A Spirited Perfect Ten

[Nemo14]

Nope, not that I can tell.

That really stinks then. So CP kids and well-established CM's are all the same?

 

[Nmoody1]

As we noticed yesterday, WDW management is continuing its war on benches, this time at DAK. We were walking along seeing the new passage behind the Harambe Marketplace, and when we came out to go see with standby time at KS, we noticed that WDW has removed the benches that used to be opposite the Fastpass entrance. So now you have people milling around waiting for their FP time (which makes no sense to us, but it is what it is), instead of taking a break.

Then as we walked towards the park entrance, we noticed that all of the benches along the walkway between Creature Comforts and Island Mercantile are missing. The only place to sit now is on the stone walls forming the planters, which have neither backs not form-fitting seats. We noticed this and encounter a "suit" as we noticed, and stopped her to mention it. She expressed surprise, and indicated that she had not noticed. Great.

(We also will not mention the removal of the benches outside of Island Mercantile, which are gone, but since they are doing construction in that area with walls up all around we'll give them a pass on this one.

On the way out of the park, we thought we'd stop at Guest Relations and complain. And to our surprise, the CM there actually took our complaint and wrote it down (as contrasted with MK GR, who hand you a business card with an actual and email address on it and suggest you send it that way and won't write anything down.) We don't expect any changes, but how will management know that people recognize the changes and are not happy with them.

I can't remember where I was inWDW last week - I want to say AK and I did see some new benches.... not the nice themed ones the park was known for... but green generic benches.

More alarming than the lack of BENCHES in the ANIMAL kingdom was the lack of ANIMALS from the park entrance... it seemed all of the animal exhibits from park entry through to the Oasis were empty and information covered up. No doubt it will soon be bulldozed for an endless emporium of avatar products and Disneyland (not world) mugs.

 

[FutureCEO]

As we noticed yesterday, WDW management is continuing its war on benches, this time at DAK. We were walking along seeing the new passage behind the Harambe Marketplace, and when we came out to go see with standby time at KS, we noticed that WDW has removed the benches that used to be opposite the Fastpass entrance. So now you have people milling around waiting for their FP time (which makes no sense to us, but it is what it is), instead of taking a break.

Then as we walked towards the park entrance, we noticed that all of the benches along the walkway between Creature Comforts and Island Mercantile are missing. The only place to sit now is on the stone walls forming the planters, which have neither backs not form-fitting seats. We noticed this and encounter a "suit" as we noticed, and stopped her to mention it. She expressed surprise, and indicated that she had not noticed. Great.

(We also will not mention the removal of the benches outside of Island Mercantile, which are gone, but since they are doing construction in that area with walls up all around we'll give them a pass on this one.

On the way out of the park, we thought we'd stop at Guest Relations and complain. And to our surprise, the CM there actually took our complaint and wrote it down (as contrasted with MK GR, who hand you a business card with an actual and email address on it and suggest you send it that way and won't write anything down.) We don't expect any changes, but how will management know that people recognize the changes and are not happy with them.

Less benches, more people buy drinks. But benches are good to rest and people watch.

Didn't anyone in Disney management play RollerCoaster Tycoon?

 

[doctornick]

Then as we walked towards the park entrance, we noticed that all of the benches along the walkway between Creature Comforts and Island Mercantile are missing. The only place to sit now is on the stone walls forming the planters, which have neither backs not form-fitting seats.

I think this is an interesting topic. There appears to be a strong movement among P&R/WDI to have "themed seating" as opposed to plain benches. We've seen this in a lot of new parks development -- in the FLE, the Hub renovation, at DAK, etc. You have commented on a potential drawback, if this seating doesn't have backs for support. But overall, I'm personally kinda happy about the shift -- it shows an appreciation for show while still finding a way to work in the practical. When I saw the new DAK wall seating you mentioned, I thought it was a great touch as opposed to benches which would stick out more. But YMMV.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think this is an interesting topic. There appears to be a strong movement among P&R/WDI to have "themed seating" as opposed to pain benches. We've seen this in a lot of new parks development -- in the FLE, the Hub renovation, at DAK, etc. You have commented on a potential drawback, if they benches don't have backs for support. But overall, I'm personally kinda happy about the shift -- it shows an appreciation for show while still finding a way to work in the practical. When I saw the new DAK wall seating you mentioned, I thought it was a great touch as opposed to benches which would stick out more. But YMMV.

I imagine it is a response to benches being removed. Picking up and moving a bench is easy. Removing and replacing a wall, not so much.

 

[culturenthrills]

I think this is an interesting topic. There appears to be a strong movement among P&R/WDI to have "themed seating" as opposed to pain benches. We've seen this in a lot of new parks development -- in the FLE, the Hub renovation, at DAK, etc. You have commented on a potential drawback, if they benches don't have backs for support. But overall, I'm personally kinda happy about the shift -- it shows an appreciation for show while still finding a way to work in the practical. When I saw the new DAK wall seating you mentioned, I thought it was a great touch as opposed to benches which would stick out more. But YMMV.

Yeah, themed or not having a bunch of seating with no backing you end up with people everywhere in the parks sitting on the ground leaning up against buildings and other things. Or occupying quick service seating when they aren't eating.

 

[doctornick]

Yeah, themed or not having a bunch of seating with no backing you end up with people everywhere in the parks sitting on the ground leaning up against buildings and other things. Or occupying quick service seating when they aren't eating.

It's a reasonable concern, but I think a potential solution is to design these "wall seating" setups to have some support for the back not to eliminate the concept entirely.

No reason not to have more seating like this:

 

[AEfx]

Listen, this has nothing to do with Tron anymore and hasn't for awhile. It's about you splitting hairs over something very stupid.

And I know Disney history full well and what was taken into account with this movie. But I also know that most of it didn't play a big part and that any writer out there worth their salt could come up with a similar script, possibly even a better one. It just wouldn't have been as Disney-fied in certain ways.

The only one splitting hairs is you - you keep moving the goal post to make yourself seem reasonable but sorry, you've been wrong since you entered the discussion. And now you are taking '74's opinion and pretending it was yours all along.

All I can suggest is that perhaps the director knows more about the film than you do, since you clearly don't understand the basis for the film. Argue with him, not me.

 

[Cesar R M]

The story/script/characters were all 100% "original" to the movie "based on" an existing concept.

lets not get into another silly argument...
pretty sure everyone is sick of the dumb conversation we had months ago about how Frozen is/isnot "based" on norwegian stuff.

 

[Cesar R M]

So moving away from the movie argument and back to Dynamic Pricing and the crowds at Disney.....

I did some number crunching and a Data Analysis based on the TouringPlans' historical crowd data from last year.

Short version? Yes, the Calendar Disney put out in their Survey is very very close to how life is and what days are peak/off-peak. Len's data reflects this.

Each Park drew a Peak level crowd for their respective park about 14% of the time and the resort as a whole drew a peak crowd 12% of the time overall.

Other major conclusion? DHS is a disaster. DHS isnt drawing people. DHS draws an off-peak crowd 34% of the time while the resort as a whole only draws an off-peak crowd 20% of the time. 14% more than than normal. DAK isn't far off as their crowd is off-peak 30% of the time. Epcot fanbois, bad news - your park isn't as bad off, or so says the data - as Epcot only draws an off-pear crowd 6% more than normal or only 26% of the year.

I can't imagine that management would let DHS continue down this road but nothing is slated or even rumored until 2020/21; at least DAK has something coming in 2017.

now.. if they could just run to build outright in DHS and stop the silly "lets spread the building into 20 fiscal quarters so I look pretty and get bonuses every year!".

 

[Funmeister]

lets not get into another silly argument...
pretty sure everyone is sick of the dumb conversation we had months ago about how Frozen is/isnot "based" on norwegian stuff.

