California Adventure or Hollywood Studios?

[aliceismad]

This is actually a really interesting idea worth exploring. While DCA's original criticism were all surrounding how different it was from Disneyland, and the general lack of things for kids to do, they have still stubbornly insisted on offering more adult content at DCA.

Bugs Land was added to offset the perceptions of the park as not kid friendly, but what you didn't see are things like Tower of Terror or Screamin' removed.

In more recent times, additions like Guardians of the Galaxy and Avengers Campus are pushing DCA back to appealing to a PG-13 demographic. Maybe not as adult as factory tours and wine tasting, but still an interesting compromise.

This is what I was trying to get at with my post. DCA started as a park that targeted adults, then hastily added (arguably with poorly executed) Bug's Land for young kids, and has diversified its offerings to appeal to all ages over the years. Avengers fills a need for rides/franchise that is more appealing to the pre-teens and teens of the world while making the park more of an all-day (or more than one day) park.

FWIW, I agree with most of what @October82 said. I absolutely think Disney is trying to get people to spend more overall, has identified that families are the people who will spend that money, and wants to cater to that. Building synergies between product lines just makes sense from a business perspective. We've gotten to the point where non-IP rides have spawned (mostly bad) movies. There's no doubt that Disney will make more merchandise off FEA at Epcot than they did off Maelstrom, and I can certainly see why people are fearful of non-IP attractions being lost at some point.

 

[el_super]

This is what I was trying to get at with my post. DCA started as a park that targeted adults, then hastily added (arguably with poorly executed) Bug's Land for young kids, and has diversified its offerings to appeal to all ages over the years. Avengers fills a need for rides/franchise that is more appealing to the pre-teens and teens of the world while making the park more of an all-day (or more than one day) park.

I think the Avengers franchise does actually appeal to a much broader audience from teens through adults. So maybe it signifies a shift specifically from trying to appeal to a certain demographic, to one of just appealing to the broadest audience you can? I'm sure there are lots of smaller kids that like marvel, even if it isn't exactly age appropriate.

That they don't see a need to necessarily appeal to the youngest age group may just be reflective of shifting cultural norms outside of the parks. It seems we are seeing fewer and fewer G and PG movies made, in favor of PG-13, and even seeing some R rated fare being edited precisely to fit that PG-13 category.

FWIW, I agree with most of what @October82 said. I absolutely think Disney is trying to get people to spend more overall, has identified that families are the people who will spend that money, and wants to cater to that.

I don't disagree necessarily, but I think the idea that families spend the most was TRUE back in the 1990s and early 2000s when DCA was being developed. I don't think it's so true anymore. Famously in Japan, Tokyo Disneyland and Kawaii culture in general, flourished due to the "shop girl" demographic of Japanese women who worked, were unmarried, lived at home, and had a lot of disposable income.

And while Tokyo Disney Sea was built with the idea of shifting the norms of what a Disney park should be, it can not be dismissed that Duffy the Disney Bear is the most popular attraction at TDS. Character meetings at Tokyo Disney Sea have been known to pass 11 hours because Minnie got a new dress.

It's only been in the last decade or so, due to a lot of different aspects (housing market, social media, marriage expectations), that the culture in the US has adjusted to that same idea: young adults with lots of disposable income. There are now a lot of similarities between how Tokyo operated their parks for decades at Disneyland where you have seasonal food offerings, character events and entertainment drawing attendance with a strong AP program, rather than families making a special birthday or graduation trip.

 

[October82]

This is what I was trying to get at with my post. DCA started as a park that targeted adults, then hastily added (arguably with poorly executed) Bug's Land for young kids, and has diversified its offerings to appeal to all ages over the years. Avengers fills a need for rides/franchise that is more appealing to the pre-teens and teens of the world while making the park more of an all-day (or more than one day) park.

FWIW, I agree with most of what @October82 said. I absolutely think Disney is trying to get people to spend more overall, has identified that families are the people who will spend that money, and wants to cater to that. Building synergies between product lines just makes sense from a business perspective. We've gotten to the point where non-IP rides have spawned (mostly bad) movies. There's no doubt that Disney will make more merchandise off FEA at Epcot than they did off Maelstrom, and I can certainly see why people are fearful of non-IP attractions being lost at some point.

Has DCA become more of a multi-day park because of the single new build attraction since 2012?

I'd be curious to see whether guests spend any more time at DCA after Avengers Campus opens than they did in 2012. I'd be surprised if there is any change in that metric. The thing is - being a full day or multi-day park is something guests care about, but as long as you're spending outside the parks, it doesn't really matter to Disney.

Disneyland isn't positioned as a multi-day vacation destination the way WDW is, and that's largely because DCA never found an audience or footing that could draw people to spend more than a night or two in the limited number of available hotel rooms. So it makes sense to switch away from a model that offers a diverse set of attractions and focus instead on extracting as much as possible from the guests you do have.

 

[October82]

I don't disagree necessarily, but I think the idea that families spend the most was TRUE back in the 1990s and early 2000s when DCA was being developed. I don't think it's so true anymore. Famously in Japan, Tokyo Disneyland and Kawaii culture in general, flourished due to the "shop girl" demographic of Japanese women who worked, were unmarried, lived at home, and had a lot of disposable income.

And while Tokyo Disney Sea was built with the idea of shifting the norms of what a Disney park should be, it can not be dismissed that Duffy the Disney Bear is the most popular attraction at TDS. Character meetings at Tokyo Disney Sea have been known to pass 11 hours because Minnie got a new dress.

Tokyo DisneySea was designed specifically to appeal to people outside of this demographic. OLC realized that the biggest longterm risk to their business was Japan's aging population and built a park that would appeal to older adults. It's probably still true that OLC has more to lose from the change in strategy across all of the global Disney parks than the Disney Company does from the US locations.

Of course, it doesn't hurt that OLC also spends enough to deliver undeniably quality experiences with very rare exceptions. TDL isn't going to get a fancy TSMM as the centerpiece of a first phase of Marvel expansion. Comparing Avengers Campus to Fantasy Springs and the Fantasyland expansion at TDL is very reminiscent of the DCA/TDS comparison in 2001.

 

[el_super]

Of course, it doesn't hurt that OLC also spends enough to deliver undeniably quality experiences with very rare exceptions. TDL isn't going to get a fancy TSMM as the centerpiece of a first phase of Marvel expansion. Comparing Avengers Campus to Fantasy Springs and the Fantasyland expansion at TDL is very reminiscent of the DCA/TDS comparison in 2001.

Well I think the schedule of financing just might be a little off between the two, since TDS never had an expansion on the scale of Carsland or Buena Vista Street. I think if you added it all up, Disney has probably spent a comparable amount on expansion at DCA as OLC has at DisneySea.

There really were two different design philosophies between the two expansion projects. TDS was being conceptualized in 1988, around the same time as Disneyland Paris. After the failure of Disneyland Paris, spending that much up front was a risk TWDC didn't want to take, but OLC continued plotting along with TDS. Scrapping the concept of Westcot and building DCA so cheaply, was overall a negative when it opened, but it allowed the park to pivot directions and put more money into expanding into things that were more appropriate for the direction at the time.

In 2001 it looked pretty stupid, but 20 years later it doesn't seem like it made that much of a difference. Maybe in another 20 years when no one remembers what CARS LAND is based on, or what a Guardian of the Galaxy is, it might turn out to be a stupid idea again.

 

[DanielBB8]

Well I think the schedule of financing just might be a little off between the two, since TDS never had an expansion on the scale of Carsland or Buena Vista Street. I think if you added it all up, Disney has probably spent a comparable amount on expansion at DCA as OLC has at DisneySea.

You mean like this? TDS' version of Soaring. When you look at every project at TDS, DCA may never catch up.

 

[el_super]

You mean like this? TDS' version of Soaring. When you look at every project at TDS, DCA may never catch up.

Huh? DCA already had Soarin. The development costs were carried under the DCA project.

 

[DanielBB8]

Huh? DCA already had Soarin. The development costs were carried under the DCA project.

Soarin' at DCA was the bare minimum. OLC continues to exceed with every project.

 

[el_super]

Soarin' at DCA was the bare minimum. OLC continues to exceed with every project.

