe, World Showcase, or at the end of Hollywood Blvd. as they are meant to evoke real places. And that’s my issue with the castle—Main Street, USA is meant to look like a real place and time. With a cartoony castle at the end of the street.

As for a cheap look, compared to a real castle, it looks cheap. Certainly when compared to the castle showcased on Soarin’. But again...it’s fantastical. At least they had the sense in DLP to fully-embrace that in its design and avoid having it kinda sorta inspired by real buildings.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that it’s fantastical, but that doesn’t, in my book, make it remotely tasteless. As a Londoner who grew up seeing real castles, I’ve always found Cinderella Castle elegant and impressive, even as I recognise its manifest artificiality. I imagine a turn-of-the-century Missourian would have found the effect surprising, whimsical, and possibly farfetched, but not tasteless. It’s too beautiful to be that.
 
LittleMerman

LittleMerman

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
Honestly if you have any "artistic sense" you would see the complex design and fabrication and not simply dismiss it as plastic hippos and elephants with poles in their backs... And while I agree it is fun to be snarky, The original Magic Kingdom is pretty well designed... It was fantasy architecture, beautifully designed to evoke moods and places...It was most certainly not "tacky"...though I will say some of the added embellishments over the years have been. The parks were designed by visionary architects and artists in collaboration... Not a carny roustabout... If you look at the breadth of Cinderella Castle, the composition as a whole is quite beautiful, balanced, and elegant. That was the Disney Difference in that age... None of this was tacky. It was designed for beauty, great amounts of time and thought went into everything to avoid the judgement of those like you who dismiss it as "tacky".
Click to expand...
Art is subjective and beauty is in the eye of the beholder so to each their own. I agree with you that as far as theme parks go, Disney is mostly designed beautifully. But I also agree with @MansionButler84 that ultimately these are fake representations from a fantasy world built in reality/central Florida - a lot of these things don't truly exist (flying carpets, Galaxy's Edge, etc.) so ultimately we are criticizing fake elements. In some people's opinion, some of it is tacky. Doesn't mean everyone has to agree.

Personally, I think Cinderella Castle was beautiful with the original color scheme. I still think it's a beautiful piece of architecture but the new color palette was a downgrade in my opinion. And to me, the multi-colored banners on the now multi-colored castle look tacky - there's too much contrast even within just the new paint job and the banners take it all over the place. If their goal was "iridescent," I don't know why they didn't just go iridescent. But again, we can all have different opinions.

It's interesting that we all have such strong opinions about the castle - shows how iconic and beloved it truly is. We all want to see it in it's absolute best and we want the Imagineers to serve it love, respect, and the justice we all think it deserves. But as far as art goes, which the castle ultimately is, it's really subjective so we all have a different idea of what the castle should look like.
 
Last edited:
networkpro

networkpro

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
Yes
LittleMerman said:
Art is subjective and beauty is in the eye of the beholder so to each their own. I agree with you that as far as theme parks go, Disney is mostly designed beautifully. But I also agree with @MansionButler84 that ultimately these are fake representations from a fantasy world built in reality/central Florida - a lot of these things don't truly exist (flying carpets, Galaxy's Edge, etc.) so ultimately we are criticizing fake elements. In some people's opinion, some of it is tacky. Doesn't mean everyone has to agree.

Personally, I think Cinderella Castle was beautiful with the original color scheme. I still think it's a beautiful piece of architecture but the new color palette was a downgrade in my opinion. And to me, the multi-colored banners on the now multi-colored castle look tacky - there's too much contrast even within just the new paint job and the banners take it all over the place. If their goal was "iridescent," I don't know why they didn't just go iridescent. But again, we can all have different opinions.

It's interesting that we all have such strong opinions about the castle - shows how iconic and beloved it truly is. We all want to see it in it's absolute best and we want the Imagineers to serve it love, respect, and the justice we all think it deserves. But as far as art goes, which the castle ultimately is, it's really subjective so we all have a different idea of what the castle should look like.
Click to expand...

Sorry to interrupt your narrative, but have you seen the castle in person recently? We saw it in September, December last year with what at time appeared to be pink uppers and purple iridescent turret roofs. Our last trip which ended a week ago, the castle pink had faded to a muted color and the turrets were deep blue.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom