Disney Playing catch up with Universal... Potter Disney's biggest mistake in 20 years...

[lazyboy97o]

I rather own Pixar and Star Wars, then rent Potter from JK and WB. If Disney landed Potter, they may have lost Pixar and probably never would have purchased Star Wars. I think Disney got the better end of the deal.

You're ability to twist and spin is impressive.

 

[marni1971]

You're ability to twist and spin is impressive.

I wouldn't call it impressive as such.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

I wouldn't call it impressive as such.

Thats cause you iz a UniFanboyzz

 

[Quinnmac000]

I wonder how he is going to twist the fact Universal put in a permit for their new park while Disney still hasn't even put anything in for Star Wars.

 

[Skip]

I rather own Pixar and Star Wars, then rent Potter from JK and WB. If Disney landed Potter, they may have lost Pixar and probably never would have purchased Star Wars. I think Disney got the better end of the deal.

Wait, what? What? I'm still trying to make sense of this. Rent? Own? These are three entirely different situations... Disney had previous, strong relationships with both the PIXAR and Star Wars brands prior to owning them... they never had any relationship with JKR/WB & the Potter franchise until the theme park talks... I don't typically like the apples and oranges analogy, but here I think it's well-suited...

 

[lazyboy97o]

I wonder how he is going to twist the fact Universal put in a permit for their new park while Disney still hasn't even put anything in for Star Wars.

Disney has to concentrate on Shanghai Disneyland and Pandora first because they only hire a small group of the best. They don't spread themselves thin and hire any idiot like Comcast does.

 

[Skip]

That's all awesome, and all, but this conversation was about whether one person is allowed to have the opinion that one attraction is enjoyable and to further enjoy one attraction more than another one. As such, only that one person's opinion matters.

You keep changing the argument and moving the goalpost as soon as it becomes clear that what you're saying is deliberately contrarian and nothing more. You argued that my initial point about The Godfather (which I expanded into a larger discussion of objective measures of quality and all opinions not being created equal) was "bunk." I offered my follow-up to that "retort" (not a very good or well-argued one I'll add), and instead of actually engaging in a discussion you provide another one-liner (which is the grand majority of your posts) that add nothing but more troll bait.

You can have your individual opinion. But if you really feel no other opinions matter in the grand scheme of things, you've got a very warped worldview.

 

[Quinnmac000]

Disney has to concentrate on Shanghai Disneyland and Pandora first because they only hire a small group of the best. They don't spread themselves thin and hire any idiot like Comcast does.

The same idiots that stole the headlines from Disney to create the impressive and well themed park area?

 

[lazyboy97o]

The same idiots that stole the headlines from Disney to create the impressive and well themed park area?

Haven't you been reading the reviews? Nobody likes Diagon Alley. It is an embarrassment.

 

[dadddio]

You keep changing the argument and moving the goalpost as soon as it becomes clear that what you're saying is deliberately contrarian and nothing more

No, I tried to return play to where the goalpost actually was, rather than where you guys took it.

 

[mahnamahna101]

It amuses me that even in making that statement, you've twisted my stated position.

It amuses me that you don't have any real evidence to back up your position to begin with...

What "position" do you even have?

People should be allowed to enjoy mindless ("fun") attractions at Epcot regardless of whether they uphold the theme? If they're spending thousands of dollars, give them fun?!? Even at the cost of thematic integrity/immersion?

Even a terrible attraction like Stitch's Great Escape is considered "fun" by a few people... does that mean it should stay? Is the Imagination pavillion well done in its current state because one person somewhat enjoyed themselves? Dinorama makes a few kids happy, so lets keep it, right? Who cares about theme/transitions?!? A few out of millions of guests thought it was "good" so it should stay!

That's the TDO bean counter mentality - justifying nearly every terrible/mediocre attraction's existence so they don't have to spend money on a replacement

You generally don't understand the concept of certain films, shows, songs, attractions, paintings, etc... being inherently higher quality than others.

More importantly, you DO hold the view that Epcot should have attractions that are "fun for fun's sake". Your first post featured you stating "how dare those people have fun at an "amusement park" (your wrong dubbing of Epcot) after spending thousand and thousands of dollars"

But shouldn't quality and dedication to theme be high if I'm spending that much? Shouldn't Future World be a truly futuristic look at the innovations on the horizon rather than Nemo playing hide and seek? Shouldn't DHS be overhauled to actually have a coherent theme? Shouldn't Tomorrowland stay dedicated to "a future that never was"? Shouldn't the experience be immersive and top notch?

I don't go to Disney or Universal to just "have fun". If I wanted that, I'd go to Six Flags, Busch Gardens, Cedar Point, any of the regional amusement parks where some thrills/fun is the only goal.

But at a theme park, immersion goes along with thrills/fun. It's not just for "amusement" like Six Flags is. Sure, people are entitled to opinions. But the informed opinion for all fields is what lets us make intelligent choices. Disney is higher quality theming than Six Flags - that's something no one can argue/debate. While one can prefer Six Flags over Disney, the general consensus leans toward the House of Mouse.

