-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Anyone else who can't stand the Dino-Rama section of Animal Kingdom?
- Thread starter DisneyJunkie
- Start date
Zummi Gummi
Pioneering the Universe Within!
I dislike it too, which is a pity, because a dinosaur themed land is an excellent idea. Plus, Dinosaur is my favorite attraction in the park, and deserves better surrounding attractions than this Hester and Chester nonsense.
Was it Joe Rhodes who declared (referring to Dinorama), "All of this can be gone in one night."???
Was it Joe Rhodes who declared (referring to Dinorama), "All of this can be gone in one night."???
Like most things at AK Dinorama/dinoland is a disappointment.
I agree very much so with that statement, HOWEVER......Expedition Everest is a huge leap forward in terms of drawing people to this park. If nothing else, EE has caused me to change my opinion that AK is a one-time-visit only park during any one of my WDW vacations. Now I'd park hop over there several times just to ride EE again.
But for the most part, anything worthwhile in seeing at AK can be done in an entire morning, and that's taking into account going at a slow pace to appreciate the surroundings. I hate the Dino-Rama area, and I find Primeval Whirl to be quite lame. We have the exact same type of ride (different theming) here at a local theme park, and that ride's lame as well. Now if Beastly Kingdom were ever added, and a few more e-ticket rides thrown in, I'd be glad to say that AK was as worthwhile a theme park as the other 3.
CuriousDeGeo
Member
I think it's a great place for little kids, but it's honestly it doesn't look like something Disney would do. It looks like an upscale fair and that's not Disney. It may have a great back story, but it still is not one of my favorite things in Disney, however everytime I am over in that part of the park it seems very crowded so it must be doing something for Disney.
corn twistees
New Member
I have visited Disney's Animal Kingdom both BEFORE and AFTER the addition of the "street carnival" known as Dino Rama. I think this area of the park is *TERRIBLY* out of place, does not blend in at all with its surroundings, and dramatically cheapens the DAK experience. What surprised me is that they didn't even bother to paint over the yellow parking lot lines, which are easily viewable by the Primeval Whirl (which hardly belongs at this park). Any attempt at "theming" this area with a preposterous "back story" seems to me a surprising attempt at saving money.
I am glad others think the same thing. What in the heck were they thinking .
PS I'm new here on the website. This is one of the nicest, most comprehensive non-official websites I have ever visited. Well done!
I am glad others think the same thing. What in the heck were they thinking
.PS I'm new here on the website. This is one of the nicest, most comprehensive non-official websites I have ever visited. Well done!
nicholas
New Member
Well, yes and no. They didn't bother to paint over those lines because....they painted them there specifically for that part of the park. They designed that entire area to look like they had plopped that area into an empty parking lot. They even manually added all of the cracks in the pavement to age it and make it look like the parking lot had been there for years. So, I guess the fact that you noticed it means they did their job. :lol:
It takes a BRILLIANT singer to be able to purposely sing bad. Only the most prolific dancers can purposely dance badly. And only the best theme park can purposely make a tacky roadside attraction. It just proves how great Disney is at doing what they do to me.
Viva Dino-rama!
corn twistees
New Member
Well, I didn't "get it," and it looked, well, embarassingly ugly for a park as beautiful as Animal Kingdom.
Whoever was in charge of that should be fired:fork: !! Please note: I would never deny that Disney is not brilliant. I just think they were 'out to lunch' in the creation of Dino Rama.
PS, I know of a lot of tacky amusement parks - they seem to *simulate* the effect rather well with much less budget than Disney has....
Whoever was in charge of that should be fired:fork: !! Please note: I would never deny that Disney is not brilliant. I just think they were 'out to lunch' in the creation of Dino Rama.
PS, I know of a lot of tacky amusement parks - they seem to *simulate* the effect rather well with much less budget than Disney has....
Rob562
Well-Known Member
That quote was either Joe Rhode or Marty Sklar, I'm not sure which.
As for Dinorama, I classify it as WDI doing an excellent job with the theming (roadside carnival, making the pavement look like a decades-old parking lot, cheesy theming, etc), but the problem lies in the choice of theme to begin with. WDI can only design and build what they're told to build. Dinorama was a hastily-installed addition to a park that was getting complaints of there being very little for kids to do.
