SorcererMC
Well-Known Member
To key in on this - I think that it is inspired by Gaudi's work. The difference to me between what Disney has done, for example, is that Gaudi's ironwork is functional. Disney has used it as decorative form. I can see how some might view that as sub-par.You were also previously referencing Guadí, an architect, so it seems particularly odd to claim that a lot of the design was inspired by the work of an architect, just not the actual architecture.
Ok. Thanks for this because I think it clarifies the argument of why people are saying 'it's not enough'. With respect to Dali influence, they kept it narrowly focused on the short. For me that is sufficient to anchor it, but I feel it demands more of the guest in terms of interacting with the space. If they want to know more, the impetus is on them. I do think it's a challenge for Disney to combine underlying works in this manner, and I'm trying to think of any other hotel where they have done so?Specifically saying that the design is on trend seems to be supporting evidence for the claim that the design is something one could expect at other large, business oriented hotels. It also still begs the question of “Why insist on a concept that doesn’t work?” If Guadí or Dalí alone are too much, much less combined, then maybe do something else that better fits the budget and alleged market. Disney freely chose to do a concept that they themselves admit is too much for what they actually wanted.
In large part I attribute the clumsiness of this retroactive application to the entire resort to management. IMO there are plenty of other Mexican-inspired themes that they could have chosen, that would have been consistent with the resort. It does beg the question, why? The more I think about it, the more I think they need a cultural intelligence expert.
Last edited: