Or maybe not...JustinTheClaw said:
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney Purists vs. Disney Traditionalists
- Thread starter JustinTheClaw
- Start date
Hmm...perhaps this may end up a new forum question...
PintoColvig
Active Member
Since you quoted me above re: Six Flags, here is another articles about Six Flags that came out this week in USA Today. It speaks a lot about how the new CEO is copying Disney's approach.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/2006-06-13-six-flags-usat_x.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/2006-06-13-six-flags-usat_x.htm
dxwwf3
Well-Known Member
PintoColvig said:
I hope he succeeds. I wish USA Today would call them the "amusement parks" that they are, but that's just a pet peeve of mine
. But the only Six Flags I have been to is the one in Atlanta and it could use some serious help. Of course, I'm spoiled by Disney and Universal and any "amusement park" I go to just doesn't do it for me. But there is certainly a market for regional parks like that and if Six Flags does a better job, it could lead more people to the "theme parks" of Florida and California.Alright, I will try using the brute force to get the discussion back on track...
I think that your labels of Disney Traditionalist and Disney Purist are really missing the mark, both because a) Trraditionalist vs Purist is kind of biased, isn't it? and b) because you are missing a huge grroup of people.
I think that one of the issues is that there is a core group of Disney fanatics that sees everything as revolving around an interest in Disney Characters. But there is also a huge group of Walt Disney World fans who are more fans of the magic created by Disney than they are about the Characters and the animated movies and the live action movies. And this is where those Disney Fanatics who can't understand why so many people are upset over the latest changes get confused.
As someone who is a fan of the Disney Magic, NOT the Disney Characters, I find most of the changes that have happened are not in keeping with Walt's ideal of creating a magical, creative environment, I think they are simply cross-marketing attempts - branding at it's worst. With the exception of the Swiss Family Treehouse, none of the orriginal attractions outside of FantasyLand were based on Disney movies. That is only something that happened recently. It iused to be something different - something new and imaginative. Now it has simply become a case of throwing characters into a ride trying to cross sell the ride on the movie and the movie on the ride. It's not creating a new magical experience, just another sequel.
I think that this has even affected attendance, where Disney is becoming more and more a young familly park, as everything becomes related to the animated or live action movies. It is loosing it's broad appeal and become to specialized. That's why 5 years ago Pirates was considered one of the best attractions even though it was so old, yet now people find it boring and dull. A different market.
I think that your labels of Disney Traditionalist and Disney Purist are really missing the mark, both because a) Trraditionalist vs Purist is kind of biased, isn't it? and b) because you are missing a huge grroup of people.
I think that one of the issues is that there is a core group of Disney fanatics that sees everything as revolving around an interest in Disney Characters. But there is also a huge group of Walt Disney World fans who are more fans of the magic created by Disney than they are about the Characters and the animated movies and the live action movies. And this is where those Disney Fanatics who can't understand why so many people are upset over the latest changes get confused.
As someone who is a fan of the Disney Magic, NOT the Disney Characters, I find most of the changes that have happened are not in keeping with Walt's ideal of creating a magical, creative environment, I think they are simply cross-marketing attempts - branding at it's worst. With the exception of the Swiss Family Treehouse, none of the orriginal attractions outside of FantasyLand were based on Disney movies. That is only something that happened recently. It iused to be something different - something new and imaginative. Now it has simply become a case of throwing characters into a ride trying to cross sell the ride on the movie and the movie on the ride. It's not creating a new magical experience, just another sequel.
I think that this has even affected attendance, where Disney is becoming more and more a young familly park, as everything becomes related to the animated or live action movies. It is loosing it's broad appeal and become to specialized. That's why 5 years ago Pirates was considered one of the best attractions even though it was so old, yet now people find it boring and dull. A different market.
dxwwf3 said:
I too hate the fact that Six Flags and Busch Gardens and the like call themselves "theme parks." You're right, they're not theme parks. A theme park, in my opinion, and I'll say for the sake of argument in Walt's (and if past experience is any idication, I'm sure someone will flame me for doing so
), is a place where you are transported to another place/time/reality through theming, entertainment, atmosphere and people. Six Flags is a place where you wait outside in long lines and clouds of cigarette smoke to get on a roller-coaster that may be named after some DC/WB character but otherwise have no theming whatsoever.cloudboy said:
Something I hadn't quite put that fine a point on until I read your post. I will say some of my least favorite updates are Enchanted Tiki Room: Under Incompetant Management and Stitch's Great Excrement, but I hadn't quite realized why I didn't like them (aside from the fact that THEY SUCK!). Though to put a small hole in your argument, you cannot deny that Splash Mountain is a very good example of an Attraction based on a Disney movie though it is not in Fantasyland.
In the field of Pirates, I don't think the change will have a negative effect on the Attraction simply because word-of-mouth has generated a lot of excitement even with huge fans of the classic Attraction, and it was done to please the non Disney-savy Guests (read: ignorant). Also, unlike the aforementioned, Pirates is not a complete redesign, but merely a retheming.
dxwwf3
Well-Known Member
JustinTheClaw said:I too hate the fact that Six Flags and Busch Gardens and the like call themselves "theme parks." You're right, they're not theme parks. A theme park, in my opinion, and I'll say for the sake of argument in Walt's (and if past experience is any idication, I'm sure someone will flame me for doing so
You know, amusement park isn't a BAD word. That's what they are and if nobody liked them, they wouldn't be in business. However, it sounds like a cheap way to try and make themselves look like Disney. I think it's pretty pathetic.
"Who's your ideal person — dead or alive — to have dinner with?" - USA Today
"Either JFK or Walt Disney." - Six Flags CEO Mark Shapiro
Anyone else want to be a fly on the wall in that resturaunt?
"Either JFK or Walt Disney." - Six Flags CEO Mark Shapiro
Anyone else want to be a fly on the wall in that resturaunt?
Well, come on...that's what they're trying to do, compare themselve to Disney. Don't you remember the old ads: "Bigger, Faster, Closer?"dxwwf3 said:
Any self-proclaimed "theme park" is clearly trying to cash in on what people perceive as a theme park. Despite the watering-down of the term, people still think of a theme park as something grander than your standard amusement park. Which, of course, it is, but being a theme park is not just about having licenced characters and flashy advertisements. Take a look at this link from Universal Orlando's website.
Clearly they have a bit of an inferiority complex
.Not to mention some of their examples are either incorrect or illogical.
I know, I'm just saying that a movie-based Attraction can be acceptable outside of Fantasyland. Though it is far more logical in Disneyland where "Critter Country" implies adventures with semi-interactive cuddly things, whereas the Magic Kingdom's Frontierland doesn't begin to fit in with Country Bears or Song of the South. Despite what you hear on the radio, Country and Western are not the same thing!cloudboy said:
You may be right though. Had Splash Mountain been built 35 years prior, Walt probably would have placed it in or at least near Fantasyland where people expect to see a bunch of singing cartoon animals.
me said:Take a look at this link from Universal Orlando's website.
Clearly they have a bit of an inferiority complex
Not to mention some of their examples are either incorrect or illogical.
To wit, one of their examples as you may have noticed is Universal's "TODAY’S HOTTEST ENTERTAINMENT" versus Disney's "Yesterday’s Classic Fairytales." For one example, on Universal's side they have The Mummy, on Disney's they have Monsters, Inc. Now setting aside the fact the Monsters, Inc. could hardly be considered a "Classic Fairytale," last time I checked the latest Mummy movie, The Mummy Returns, came out the same year as Monsters, Inc. (2001). In fact I'm pretty sure Monsters, Inc. came out later in the year than The Mummy Returns, which puts it closer to "TODAY" than Universal's example!
Also on the list are Shrek (Universal's through a partnership with Steven Spielberg and Dreamworks) and Toy Story (distributed by Disney). Ironic that Universal should play that card, seeing as how if it weren't for Toy Story, Shrek (as it is) wouldn't even exist!
A few more:
• Disney does allow pets at their On-Property Resorts
• Under "THRILLING ATTRACTIONS" not only do they curiously leave out Expedition Everest: Legend of the Forbidden Mountain, but many of Universal's Attractions are copied from Disney's and their counterparts are on the list (ex. Shrek 4-D vs. It's Tough to be a Bug! (neither of which are my definition of "thrilling"), Back to the Future the Ride vs. Star Tours, and the most glaring one of all, Doctor Doom's Fearfall vs. Twilight Zone Tower of Terror).
• Last time I checked, Pirates of the Caribbean, It's a Small World, Jungle Cruise, El Rio De Tiempo, Maelstrom and all of the Attractions at Typhoon Lagoon and Blizzard Beach were also considered "WATER RIDES."
• Universal CityWalk and Downtown Disney are very similar in the comparison, though I think DisneyQuest alone gives Disney the upper hand over Universal.
• They at least come right out and admit that Disney has two water parks over Universal's one (which isn't even on Universal Studios' property).
Simpsons writer, Ricky Gervais once said that "Homer [Simpson] is at his best when he's arrogant and ignorant at the same time." I think that pretty much sums up Universal's "compare-us-to-Disney" campaign.
Dang.....thread still going...amazing.
PintoColvig
Active Member
It is amazing, isn't it?hakunamatata said:
BTW, in keeping with the topic, I've come to the conclusion that I'm Purely a Traditionalist or, if you prefer, a Traditional Purist. Take yer pick.