-Rob
CoffeeJedi
Active Member
What's really amazing is that that "pavement" is actually concrete themed and painted to look like old parking lot pavement! Real pavement would melt with all those people walking on it in the hot Florida sun, and women would have heels pulled right off shoes.
(still doesn't make it any more attractive however)
I get the backstory, I understand the backstory, I even can see how the backstory chronologically mirrors the actual development of Dinoland itself (in real life, Dinorama was added on to Chester and Hester's later, just like the story). But none of that means I particularly like the backstory. The orginal Dinoland was much better, it was more educational and had a nicely immersive "hyper-real" Disney environment almost akin to Frontierland. I don't understand why they would want to replicate ugliness and tackiness so perfectly however.
(still doesn't make it any more attractive however)
I get the backstory, I understand the backstory, I even can see how the backstory chronologically mirrors the actual development of Dinoland itself (in real life, Dinorama was added on to Chester and Hester's later, just like the story). But none of that means I particularly like the backstory. The orginal Dinoland was much better, it was more educational and had a nicely immersive "hyper-real" Disney environment almost akin to Frontierland. I don't understand why they would want to replicate ugliness and tackiness so perfectly however.
EpcotServo
Well-Known Member
Dino-Rama is a nice little place for familes that can't ride Countdown, and it's aspect is one that needed a place in the story of Dinoland. I really like the road they built, and the planter sign that says Dino-Rama is cool too. Now I do wish they'd take better care of it. I can actully tell what's supposed to look bad, and what's just poorly taken care of. (Mostly Primevil Whirl's show effects, and ride guts.)
hazelrah
Member
Dinorama is ugly in the extreme and represents the lowest standard Disney of attraction that Disney has ever introduced to its guests.
Do not be fooled by the idea of a "back story." There is no back story. Dinorama is EXACTLY what it appears to be: A low-rent tourist trap. It was added because the tourist market was in a downward trend and AK badly needed capacity. So Dinorama sprang up because it was cheap and could be built quickly. Disney tells you that it's SUPPOSED to be look like a cheap carnival. That's not a clever back story; that's the literal truth. The only thing fictitious about it are the owners, Chester and Hester. If someone dumps a pile of garbage in their front lawn, and then tries to say "I meant to do that," it still doesn't make it right.
Contrast Chester and Hester's Dinorama with their original souvenir shop that opened with Dinoland in 1998. The shop is built along the same idea, but is infinitely more clever, detailed, and whimsical than the loud mess outside.
Do not be fooled by the idea of a "back story." There is no back story. Dinorama is EXACTLY what it appears to be: A low-rent tourist trap. It was added because the tourist market was in a downward trend and AK badly needed capacity. So Dinorama sprang up because it was cheap and could be built quickly. Disney tells you that it's SUPPOSED to be look like a cheap carnival. That's not a clever back story; that's the literal truth. The only thing fictitious about it are the owners, Chester and Hester. If someone dumps a pile of garbage in their front lawn, and then tries to say "I meant to do that," it still doesn't make it right.
Contrast Chester and Hester's Dinorama with their original souvenir shop that opened with Dinoland in 1998. The shop is built along the same idea, but is infinitely more clever, detailed, and whimsical than the loud mess outside.
Disney's Mom
Member
I would have to say that I think this section is only OK for me. Like someone else pointed out, even though it is supposed to be for the kids - there isn't much for them to do other than a Dumbo type ride. My husband and I enjoy the other ride, and I think our kids would too, if they were tall enough for it.
BUT - I do not think it is horrible either, just ok.
BUT - I do not think it is horrible either, just ok.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
I don't care how well-themed it is in terms of skill, no matter how good it is if the original theme sucks no amount of dressing it up will make it any better. It's sort of like putting together a 100 million dollar budget movie and then casting horribly bad actors...if the actors suck, it doesn't matter what you surround them with you've just wasted your time.
"Showgirls" excepted, of course.
Right now, Dinoland makes no sense. It makes even less sense to me now that I've read the "official" version of the "story" in the new AK field guide. Very little of what they say in there comes across in the park experience, and even if they did convey the idea fully it is so convoluted in the first place it is just silliness.
The truth is, not a lot of thought went into it. Disney wanted two off-the-shelf rides to gussy up, and this is the best they could come up with to stick them in. So they tried to tie the land together with a ridiculously inane story, and didn't even do a very good job of getting it across.
Yeah, I'm sure it was hard to make the hottop look old...but that doesn't make it a good choice.
AEfx
"Showgirls" excepted, of course.
Right now, Dinoland makes no sense. It makes even less sense to me now that I've read the "official" version of the "story" in the new AK field guide. Very little of what they say in there comes across in the park experience, and even if they did convey the idea fully it is so convoluted in the first place it is just silliness.
The truth is, not a lot of thought went into it. Disney wanted two off-the-shelf rides to gussy up, and this is the best they could come up with to stick them in. So they tried to tie the land together with a ridiculously inane story, and didn't even do a very good job of getting it across.
Yeah, I'm sure it was hard to make the hottop look old...but that doesn't make it a good choice.
AEfx
AEfx
Well-Known Member
See, this is the key issue here...the only people that know the "story" are a subset of fans on a Disney board and now those that read the AK field guide.
That's why the area is an utter failure to me - the story does not come across to even those who are informed. Like the story or not, that is personal opinion, but it's not successful if you have to do research to understand a theme park land, LOL.
AEfx
Monty
Brilliant...and Canadian
- In the Parks
- No
So, throw in some scantily-clad Las Vegas-style showgirls and you're on the Dinorama bandwagon? :sohappy:I don't care how well-themed it is in terms of skill, no matter how good it is if the original theme sucks no amount of dressing it up will make it any better. It's sort of like putting together a 100 million dollar budget movie and then casting horribly bad actors...if the actors suck, it doesn't matter what you surround them with you've just wasted your time.
"Showgirls" excepted, of course.
Right now, Dinoland makes no sense. It makes even less sense to me now that I've read the "official" version of the "story" in the new AK field guide. Very little of what they say in there comes across in the park experience, and even if they did convey the idea fully it is so convoluted in the first place it is just silliness.
The truth is, not a lot of thought went into it. Disney wanted two off-the-shelf rides to gussy up, and this is the best they could come up with to stick them in. So they tried to tie the land together with a ridiculously inane story, and didn't even do a very good job of getting it across.
Yeah, I'm sure it was hard to make the hottop look old...but that doesn't make it a good choice.
AEfx
:ROFLOL:
DisneyNeighbor
Well-Known Member
I agree dinorama should go.
Has anyone seen the TV show dinotopia that was short live on ABC. My son loved that show so we bought him the DVD. This area would have been soooooo much better if it were themed to Dinotopia.
I guess that Lucky the dino could have been planned to be used as a dino from dinotopia. That would have gave Disney a story to have talking a Dino.
Has anyone seen the TV show dinotopia that was short live on ABC. My son loved that show so we bought him the DVD. This area would have been soooooo much better if it were themed to Dinotopia.
I guess that Lucky the dino could have been planned to be used as a dino from dinotopia. That would have gave Disney a story to have talking a Dino.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
Throw in a Gina Gershon AA that says, "I used to be Cristal Lou Connors with dingy brown hair and little bitty t**ts...It's a wonder what paint and a surgeon can do for you, darlin'." And then Dinorama becomes the best land in all of the Disney Kingdom.
You see, while I cannot appriciate Showgirls for the scantily clad part - I'm not of the persuasion that, um, "appriciates" the female form like that - there is no better bad actress than one Miss Gina Gershon.
And, in an incredible attempt to bring it even remotely on topic, right above my desk where I sit now is a framed poster of Miss Gershon with Jennifer Tilly from Bound, and since Miss Tilly is in the HM movie which is Disney related I dont feel so bad about justifying my Gershon-addiction.
AEfx
Zummi Gummi
Pioneering the Universe Within!
Excellent point. I had no idea there even was a "backstory" behind this land until reading the field guide. It was a poorly conceived, poorly executed, cheap land. I wish this had gone away before the infamous "Wand," myself.
