News Disney Riviera Resort announced

[dreday3]

"Disney Deluxes" are a step below most deluxe hotels outside of Disney - agreed. But they're mostly a cut above places like the Courtyard Marriott I mentioned.

My only point was: Deluxe > "Disney Deluxe" > Courtyard Marriott / Destino

My take would be that if Gran Destino had the advantage of better transportation going for them (boat, walk-ability or monorail) and based on it's interior spaces, rooms, CL reviews, service reviews, lounges and restaurants - it could have been a Flagship type resort.

I really think it's that much better looking than the other deluxes (outside Yacht/Beach). It's too early to tell about Riviera, but early pictures/drawing also lead me to believe it will be up there with Gran Destino.

I don't know what Courtyard Marriotts you guys are staying at, but I've never seen one with the decor/opulence that Gran Destino has! Do you mean the luxury version of Marriott?

 

[HoldenC]

I prefer the exterior of GD to Rivera. Looking forward to seeing more the interior before I jump to conclusions, unlike some people here

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

My take would be that if Gran Destino had the advantage of better transportation going for them (boat, walk-ability or monorail) and based on it's interior spaces, rooms, CL reviews, service reviews, lounges and restaurants - it could have been a Flagship type resort.

I really think it's that much better looking than the other deluxes (outside Yacht/Beach). It's too early to tell about Riviera, but early pictures/drawing also lead me to believe it will be up there with Gran Destino.

I don't know what Courtyard Marriotts you guys are staying at, but I've never seen one with the decor/opulence that Gran Destino has! Do you mean the luxury version of Marriott?

I don't agree, from what I've been able to see online. It doesn't look like "opulence" to me -- it reads more as "imitation of opulence". JMO.

 

[dreday3]

I don't agree, from what I've been able to see online. It doesn't look like "opulence" to me -- it reads more as "imitation of opulence". JMO.

Yep, we disagree. That lobby and those lounges.....

Maybe opulence is too much (I get excited easily),..... um, very high end finishes/furnishing/decor.

 

[eddie104]

I prefer the exterior of GD to Rivera. Looking forward to seeing more the interior before I jump to conclusions, unlike some people here

That is not allowed here sir please post your thoughts before the project is completed

 

[HoldenC]

That is not allowed here sir please post your thoughts before the project is completed

Oh I'm so sorry. Let me go consult my textbooks on Mexican architecture, hotel themed, and the "Snobs Guide to Disney Parks" manual

 

[SorcererMC]

Oh I'm so sorry. Let me go consult my textbooks on Mexican architecture, hotel themed, and the "Snobs Guide to Disney Parks" manual

Imagine, if you will, telling French people that they don't know anything about France.

 

[Missing20K]

And if you look at their rooms at Le Negresco, they use the same bright colors and modern style.
View attachment 389493

Riviera's rooms are nothing like that.

 

[SorcererMC]

Riviera's rooms are nothing like that.

I know. But it might explain the bright colors of the exterior awnings, and it mimics the geometric pattern in the lobby, which didn't make any sense to me otherwise. It seems to be, um, a curious expression of Art Deco . I have questions. I just keep staring at it in awe (which is why I wanted more information and asked what people like about it).

 

[Sir_Cliff]

There's something about those open, white, tiled, and vaguely continental interiors that is giving me a suburban wedding reception venue vibe.

I'm sure it will look a lot nicer than that in person as I don't think these computer renderings do the hotels many favours. I still don't love the exterior, but I have to admit that it's nicer than the early renderings/concept art they released made it look.

 

[Creathir]

The Destino lobby is certainly grand and deluxe looking, much more so than the Riviera, as you said.

I wonder how the Riviera lobby will feel, though? Like I said, it might be able to give the exclusive ambiance of a smaller hotel.

Actually, I wonder if what's pictured as the "lobby" is meant to be for check-in at all? I was recently watching a video of the Le Negresco in Nice and noticed that the design has the check-in lobby as a room separate from the "salon" where you might sit and wait to meet someone:


Speaking of Le Negresco, have we discussed it as being one of the inspirations for Riviera? I searched the thread but didn't find anything.

Back to Riviera, one thing to remember is that it is 100% DVC. Those always seem a bit more cheaply built than the "real" deluxe resort hotels, sadly. The OKW and SSR check-in are nice but don't strike me as "grand." I haven't checked in to VGF or BLT either, but I don't recall BWV being so grand, even though I like it a *lot*.

Really it's all in the details so I'm going to reserve judgement until I walk through it myself.

The lobbies of all of the 100% DVC that I’ve been in are definitely more understated than the standard resort lobbies.

Kidani Village is a perfect example of this contrast.
Compare it to the absolutely jaw dropping Jambo House lobby. It’s cavernous at the deluxe resort, yet much more simple at Kidani. Even simple things like the atmospherics such as live music make it feel more subdued. I’m positive this is on purpose though.

The clientele at DVC are looking at the resort as a relaxing getaway, with the peacefulness and calmness you would find at home. They return every year to Disney World. The grandeur of the giant lodge like lobbies of the deluxe resort is almost wasted on us. The lobby is a meeting point, a place to traverse, or to relax in. The overwhelming grandeur of a deluxe resort lobby, while impressive, detracts from that quaintness which is loved by so many DVC folks.

I personally find the Riviera’s lobby to be refined, appealing, and serving the purpose it needs to: be the gateway to the rest of the adventure which lies beyond checkin.

 

[RSoxNo1]

These look like generic hotels.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

The lobbies of all of the 100% DVC that I’ve been in are definitely more understated than the standard resort lobbies.

Kidani Village is a perfect example of this contrast.
Compare it to the absolutely jaw dropping Jambo House lobby. It’s cavernous at the deluxe resort, yet much more simple at Kidani. Even simple things like the atmospherics such as live music make it feel more subdued. I’m positive this is on purpose though.

The clientele at DVC are looking at the resort as a relaxing getaway, with the peacefulness and calmness you would find at home. They return every year to Disney World. The grandeur of the giant lodge like lobbies of the deluxe resort is almost wasted on us. The lobby is a meeting point, a place to traverse, or to relax in. The overwhelming grandeur of a deluxe resort lobby, while impressive, detracts from that quaintness which is loved by so many DVC folks.

I personally find the Riviera’s lobby to be refined, appealing, and serving the purpose it needs to: be the gateway to the rest of the adventure which lies beyond checkin.

^^^^This exactly!

 

[WDWTrojan]

Thought I was teleported to Riviera but alas it was just the LAX Airport Renaissance hotel.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Thought I was teleported to Riviera but alas it was just the LAX Airport Renaissance hotel.

View attachment 391096

That at least has a continuous Mansard roof instead of bits of one that are visibly propped up with a wall.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

That at least has a continuous Mansard roof instead of bits of one that are visibly propped up with a wall.

Have you read the Disney Parks Blog reasoning for the design? That it started in the early 20th century, and was then added on to? What do you think of their reasons? Personally, I think it looks good, and we will definitely stay there at some point. Of course, not having been to the Mediterranean coast in the early 20th century, I don't know if the architecture is similar or not.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Have you read the Disney Parks Blog reasoning for the design? That it started in the early 20th century, and was then added on to? What do you think of their reasons? Personally, I think it looks good, and we will definitely stay there at some point. Of course, not having been to the Mediterranean coast in the early 20th century, I don't know if the architecture is similar or not.

I have read the DisneyParks Blog posts and I think the story of expansion over time comes across as ex post facto rationalization for a disconnected assortment of interior spaces. The blog posts have stated that the design is Beaux Arts, Art Nouveau and Art Deco. That is a broad span of styles, with Art Nouveau even being a reaction against the École des Beaux Arts (the ‘new art’ to the established, old art), and they’re all inside a very large, uniform building that is definitely not Art Nouveau or Art Deco. There are some traditional features but Beaux Arts would also be a stretch as a description of the building.

The general uniformity of the building also undermines the backstory of expansion. While there are most definitely buildings that have been expanded but look like they were built at once, themed experiences should easily communicate to their guests. It seems that a building that has been expanded should have some of the visual and spatial quirks found in many expansions, especially if you are going to claim a wide range of styles are present. It seems odd that someone would have their expansion meticulously match the exterior but then do a completely different interior.

 

[Communicora]

I was admittedly very skeptical of this hotel's design and posted rather negatively about the rendering in this very thread. However, we drove by it a few times during my recent trip and it either looks better in person or it grew on me. Is it the most authentic architecture at WDW? Obviously not, but it's more attractive than I anticipated.

 

[Bocabear]

I was admittedly very skeptical of this hotel's design and posted rather negatively about the rendering in this very thread. However, we drove by it a few times during my recent trip and it either looks better in person or it grew on me. Is it the most authentic architecture at WDW? Obviously not, but it's more attractive than I anticipated.

I would agree it is not hideous, but the color palette for the exterior is pretty dismal looking... and it still just seems wrong... too plain, too commercial...too like every commercial hotel building in the world... But that is me I guess... I always expect Disney to do something a little more interesting... rather than commonplace.

 

[Missing20K]

I have read the DisneyParks Blog posts and I think the story of expansion over time comes across as ex post facto rationalization for a disconnected assortment of interior spaces. The blog posts have stated that the design is Beaux Arts, Art Nouveau and Art Deco. That is a broad span of styles, with Art Nouveau even being a reaction against the École des Beaux Arts (the ‘new art’ to the established, old art), and they’re all inside a very large, uniform building that is definitely not Art Nouveau or Art Deco. There are some traditional features but Beaux Arts would also be a stretch as a description of the building.

The general uniformity of the building also undermines the backstory of expansion. While there are most definitely buildings that have been expanded but look like they were built at once, themed experiences should easily communicate to their guests. It seems that a building that has been expanded should have some of the visual and spatial quirks found in many expansions, especially if you are going to claim a wide range of styles are present. It seems odd that someone would have their expansion meticulously match the exterior but then do a completely different interior.

I know when we do additions, we always be sure to have the new stair tower inexplicably break the roof line, becoming the tallest element of the mass. "Look at me, I'm a fire exit stair tower, all must bow to my authority."

The DPB explanation is vacuous and fails to connect it's varied descriptions with what is actually built. It speaks of elements being varied reflecting the nature in which the wings were "added progressively" but in practice it comes across as haphazard. They claim windows vary in size, shape and mullion design, but they are still repeated ad hoc over the course of the facade, belying the story of it being a progressive additive process. The ironwork balcony guards vary, but inelegantly so. Some being quite ornate and organic, and on an adjacent room balcony, the guards are vertical and parallel. Some obviously inoperable windows have guards, others do not. Some windows have a canopy, some shutters, some both, some neither, all on the same elevation of the building. Canopies and shutters are functional elements, particularly in the Mediterranean climate. Canopies and shutters are there to shade the sun primarily, and keep out the rain while providing airflow in the case of shutters. If a building would have them on one window of an elevation, they would have them on all the windows on that elevation that have the same exposure. This is not happening at Riviera.

Tell any story about "additions" to the original resort as you like, the absurdity of certain aspects of the design remain.