Oh lol this was not my argument. Just showing the difference of the two. I was not suggesting my views of Tomorrowland.

 

[Cesar R M]

I just put this up on the thread regarding Disney's surveying for decisions already made regarding future pricing modeling. But here it is again ...

I commented on this a bit ago on the Spirited Perfect Ten thread and I'll likely copy this over.

But you are absolutely correct. Disney wants this out in the public to prepare them for what is coming. I am wondering if we're going to see some of this enacted before summer (yes, like in the next few weeks) as the media campaign to plant this and spin it as something good for Guests (only Disney could screw people and convince them that it was for their own good ... only Disney!) has moved along at warp speed.

They don't care about us. They don't care about our input. They care about corporate profiteering. They already likely have posts for the Disney Parks Blog penned by Thomas.Smith@disney.com or Jennifer.J.Fickley@disney.com or maybe even Robert.Chapek@disney.com already touting their 'revolutionary' new ticketing plan (about as revolutionary as RFID tracking bands and keyless door locks!) ready to go.

Oh, as far as the black-helicopter-ish stuff ... save that for say ... I dunno ... an exclusive home community that isn't all that it appears. Most of Disney's surveys are very easy to copy if you have just a bit of tech savvy.

pretty sure that ANY politician loves to spin it in the way disney is doing now.
the difference is.. Disney's Spin PR system is almost as good as Apple's.
I mean.. they can convince anyone that a turd is valuable as gold.

 

[AEfx]

Nope. Because Disney used to actually be able to make quality and successful films that were released under its own banner and later under Touchstone, Hollywood and Miramax.

If you're saying that Disney simply can't do that, then I'd say that they need better management.

Miramax? Miramax is no more Disney than Marvel and Lucasfilm. They were an acquisition that they later sold.

So could they make better or more successful films? Probably, but they aren't. And you and I both well know that a CEO isn't making creative decisions like that. That's not a CEO's job.

Tomorrowland is another failed theme-park based film project, which is one of the only two types of films Disney seems to be able to make on their own (the other being live-action versions of animated properties). Even the outliers (Saving Mr. Banks) are exploiting existing IP. It's like a disease with them. And it has been since well before anyone knew Iger's name.

So no matter if it was Iger's fault (because he wrote, directed, and starred in it, right...) or not - the basic premise remains - Marvel has already, and soon Lucasfilm will join it, in proving to be brilliant masterstroke acquisitions.

That's all - you can say it's Iger's fault they need them anyway, you can blame him for world hunger, or we can follow him around and criticize him all day for what pictures he isn't taking, but Marvel and Lucasfilm - really getting harder to and harder to argue that they aren't simply the saviors of Disney's live action film business.

 

[Cesar R M]

And in Frozen, you have someone who schemes to marry someone and then leaves her to die in order to become king. In Tangled, you had a women who kidnapped a child and locked her up without any other human contact in order to remain young.

Bringing up Olaf in this context seems odd: do you think Pumba and Timon were deep, complex characters?

I'm not really sure I see your point; Disney animated films have always been family fare.

they sure had a way bigger interaction than just "hugs" or "being impaled".
they even had their own tv series.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Miramax? Miramax is no more Disney than Marvel and Lucasfilm. They were an acquisition that they later sold.

So could they make better or more successful films? Probably, but they aren't. And you and I both well know that a CEO isn't making creative decisions like that. That's not a CEO's job.

Tomorrowland is another failed theme-park based film project, which is one of the only two types of films Disney seems to be able to make on their own (the other being live-action versions of animated properties). Even the outliers (Saving Mr. Banks) are exploiting existing IP. It's like a disease with them.

So no matter if it was Iger's fault (because he wrote, directed, and starred in it, right...) or not - the basic premise remains - Marvel has already, and soon Lucasfilm will join it, in proving to be brilliant masterstroke acquisitions.

