Only after they explain why there’s a fairy tale castle at the end of an early 20th century American small town street…. And why there are flying magic carpets in the middle of a remote jungle… and why there’s a noisy and smelly gas-powered raceway in the future where cars go 7 mph…. I can go on and on and on.
Now that this has come up twice, has anyone ever argued that the carpets were anything other than a thematic disaster for very little (if any) benefit? It's also a particularly strange one to bring up, as it's not exactly like Walt decreed an Aladdin Dumbo clone for Adventureland at the MK.
Yeah it’s their characterization and perceived influence that are questionable. This “committee” is far and away the biggest boogeyman around here…
WDW is built on a swamp, having water isn’t the issue, good design is the issue, specifically using expanses of water as part of an overall park design & the fact that the current group at Disney doesn’t inspire confidence that they’re capable of designing & executing a decent large scale redesign.
Well it doesn’t change what exists and has been the case for decades. Themes are directional and expansive. This has always been the case for Magic Kingdom. People’s understanding of theming can be far too literal and rigid, and thus restrictive for a park at the scale and success of Magic Kingdom.
I agree here. As I’ve stated over multiple threads I don’t think this has much (if anything) to do with the “committee” in question, unless it’s a financial committee. This decision is seemingly specific to the way the WDW business model is structured.
The blame should rest with TDO and the execs since likely the primary motive here is likely a financial not an altruistic one, to replace aging and under-maintained attractions over regularly upgrading them and simultaneously expanding the footprint of the parks.
What “problematic” attraction or experience purportedly targeted by them hasn’t been materially changed?
