deleted

[larryz]

When did I say all change was bad?

When did I say you said all change was bad? Your turn again.

 

[ColinDLR]

The problem with these people is that they are far too often very soft when it comes to criticising Disney, and many of them glorify every single thing with the Disney name attached. Many of them could be compared to sheep, because they blindly go along with anything Disney does. This has caused Disney to become lazy with things that they paid extremely close attention to in the past, such as theming show buildings. For example, the very first "land" ever built in a Disney park, Main Street USA at Disneyland, was designed so that the buildings theme would be visible from every possible guest view, even outside of the park, whereas now, in the exact same theme park, the newest land, Star Wars: Galaxy's Edge (which qualifies as IP being shoehorned where it does not belong) is only themed from inside the park. Go to the top of the parking garage or the road behind Disneyland, and you will see that Galaxy's Edge is nothing but a facade attached to a warehouse.

Sorry to go back so far, and I agree with your main argument, but show building outside theming has nothing to do with a change in Disney fans. They have been not theming show building sections visible to the outside of the park since far before SW:GE. Maybe not as big as an extent, but look at Indiana Jones and Pirates in DL, as viewed from the monorail, the back of Cars Land, and Soarin' in Epcot (which even looks obtrusive inside the park, but its hard to stop that). The point is they try their very best to make every themed experience look spotless from inside the park, and they do! The decision to theme backsides of warehouses is so far removed from a changing fanbase.

 

[wendysue]

Naw, I have no problem with folks who want to live in nostalgia land (hey maybe that could be a new park) until they call me "ignorant" and claim I don't give a "crap"
then "houston we have a a problem".
But I will address a few points.

I will say this simply, one of the problems is as time moves on, many of the guest simple never experienced all these wonders. so for me it's like the old guy who swears that things were much better during "his day". maybe it was, I suspect it had it's issues just like any other time but as you guys get older and die off, the newbies simply didn't experienced the old stuff.

I actually kind of feel a bit sorry for those living via nostalgia simply because it's an exercise that can only lead to frustration. there is no going back.

I also always admit, I don't do this deep psychological analysis to theme park placement. I can see how frozen ever after clashes with world showcase, but imo the maelstrom ride sucked big time so yeah I'd rather have an new inappropriately place fun ride than something is two days older than christ and boring. The great movie ride was tired, complain to the heavens but for many it was simply 15 minutes to sit down and get out of the heat. Now sure it could have been updated and again I don't know why that wasn't considered. I have heard it was because of the cost of getting rights to the movies but again, it was time for it to go. (just my view)

Most people maybe soft on criticizing Disney because we recognize one thing, we are the consumers and at any time we do not like the direction of the parks, we criticize in the most effective way known to business. we simply stop giving them our money. Old timers can bemoan the lost of whatever they want all the live long day but REALITY is often far different. The parks are still packed to the gills.


It's funny that you said this is a thread that needed to be made, really? seems like every time there is an announcement about something new it turns into this type of thread. Almost everyone of the threads on the news forum has morphed into "Epcot sucks, too much IP and the old rides were better".

So your last paragraph pretty much sums it up. If most of the new announcements morph into "the old stuff is better", there must be something to it.

 

[wendysue]

Ya know, the same comparison could be made about music—

Sure, Boston’s first Album in 1976 was amazing. A great collection of music. There’s some who have memories of a trip to a swimming hole with it blasting on the radio...making great memories.

Well, fast forward to 2018....if all we listened to was Boston’s first album (which is still good), we would have missed new music. New music that made new memories. For you...OR most likely, for someone else.

I hate to see things go. The wife and I really love Illuminations. It’s our “reconnect “ at a park. When it changes this year, we will miss it, but at the same time, looking forward to the new show.

We scheduled a dessert party for April to say goodbye to Illuminations.

So this is all my opinion. Not to trash anyone for believing different....just my point of view

I LOVE Boston's first album

 

[wendysue]

In the "Inside Out Replacing Imagination" thread, it was recently revealed by @marni1971 that there is a possibility of the entire Imagination Pavilion being demolished, including the removal of Figment altogether. Shortly after this was revealed, I made the following comment in that thread, and @nated1226 suggested that an entire thread be created discussing my post.



Before I dive further into this, I want to clarify that I don't "hate" anyone specifically. I should have worded my first sentence a bit differently, because I was trying to say that I hate the direction that the fanbase is going.

So over the past several years, we have seen constantly rising prices, and many classic attractions have been removed in favor of attractions based on IP. While some IP attractions rightfully belong in the parks, there are many that are placed where they are unwanted by what I will call the "old style" Disney fans. Some examples would include Guardians of the Galaxy: Mission Breakout in DCA, UP: A Great Bird Adventure in DAK, and Frozen Ever After in EPCOT. It is also widely known that Walt Disney World has not received a new non-IP attraction since Expedition Everest opened in 2006. The question is why? Why has Disney abandoned what made them the king of themed entertainment in the first place, by bringing us things that we never knew we wanted, like Pirates of the Caribbean, Kilimanjaro Safaris, Horizons, Great Movie Ride, or the Enchanted Tiki Room? Up until recently, most, but not all, IP based attractions were reserved for Fantasyland, and those that weren't were used very carefully, such as Splash Mountain and Twilight Zone Tower of Terror. We are now living in a time where careful placement of IP has gone out the window, and we are seeing an unprecedented amount of IP attractions replacing old favorites.

So what changed? My theory is the fanbase.

With the rise of social media over the past several years, literally anybody, anywhere, can get behind a screen and voice their opinion, no matter how misguided it may be. This has caused lots of tension in society in general, not just among Disney fans. Before the rise of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, etc, Disney fans would congregate almost exclusively on forums such as this one. We were relatively unnoticed, and Disney had no reason to change their ways of doing business, because what they had been doing for decades worked extremely well. But now, Disney fans use new platforms to discuss the parks, with Twitter becoming the main hub for people to voice their thoughts. Unfortunately, a small group of people that had little understanding of what made the parks great began to grow, and they began to compete with each other for YouTube views, Twitter likes, and Instagram follows. These people often fight to be the first to purchase the newest popcorn buckets, review the newest cupcake flavor, or experience new attractions, without fully enjoying the experience because they are standing behind a smartphone camera and posting their location on the internet in real time for bragging rights.

So what is wrong with this?

The problem with these people is that they are far too often very soft when it comes to criticising Disney, and many of them glorify every single thing with the Disney name attached. Many of them could be compared to sheep, because they blindly go along with anything Disney does. This has caused Disney to become lazy with things that they paid extremely close attention to in the past, such as theming show buildings. For example, the very first "land" ever built in a Disney park, Main Street USA at Disneyland, was designed so that the buildings theme would be visible from every possible guest view, even outside of the park, whereas now, in the exact same theme park, the newest land, Star Wars: Galaxy's Edge (which qualifies as IP being shoehorned where it does not belong) is only themed from inside the park. Go to the top of the parking garage or the road behind Disneyland, and you will see that Galaxy's Edge is nothing but a facade attached to a warehouse.

Another issue with the new fans is that because they will accept whatever Disney throws their way, Disney knows that they can get away with basically anything, such as dramatic price increases or replacing classic attractions with very little fallout, whereas 20 or 25 years ago, they knew that it would be controversial. They now replace whatever doesn't make enough money for them, and the replacement attractions are typically built with the intent to sell merchandise. Its a win-win in Disney's eyes. They appease their "fans" (the ones that love everything Disney does and will drool over a 2 minute ride replacing an iconic 10 minute ride), and they make money from the general public (the once in a lifetime guests), who generally watch a movie at home, go to WDW and ride the corresponding ride, and take home a souvenir. I'm sure this is why Disney is now considering the removal of the Imagination Pavilion, because as sad as it is, a ride based off of a Pixar movie will sell more toys and shirts than Figment ever will, simply because of marketing.

So what can be done?

The "old style" fans have largely been silenced and pushed out by the new "hip" fans, and I fully expect that to continue. I never thought it would happen to this website, but I have even started to see it here. Those of us that care about preserving iconic experiences and attractions need to push back harder than ever before. We need to use the some of the same tactics that the new fans use, such as purchasing merchandise that is based on classic attractions. We should also be writing to Disney executives voicing our concerns with the current direction, and when we see someone defending a terrible Disney rumor or decision, we should push back and explain to them (politely) that what is happening is wrong and bad for the parks. If we continue to be silenced by the new majority, I can see a day where so many old school Disney experiences are lost that it will be too late.

We still have time. Some things have sadly been lost forever, but we need to focus on preserving what we still have, and the hope is that we can even undo some of the worst offenses someday, such as a removal of Pixar Pier and a triumphant return of Dreamfinder to the Imagination Pavilion.

I still have hope.

Because of several of the things you have stated, this is the first year in 20 that we don't have any kind of trip scheduled or thought of to WDW.

 

[Sharon&Susan]

When did I say you said all change was bad? Your turn again.