Magic Kingdom was themed to stylized depictions of our past and our future - places you can't visit.

Epcot was themed to be a year round, permanent World's Fair - one side determined to provide a realistic depiction of actual innovations in science, math, etc. the other determined to showcase nations/cultures from around the world.

Hollywood Studios is a hodgepodge that should be converted into one big contemporary Hollywood adventure - the place where less G rated IPs go. But currently, it's loosely based on a movie studio.

Animal Kingdom is themed to represent animals living, extinct and imaginary. The park also strives to educate on wildlife, conservation, etc. similar to the Land pavillion at Epcot.

None of these parks are just "fun" - they're primarily immersive. They take you to places you've never been. Six Flags takes you to warehouses and concrete.

You can certainly have fun at Disney - no one would be on here if they didn't! But Universal and Disney strive for more than just brief thrills or brief enjoyment. They strive, or used to in TDO's, for transporting you into a fantasy world

 

[danlb_2000]

I wonder how he is going to twist the fact Universal put in a permit for their new park while Disney still hasn't even put anything in for Star Wars.

When did that happen?

 

[dadddio]

It amuses me that you don't have any real evidence to back up your position to begin with...

What "position" do you even have?

People should be allowed to enjoy mindless ("fun") attractions at Epcot regardless of whether they uphold the theme? If they're spending thousands of dollars, give them fun?!? Even at the cost of thematic integrity/immersion?

Even a terrible attraction like Stitch's Great Escape is considered "fun" by a few people... does that mean it should stay? Is the Imagination pavillion well done in its current state because one person somewhat enjoyed themselves? Dinorama makes a few kids happy, so lets keep it, right? Who cares about theme/transitions?!? A few out of millions of guests thought it was "good" so it should stay!

That's the TDO bean counter mentality - justifying nearly every terrible/mediocre attraction's existence so they don't have to spend money on a replacement

You generally don't understand the concept of certain films, shows, songs, attractions, paintings, etc... being inherently higher quality than others.

More importantly, you DO hold the view that Epcot should have attractions that are "fun for fun's sake". Your first post featured you stating "how dare those people have fun at an "amusement park" (your wrong dubbing of Epcot) after spending thousand and thousands of dollars"

But shouldn't quality and dedication to theme be high if I'm spending that much? Shouldn't Future World be a truly futuristic look at the innovations on the horizon rather than Nemo playing hide and seek? Shouldn't DHS be overhauled to actually have a coherent theme? Shouldn't Tomorrowland stay dedicated to "a future that never was"? Shouldn't the experience be immersive and top notch?

I don't go to Disney or Universal to just "have fun". If I wanted that, I'd go to Six Flags, Busch Gardens, Cedar Point, any of the regional amusement parks where some thrills/fun is the only goal.

But at a theme park, immersion goes along with thrills/fun. It's not just for "amusement" like Six Flags is. Sure, people are entitled to opinions. But the informed opinion for all fields is what lets us make intelligent choices. Disney is higher quality theming than Six Flags - that's something no one can argue/debate. While one can prefer Six Flags over Disney, the general consensus leans toward the House of Mouse.

Magic Kingdom was themed to stylized depictions of our past and our future - places you can't visit.

Epcot was themed to be a year round, permanent World's Fair - one side determined to provide a realistic depiction of actual innovations in science, math, etc. the other determined to showcase nations/cultures from around the world.

Hollywood Studios is a hodgepodge that should be converted into one big contemporary Hollywood adventure - the place where less G rated IPs go. But currently, it's loosely based on a movie studio.

Animal Kingdom is themed to represent animals living, extinct and imaginary. The park also strives to educate on wildlife, conservation, etc. similar to the Land pavillion at Epcot.

None of these parks are just "fun" - they're primarily immersive. They take you to places you've never been. Six Flags takes you to warehouses and concrete.

You can certainly have fun at Disney - no one would be on here if they didn't! But Universal and Disney strive for more than just brief thrills or brief enjoyment. They strive, or used to in TDO's, for transporting you into a fantasy world

That was quite a wall of text, there. It didn't do anything but show that you are still fighting against what you have bent my position to be, rather than what it was stated to be, however. I guess that way you can 'score'. Woo Hoo!!!

 

[dadddio]

When did that happen?

Just nod and keep walking. Don't try to effect their reality.

 

[Skip]

It amuses me that you don't have any real evidence to back up your position to begin with...

What "position" do you even have?

People should be allowed to enjoy mindless ("fun") attractions at Epcot regardless of whether they uphold the theme? If they're spending thousands of dollars, give them fun?!? Even at the cost of thematic integrity/immersion?

Even a terrible attraction like Stitch's Great Escape is considered "fun" by a few people... does that mean it should stay? Is the Imagination pavillion well done in its current state because one person somewhat enjoyed themselves? Dinorama makes a few kids happy, so lets keep it, right? Who cares about theme/transitions?!? A few out of millions of guests thought it was "good" so it should stay!

That's the TDO bean counter mentality - justifying nearly every terrible/mediocre attraction's existence so they don't have to spend money on a replacement

You generally don't understand the concept of certain films, shows, songs, attractions, paintings, etc... being inherently higher quality than others.

More importantly, you DO hold the view that Epcot should have attractions that are "fun for fun's sake". Your first post featured you stating "how dare those people have fun at an "amusement park" (your wrong dubbing of Epcot) after spending thousand and thousands of dollars"

But shouldn't quality and dedication to theme be high if I'm spending that much? Shouldn't Future World be a truly futuristic look at the innovations on the horizon rather than Nemo playing hide and seek? Shouldn't DHS be overhauled to actually have a coherent theme? Shouldn't Tomorrowland stay dedicated to "a future that never was"? Shouldn't the experience be immersive and top notch?

I don't go to Disney or Universal to just "have fun". If I wanted that, I'd go to Six Flags, Busch Gardens, Cedar Point, any of the regional amusement parks where some thrills/fun is the only goal.

But at a theme park, immersion goes along with thrills/fun. It's not just for "amusement" like Six Flags is. Sure, people are entitled to opinions. But the informed opinion for all fields is what lets us make intelligent choices. Disney is higher quality theming than Six Flags - that's something no one can argue/debate. While one can prefer Six Flags over Disney, the general consensus leans toward the House of Mouse.

Magic Kingdom was themed to stylized depictions of our past and our future - places you can't visit.

Epcot was themed to be a year round, permanent World's Fair - one side determined to provide a realistic depiction of actual innovations in science, math, etc. the other determined to showcase nations/cultures from around the world.

Hollywood Studios is a hodgepodge that should be converted into one big contemporary Hollywood adventure - the place where less G rated IPs go. But currently, it's loosely based on a movie studio.

Animal Kingdom is themed to represent animals living, extinct and imaginary. The park also strives to educate on wildlife, conservation, etc. similar to the Land pavillion at Epcot.

None of these parks are just "fun" - they're primarily immersive. They take you to places you've never been. Six Flags takes you to warehouses and concrete.

You can certainly have fun at Disney - no one would be on here if they didn't! But Universal and Disney strive for more than just brief thrills or brief enjoyment. They strive, or used to in TDO's, for transporting you into a fantasy world

QFT, excellent post. @dadddio - you failed to back up your original point in the micro argument, and you clearly can't argue the macro argument either. Stop using smoke and mirrors and engage with an actual argument... or don't bother, because at this point your schtick is old and obvious. I don't mind differing view points, that's what discussion is about, but I've yet to see you write a post as thoughtful or as comprehensive or as engaged or as intelligently argued as the one I've quoted.

 

[Quinnmac000]

When did that happen?

Parkscope posted the permit on twitter...

 

[mahnamahna101]

That was quite a wall of text, there. It didn't do anything but show that you are still fighting against what you have bent my position to be, rather than what it was stated to be, however. I guess that way you can 'score'. Woo Hoo!!!

Tell me your "position" then...

 

[Skip]

When did that happen?

Apparently a new permit was filed today for a section of the Wondersea Island water park, referring to "Volcano Bay."

 

[danlb_2000]

Parkscope posted the permit on twitter...

I don't see it. Only thing I see is a Trademark filing for Volcano Bay.

 

[dupac]

This poster hasn't exactly stated an argument....

This is the funniest bit of sarcasm ever used on the internet.

Those darn people having fun at an amusement park that they paid thousands of dollars to go to on their too small vacation. They're doing it WRONG!!!

First off, don't care. You win the Internet. Go you.

Second off, I refused to be offended if people enjoy non-educational attractions while on vacation. You are welcome to get all offended at what other people enjoy, but I don't see the point.

Yes, people have already informed me that liking Nemo is bad and not thinking that Figment is awesome is a sign of the debbil.

How dare people like what they like and not what they don't and dare express these personal opinions on the Internet.

You got something better? He likes the Godfather. In his opinion, the Godfather is a great movie. It's too bad that he doesn't allow for other people deciding the things that they like.

I get his point with the Godfather thing. He is arguing that quality is something that can be decided and that any personal opinions (that run contrary to his) don't matter. I get his point. I merely think it's bunk.

Of course I know what Epcot was created for. The company felt that having two theme parks on property would be more profitable than having one theme park on the property.

I also know why you think that it was created, because you and a few others keep telling us.

It should also be noted that no one has argued that 'edutainment' must go away. That is just you trying to twist other people's posts so that you can 'win'.

That's all awesome, and all, but this conversation was about whether one person is allowed to have the opinion that one attraction is enjoyable and to further enjoy one attraction more than another one. As such, only that one person's opinion matters.

Here it looks like he is just upset because he believes that everyone should have the ability to like whatever they want.