That's all - you can say it's Iger's fault they need them anyway, you can blame him for world hunger, or we can follow him around and criticize him all day for what pictures he isn't taking, but Marvel and Lucasfilm - really getting harder to and harder to argue that they aren't simply the saviors of Disney's live action film business.

Iger is the one who mandate a company wide, narrow focus on franchises. The Marvel and Lucasfilm films, as of now, are still franchise films based in existing properties with the Marvel films based on existing story arcs from the comic books and the Star Wars Anthology films are basically a type of prequel.

 

[Rteetz]

Sapphire falls looks huge

 

[AEfx]

Iger is the one who mandate a company wide, narrow focus on franchises. The Marvel and Lucasfilm films, as of now, are still franchise films based in existing properties with the Marvel films based on existing story arcs from the comic books and the Star Wars Anthology films are basically a type of prequel.

Didn't argue that. Nothing wrong with franchises IMO. The problem is, Disney keeps trying to mine existing IP to make new franchises that aren't taking off - hence their need for successful franchises of Marvel and Lucasfilm.

If you look back at the list of WDP releases, you'll see that this is nothing new because of "The Weatherman" - the same thing was going on under Eisner (in a much different environment, as well - Disney helped START this whole franchise-rules mentality that now is so pervasive).

Same with the parks stuff - Disney was already on this road before Iger took over.

While I certainly wish he could do even more, and had an interest in things like the parks - he very obviously has saved the company financially - when was the last time you heard buyout rumors for Disney? He's built up the financial side of the business so far it's not even a plausible thought anymore.

 

[Cesar R M]

Less benches, more people buy drinks. But benches are good to rest and people watch.

Didn't anyone in Disney management play RollerCoaster Tycoon?

they probably are the ones who makes the attraction murder its visitors... and then post it online wishing they could do it in real life.

 

[michmousefan]

Disney makes largely children's films now.

Look at what was made under Eisner ... look at Lion King, evil uncle murders Simba's father and makes the young cub think he was responsible. Look at Hunchback. The abuse of a deformed man, murder by a priest who lusts after a gypsy woman. Look at Atlantis, characters smoking. And, yeah, the 'adult' themes of RR.

You think ANY of that would come out of today's Disney? No, we get Olaf who likes warm hugs and dimwitted fanbois instead.

Today's Disney releases films that largely have to be OK to the Mommy Bloggers who have special needs 8-year-olds. It's just that simple.

Again, Iger's Disney is all about playing it safe. If Tomorrowland had been released by any studio but Disney it would have had at least ONE naughty word in it.

One of the Tomorrowland post-show discussion points with friends (all Disney fans to one degree or another) was that the tone of the movie sorta felt like "Escape To Witch Mountain" or one of those Disney live-action films from the mid-late 70's. Some of us liked that, but we all agreed it was an indication to play it safe. Hell, even the bad guys in this flick had cartoony smiles plastered on them and "died" in non-threatening bloodless robot massacres.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Didn't argue that. Nothing wrong with franchises IMO. The problem is, Disney keeps trying to mine existing IP to make new franchises that aren't taking off - hence their need for successful franchises of Marvel and Lucasfilm.

If you look back at the list of WDP releases, you'll see that this is nothing new because of "The Weatherman" - the same thing was going on under Eisner (in a much different environment, as well - Disney helped START this whole franchise-rules mentality that now is so pervasive).

Same with the parks stuff - Disney was already on this road before Iger took over.

While I certainly wish he could do even more, and had an interest in things like the parks - he very obviously has saved the company financially - when was the last time you heard buyout rumors for Disney? He's built up the financial side of the business so far it's not even a plausible thought anymore.

Disney may have been on the road before Iger, but he has accelerated the movement. The Studio looks to be heading towards the tangled mess of only ever being able to do "Disney" films, that mining of what has been done before. Is Marvel immune to that sort of safety mandate? Lucasfilm is already sort of heading down that path with the Star Wars Anthology films. Disney's need to constantly go back to existing IP comes out of the franchise mandates and the culture of them being the end-all be-all combined with rising costs.