Comparing the changes of Walt's time with the half hazard changes of modern Disney management such as copying the America scene from the IASW in DLP (that has a completely different style from DL's IASW) and placing it in Disneyland's or making Paradise Pier into a land that is themed to Pixar characters that tries to be both be a classic boardwalk during the 1920's and also be hip and modern (regressing back to 2001 Paradise Pier, just now with better architecture and Pixar characters), certainly implies that I hate change just because it is change.

 

[EPCOTCenterLover]

"I also always admit, I don't do this deep psychological analysis to theme park placement. I can see how frozen ever after clashes with world showcase, but imo the maelstrom ride sucked big time so yeah I'd rather have an new inappropriately place fun ride than something is two days older than christ and boring." I've never heard the phrase "two days older than christ". Certainly there has to be a more appropriate way to make your point without offending those of us who believe.

 

[Shouldigo12]

Her entire post comes across as incredibly condescending.

What about your post, which is you talking about how wrong the younger generation is for liking the park and how it's the duty of the old timers to show us the error of our ways?

 

[VJ]

I'm kinda in the middle in this argument. Obviously Walt's "Disneyland will never be completed" quote shouldn't be taken as an excuse to put whatever you want wherever you want; changes made to Disneyland, and by extension the five other resorts around the world, should be thoughtful and appropriate. But also, you can't just hate every change Disney makes, nor should you absolutely love every change that Disney makes. It's a balance, and I think that's where I stand. I think the six resorts should and will evolve with the times; but in classy, thematically appropriate, imaginative and innovative ways. No staleness, nothing out of place. I guess that's the point I'm trying to make. Disney parks can, should and will change, as long as it's for the better.

 

[Shouldigo12]

That's totally not what I said, but you can interpret my post however you'd like.

And for the record, my views have nothing to do with age. Someone could be 13 years old and agree with me or they could be 80 and disagree with me. Age is irrelevant.

"...and when we see someone defending a terrible Disney rumor or decision, we should push back and explain to them (politely) that what is happening is wrong and bad for the parks,".

Not sure how else to interpret that. You not liking decisions Disney makes for the park does not inherently make them wrong and bad, and someone who likes those decisions does not need someone coming in to tell them why their opinion is wrong.

 

[DreamfinderGuy]

So, Re: The Chevy Comparison. Sure, that looks nice, but comparing it to Epcot would suggest that it's just evolved with the times like that car. A real comparison would be if the car of today was that exact car, but painted a bunch of different colors that don't match, dented up like hell, stripped of it's chrome, and the trunk trashed and permanently locked. It would look awful and have no consistency, right? It wouldn't have evolved at all, if anything devolved. That's what's happened to Epcot.

 

[larryz]

Comparing the changes of Walt's time with the half hazard changes of modern Disney management such as copying the America scene from the IASW in DLP (that has a completely different style from DL's IASW) and placing it in Disneyland's or making Paradise Pier into a land that is themed to Pixar characters that tries to be both be a classic boardwalk during the 1920's and also be hip and modern (regressing back to 2001 Paradise Pier, just now with better architecture and Pixar characters), certainly implies that I hate change just because it is change.

Or maybe I was just pointing out how Walt's desire that the parks not become stagnant is in keeping with the phrase about the parks not being museums.

 

[Shouldigo12]

Again, that's not what I said. It is impossible for an opinion to be "wrong" because an opinion is not a fact. Misguided? Yes. When I said "explain to them that what is happening is wrong", I was not saying to act condescending towards them and explain that their opinion is wrong, I was saying that we should explain that what DISNEY is doing is wrong. Major difference.

And it is your opinion that what Disney is doing is wrong. Whether you consider it misguided or not, if a person likes what Disney is doing it isn't your job to explain to them why they're wrong to feel that way. I, and anyone else on here, am allowed to feel that the decisions Disney's making are good ones (and keep in mind that whether they're good or bad ones are in fact opinions). You are allowed to feel that they are wrong. So, again: it is not job of people who dislike the current direction of Disney to show those of us who do how "misguided" we are. It is not welcome, it is not wanted, don't do it.

 

[networkpro]

Sorry to go back so far, and I agree with your main argument, but show building outside theming has nothing to do with a change in Disney fans. They have been not theming show building sections visible to the outside of the park since far before SW:GE. Maybe not as big as an extent, but look at Indiana Jones and Pirates in DL, as viewed from the monorail, the back of Cars Land, and Soarin' in Epcot (which even looks obtrusive inside the park, but its hard to stop that). The point is they try their very best to make every themed experience look spotless from inside the park, and they do! The decision to theme backsides of warehouses is so far removed from a changing fanbase.

No they didn't and your showing your age. Anyone who rode the skyway could inform you of the flat unthemed tarpaper roofs that lined its path.

