And I am not denying Expedition Everest is an awesome Attraction, nor that it looks awesome from inside the park, but the trees do not cover the building more than just a little bit.wannab@dis 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
wannab@dis
Well-Known Member
Sorry... but you're wrong. Anything outside the gated area is off stage. :wave:
So, what you're saying is if the characters that greet guests in the Main Entrance of Animal Kingdom, outside the "gated area," decided they wanted to take their heads off and smoke a cigarette, that's okay because it's off-stage? Or how about a Cast Member in full costume cursing up a storm on his cell phone while waiting for a bus? Is that okay too? Or what if Disney stopped cleaning trash off of the highways and parking lots? That would be okay too, because they're not within the "gated area" of a theme park. I guess that also means all the Resorts are considered off-stage because they don't even have "gates" as you would find in a theme park. Downtown Disney? No gates whatsoever, anything goes.wannab@dis said:
Anywhere that a Guest can see is considered on-stage, whether it's in the parks, the parking lots, the resorts, the resturants, or even the highways on Disney property. imagineer boy has the right idea. Seeing the backside of a show building at Disney World is like seeing a movie without the special effects. It ruins the illusion they are trying to create.
wannab@dis
Well-Known Member
Thankfully there are others in charge. 'nuff said.
ClemsonTigger
Naturally Grumpy
JustinTheClaw said:
This discussion about doing a "complete attraction" regardless of cost reminded me of a Jim Hill article about proposals for the Indy attraction at DL. An early concept was amazing, the final product is still pretty darn good, but budgets were used to keep it under control.
http://jimhillmedia.com/blogs/jim_hill/archive/2006/02/05/749.aspx
The reason for a budget proposal and cost analysis is to force the planner to fully think out a project before starting and allowing for proper Q&A by others to make sure the initiative is doable BEFORE venturing out on the merry road to implementation.
ONLY government does not revisit budget proposals during implementation (and we know how fiscally responsible they are). If any private company did not take those initial numbers very seriously, they wouldn't be around long. If there are major budget overruns and add on's it usually means the initial proposal was poorly done and poorly reviewed.
hakunamatata said:
I had to laugh at the quote about the attention span, because I too am a short attention span victim, which may be why I love the thrill rides and fell asleep on things like It's a Small World and the Great Movie Ride as a child, and didn't really care for Epcot either. Although I do appreciate them more now, I definitely prefer the EE, Mummy, TOT types of rides over any other. The Indiana Jones/Extraterrestrial Alien Encounter/King Kong type of rides that are thrilling and have a story at the same time are my absolute favorites.
That being said, I don't feel that I can categorize myself as a Purist or Traditionalist based on the definitions given. I LOVE new and exciting thrill rides but I'm truly sad to see any classics go (i.e. AE and King Kong) and I love Pirates of the Caribbean as is and also love Jungle Cruise, etc. So I'm in the middle. For example, I would love to see them keep Pirates as in AND add a NEW Pirates that was more thrilling. (all about compromise and optimism
)In conclusion, I LOVE DISNEY!
Tim G
Well-Known Member
JustinTheClaw said:
Ahh... I forgot... this is Your thread...
And about the interlectual conversation, as you call it nicely is IMO more a story full of nagging from a custodian who isn't happy with himself and his job... and if this is your way of life... so be it... but don't bother people who mean well... and still feel the Magic...
IMO you should be glad to be in custodial... but alas you're only an instigator...
If you even are in custodial... but for that, I'll check the employee locator...
Fortunately, Speck, that unenviable task is not in my job description...:lol:speck76 said:
The wonderful thing about this board is that we are free to discuss these issues hypothetically. If it was our job and budget, we may have to somewhat change our way of thinking, or keep the same thinking while trying to retain our high paying job.:wave:
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
wannab@dis said:
It still ruins the illusion.
ClemsonTigger
Naturally Grumpy
imagineer boy said:
Only if you let it. I'm bothered more by the giant cell tower tree that is taller than ToL on the ride in...but all of that is a different place when I enter the park. Enter the gates and all the magic I could want is there, each and every time.
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
wannab@dis said:I just can't believe that some people around here will complain about anything. Disney builds a brand new awesome attraction and they STILL find something to whine about.
Well, look at ToT when it opened. Other than complains about the line, and some people getting sick, the ride had NO complaints. It was ground breaking, fantastic special effects, advanced technology, and thrilling. If ToT had a large unthemed building sticking out of the back, it would've gotten complaints then. But it didn't, because they invested a large amount of money and managed to create a thrilling, amazing attraction. AND they themed the back.
wannab@dis
Well-Known Member
Let's try again. ToT opened prior to the existence of most (if not all major) fan forums where every armchair imagineer thought he knew more than the pros. However, when they added seatbelts, there were plenty of complaints here on the forums. :wave:imagineer boy said:
Although the theming was good, it isnt 100% themed. If it were to be 100% themed, they wouldnt have named it the Hollywood Tower Hotel. Its in Florida, not Hollywood.imagineer boy said:
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
TAC said:
So? Atleast its something. Its atleast not a huge unthemed building sticking out of the back.
Maybe there is a large unthemed building on the actual mountain.....imagineer boy said:
I think I fall somewhere in the middle of the two. Walt was a man who had a sense of nostalgia as well as a desire to explore new innovations and technology. I don't think it's possible to know precisely what he'd want or how he'd feel about every single change; he could be unpredictable. But he was a person who seemed to respect the past and anticipate the future...he wanted to harken back to days gone by in Disneyland's Main Street, USA and Frontierland, but also embrace new technology in his company's films and in Disneyland's Tomorrowland and his original concept for EPCOT.
I think that the Disney company should absoultely be constantly growing and changing, but that it is also important to understand that part of their continued success is based on traditions and keep some of those traditions alive. Quality is the bottom line, no matter what.
I think that the Disney company should absoultely be constantly growing and changing, but that it is also important to understand that part of their continued success is based on traditions and keep some of those traditions alive. Quality is the bottom line, no matter what.