OLC exceeds at every project by... cloning attractions that have been at DCA for 20 years?

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

That Japanese Soaring seems to really oversell the product. It's a good ride, but still. Universal is guilty of doing the same thing these days with creating amazing waiting lines that overshadow the ride itself.

 

[aliceismad]

You mean like this? TDS' version of Soaring. When you look at every project at TDS, DCA may never catch up.

It's a lovely building, as I'm led to believe all the buildings at TDS are, but I'm not sure how it matches the attraction itself. I think it's in the Mediterranean area? I quite like the airplane hangar-style DCA building, especially when it's Soarin over California (which I think is better than the world version). Of course, I really like the entire Condor Flats area and the tie-ins with the Grand Californian.

My husband, while stuck in Tokyo for a couple of days, decided to go to Disneyland rather than DisneySea, and I'll never understand why. He was not impressed with Tokyo Disneyland. I would like to see TDS someday.

 

[PiratesMansion]

It's a lovely building, as I'm led to believe all the buildings at TDS are, but I'm not sure how it matches the attraction itself. I think it's in the Mediterranean area? I quite like the airplane hangar-style DCA building, especially when it's Soarin over California (which I think is better than the world version). Of course, I really like the entire Condor Flats area and the tie-ins with the Grand Californian.

My husband, while stuck in Tokyo for a couple of days, decided to go to Disneyland rather than DisneySea, and I'll never understand why. He was not impressed with Tokyo Disneyland. I would like to see TDS someday.

Maybe he didn't really understand what DisneySea was? When I was on my study abroad term in college, pretty much everyone assumed it was a water park until I told them otherwise.

I suppose I can understand being let down by Tokyo Disneyland, even though it's a wonderful park. Not a lot there that's unique and not designed to the same level of care as the US castle parks, even if it excels in other ways. Depends on what you're expecting coming in too, I imagine.

 

[DanielBB8]

That Japanese Soaring seems to really oversell the product. It's a good ride, but still. Universal is guilty of doing the same thing these days with creating amazing waiting lines that overshadow the ride itself.

Sorry, I often felt Soarin is one of the top rides at DCA. Having a much better presentation does sell the experience. DCA’s Soarin is just a hangar styled building. That’s what it’s designed to be when fitting into barebones California Adventure park. It’s so infectious that there’s even more warehouse styled buildings in Hollywood Backlot. Decades ago, I actually worked in aircraft manufacturing in Long Beach. It’s pretty much the industrial feeling of aircraft maintenance. For a while, they even had a military aircraft for the Captain Marvel meet and greet at Hollywood Backlot. TDS’ Soaring brings it up a notch. They couldn’t do the same for MuppetVision at DCA that also felt cut rate. Bug’s Theater was much better in presentation, but it succumbed to waning interest.

 

[DanielBB8]

It's a lovely building, as I'm led to believe all the buildings at TDS are, but I'm not sure how it matches the attraction itself. I think it's in the Mediterranean area? I quite like the airplane hangar-style DCA building, especially when it's Soarin over California (which I think is better than the world version). Of course, I really like the entire Condor Flats area and the tie-ins with the Grand Californian.

It looks flat when right next to the Grand Californian. There’s also no indoor queue line when lines exceed 15 minutes. Everyone is standing outside. The criticism of the park remains the lack of shade.

 

[aliceismad]

It looks flat when right next to the Grand Californian. There’s also no indoor queue line when lines exceed 15 minutes. Everyone is standing outside. The criticism of the park remains the lack of shade.

Perhaps what I think makes the area great is exactly what you think makes it boring. If you worked in aircraft maintenance, maybe it doesn't feel special to you. I've been in a lot of military hangars, historic hangars, and to most national parks in the American West, and I feel like the whole area, Soarin included, does a good job at capturing that feeling. I enjoy the historic/industrial feel, and I think there is a real sense of place in that area of DCA. The sense of place and immersion is what makes a park, or anywhere really, feel special to me. I agree shade is always an issue at any park, but the foliage has grown up nicely, and personally I'd take the presentation of Soarin at DCA over the one at Epcot any day of the week.