 

[VJ]

So, Re: The Chevy Comparison. Sure, that looks nice, but comparing it to Epcot would suggest that it's just evolved with the times like that car. A real comparison would be if the car of today was that exact car, but painted a bunch of different colors that don't match, dented up like hell, stripped of it's chrome, and the trunk trashed and permanently locked. It would look awful and have no consistency, right? It wouldn't have evolved at all, if anything devolved. That's what's happened to Epcot.

In my opinion, Epcot is such a mishmashed mess because it hasn't had a cohesive vision since 1982. Add to that the fact that Tomorrowland-style areas in Disney parks don't mesh with the company's set-it-and-forget-it mentality (see Tomorrowland in Disneyland/MK and Future World at Epcot) and Epcot is made worse for it. Disney just isn't wanting to update Tomorrowland-style areas at the rate that they need to be updated.

I honestly think that people should stop thinking of EPCOT Center when they look at Epcot. Horizons isn't coming back. Universe of Energy isn't coming back. Figment will only ever be used as a shot of nostalgia to warm your hardened heart (and open your hardened wallet). Times have changed, and at this point Disney doesn't have a reason to look back.

 

[networkpro]

It goes both ways. I don't recall anyone giving you the authority to tell me what to do.

Unless you're a major share holder, your opinion on the direction of Disney has the same value as any other consumer : 1

 

[Shouldigo12]

It goes both ways. I don't recall anyone giving you the authority to tell me what to do.

I would say I got the authority when you decided my misguided views needed correcting.

 

[RandySavage]

There a couple aspects to the "Is WDW better or worse now than in your Halycon Days and why is that (Are the new fans enablers?)?"

First are the bigger strategic issues related to the physical plant. Does that IP belong there and does it matter? Is that classic attraction going bye-bye and is the replacement a better experience? Is this hotel an eyesore or will it provide great views? Am I cool with the fact that the parks will no longer originate experiences, they will come from popular movies/tv?" Like most here, I have strong opinions on these questions (mostly anti-recent and -current course), but I can understand that it is, to a degree, subjective per an individual's take.

Then there is the less-discussed, much more insidious - and less objective - changes in the standard/class of the way WDW (and Dis Parks in general) are OPERATED from then to now. This includes the much-criticized nickel & diming, merchandise & retail, graphics, lawyereering, crowd management, maintenance & sanitation, SQS, cast member quality, food quality & variety, etc.. Downgrades in such areas are only outwardly noticeable to some (though inwardly to many more) and take place over the time ("declining by degrees"). Shifting Baselines comes into play here, as well: a 75-year old Reef Diver looks depressingly upon the state of today's Virgin Island coral reefs while a first time family delights and marvels at the same, having never known what it was like. New fans have a new baseline.

A cold fact is that most managerial decisions are made with the purpose of triggering short and medium term performance bonus targets. Dis Legend Ken Armitage said in an interview before his death that the paradigm shift at Disney came after Frank Wells' death. Paraphrasing: before that event, delivering the best product was the primary goal from the execs on down. Afterward, it was money.

 

[Shouldigo12]

So let me get this straight. You disagree with my opinion that those who like the current direction of the parks have a misguided opinion, so you decided that you can now try to tell me what to do? Sorry but it doesn't work that way. If I tried to tell you what to do I'd be attacked left and right, but because you agree with recent decisions whereas I don't, the pixie dust brigade won't bat an eye. Seems legit.

Dude. I'm telling you to be respectful on an online forum and not give people unsolicited lectures on why their beliefs on the current direction of the park is wrong. It's condescending. It does not matter how misguided you think people are, they don't need your help in forming the correct opinion. Just be respectful of other people and their opinions and understand that they probably have their own reasons for feeling the way they do.

 

[Goofyernmost]

So your last paragraph pretty much sums it up. If most of the new announcements morph into "the old stuff is better", there must be something to it.

There is nothing to it. It is just that if we liked something we feel it is better. However, the fact is that those of us that felt that the old was better are also old and our visits take on a duty of nostalgia. The vast majority are going now that have no real memory of what once was. Those that are set on constantly talking about how much better it was are only talking to the few that are even aware of what the past was. We are also the people that would be spending more of our time on boards like this. So, just because there are a core number of people that are adamant about the superiority of the past are really just saying that they like it better then what is currently happening. That doesn't make it right or wrong. All it means is that in our opinion it was better. As long as the younger visitors find it good and are going to return then what we are so sure is bad, are their memories that 30 years from now will be complaining about how the new stuff isn't as good as it was when they started going there.