Back then, it didn't cost me 10 percent of my annual income to visit for a week. And it was better when the company was more focused on the guest experience than it was trying to beat last quarter's numbers.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
deleted
- Thread starter iHeartDisneylandCats
- Start date
Raineman
Well-Known Member
A couple things:
This whole discussion about IP or no IP really has to go back to this-for every member of this forum, what first attracted you to Disney? I would say the vast majority became fans of Disney through the characters that appeared in movies, tv shows, video games, etc. So, basically, your first exposure, and the reason you started to like Disney, was through Disney owned IPs. Now, some of you feel that there are too many IP-based attractions at WDW. If no Disney characters had ever been developed, and Walt was a man who decided to open a theme park full of attractions that did not contain any recognizable components, would we be where we are today as it relates to Disney theme parks? I will admit, it seems like the current IP within the parks is now focused more heavily on IPs of the last decade or two as opposed to the classic Disney IP, which I don't really agree with, but it keeps the masses rolling in though the park gates.
Opinion is not fact. Fact is fact. Concrete data and observations are fact; the way a person interprets and processes something where not enough concrete evidence/data exists is opinion. Some people can't separate the two, and it shows on this forum.
This whole discussion about IP or no IP really has to go back to this-for every member of this forum, what first attracted you to Disney? I would say the vast majority became fans of Disney through the characters that appeared in movies, tv shows, video games, etc. So, basically, your first exposure, and the reason you started to like Disney, was through Disney owned IPs. Now, some of you feel that there are too many IP-based attractions at WDW. If no Disney characters had ever been developed, and Walt was a man who decided to open a theme park full of attractions that did not contain any recognizable components, would we be where we are today as it relates to Disney theme parks? I will admit, it seems like the current IP within the parks is now focused more heavily on IPs of the last decade or two as opposed to the classic Disney IP, which I don't really agree with, but it keeps the masses rolling in though the park gates.
Opinion is not fact. Fact is fact. Concrete data and observations are fact; the way a person interprets and processes something where not enough concrete evidence/data exists is opinion. Some people can't separate the two, and it shows on this forum.
DreamfinderGuy
Well-Known Member
Epcot and it’s history
RandySavage
Well-Known Member
^ IP, especially Disney/Pixar toons, never attracted me to the parks. There is/was a different type of theme park fan that appears to be quite small and dwindling and is certainly not the focus of the company anymore. They are focused the DisneyBrandophiles.
Last edited:
RandySavage
Well-Known Member
No more boring than your blanket-categorizing of critics and "Armchair CEO" retort repeated in numerous threads.
It's intolerable when people try to shut down discussion on a discussion board because they see opposing viewpoints. I strongly disagree with a couple of your points, agree with the realism of others. Like a sports fan, I'm here because I enjoy the medium, good & bad, and like discussing/debating it. If you don't want to hear viewpoints you don't agree with, maybe move on yourself?
Last edited:
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
I'm a real fan, too, and I don't share your views or have a tattoo. Whatever happened to live and let live?
eliza61nyc
Well-Known Member
Off topic.
lol, this is a funny video on adult disney fans and tattoes
this is just for giggles.
Joesixtoe
Well-Known Member
Right they did, I was more so meaning the Future World aspect of Epcot seems to be fading, so I wondered if Epcot is or will be a fitted name for the park
Curiosity piqued. What are two chunks you would fix and one you think is ok as is. I’m not a fan of the stage on the world showcase side of the fountain of nations. I think the walk from The Seas to Imagination is delightful.
And so it was... by today's standards.
Joesixtoe
Well-Known Member
Cool thanks. I guess I'm just trying to figure out EPCOTs identity after all the major changes.
SourcererMark79
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
^^ Aren't we all......
Raineman
Well-Known Member
OK, anyone whose first exposure to Disney was the parks themselves, I can understand why they don’t want an over abundance of Disney IP in the parks. It’s the people who grew up loving Mickey and Donald and Cinderella and Pinocchio, and now complain they see too much IP in the parks-doesnt make sense to me.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
It's because for some reason they cannot realize that Walt didn't originate all of those. He did Mickey and Donald, but, not most of what we see in the parks, or that IP's are Intellectual Properties even if people on the Disney payroll created it. Since almost everything in WDW now is "owned" by the Walt Disney Company... they are all Intellectual Disney Properties. Bought and paid for. What difference does it make who thought of it. If P.L. Travers had been getting a paycheck from Disney when she created Mary Poppins, it would no longer be considered an IP according to many, yet it is exactly the same source of inspiration either way. Disney bought Pixar and Lucas Productions (among others) so now they are Disney Properties.
eliza61nyc
Well-Known Member
There maybe some truth also to what one was exposed to when first visiting Disney. While my kids grew up going to Disney (I did not) they were also exposed to other "magical" vacations and via modern technology they were also exposed to other entertainment. They want a good attraction/ride, they could care less who's IP it is, whether or not it "fits" where it is or what the original intent of the space was for.
Now my family doesn't have this longing for the past primarily because when we started going those thing were either gone or tremendously old and outdated, we can argue the why and why not's all day but I would hazard many of today's guest don't see the "history" behind figment, they see a place where they can cool off for 3 minutes.
I think they would be foolish to change the Epcot name, lol I've got some folks floating around my office that still call HS, Disney-MGM
Now my family doesn't have this longing for the past primarily because when we started going those thing were either gone or tremendously old and outdated, we can argue the why and why not's all day but I would hazard many of today's guest don't see the "history" behind figment, they see a place where they can cool off for 3 minutes.
I think they would be foolish to change the Epcot name, lol I've got some folks floating around my office that still call HS, Disney-MGM
xdan0920
Think for yourselfer
A million times you have posted some variation of this. Basically you could have just said. Yes. The demographics are changing. Full stop.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
I really like you, iHeartDisneylandCats, but when you start comparing a theme park to the most destructive war in history, it’s time to take a step back and look at things in perspective.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
I agree that Disney history is important, but it’s not the end of the world (or even the World!) if there are varying levels of interest in the topic. Some of us care deeply about the story behind the parks, others less so, and others not at all. This has always been the case—it’s not as if guests in the past were all theme-park aficionados or Disney buffs.
Last edited:
eliza61nyc
Well-Known Member
not at all, but I think it's combined with the vacation destination and how important knowing the history is to that place or to enjoyment of that destination.
For example, I live in Philadelphia, the so called birthplace of America. so a visitor here knows that the history of America is going to be a huge, huge part of their vacation experience. By my nature I'm not a history buff, hated it in school but I went to school back in the dark ages where most of it involved memorization of dull dates but I can appreciate historical significance without knowing the who, what and when.
Not so with Disney. most folks who plan a vacation to Disney probably aren't really concerned about the backstory to Disney. Why do we need to know what Walt had originally intended for the parks? It's not an either or proposition, where in order to go and enjoy a place you have to know all the ins and outs.
When someone goes to Vegas, while the history is colorful and interesting, unless you are into it, it's not needed to enjoy the vacation nor even cared about.
Did I notice the names on the windows when I first went, sure? did it make me want to see if those names meant something? absolutely not. it was a charming ambiance and that's it.
Last edited: