Anyone who brings up issues about Michael Jackson in the "EO" thread are promptly b*tched out by those who don't believe it to be a valid topic of conversation under that thread, but it seems to be an issue worth discussing to many people.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Does Michael Jackson belong at WDW?
- Thread starter wizards8507
- Start date
I was on facebook the other day and facebook "suggested" that I become a fan of Michael Jackson because many who are fans of "Walt Disney World" are fans of Michael Jackson... I couldn't help but wonder how many of them were under 14.
Evil Genius
Well-Known Member
It isn't that the MJ issue isn't a valid debate, it's that the thread it was occurring in wasn't where it belonged!
We can debate until our fingers fall off...just in the proper locale.
Alas, the genesis of this thread.
Evil Genius
Well-Known Member
Well now it has a home...no one can balk.
Until WDW builds a cemetery I am going to say no. MJ, or any other dead celebrity for that matter, should not be allowed in WDW.
sweetpee_1993
Well-Known Member
There needs to be more choices as neither option applies to my thinking on the subject.
Controversy aside, I don't see EO being a good fit or a step in the right direction. It's more like a step backward. And the better question is: Would EO be back in the parks today if MJ was still alive? I think not. And that's exactly the reason I don't understand why EO is back now. It's a cheap milking of the public interest that arose from a person's death. No arguing that. :shrug: And it just feels wrong. :lookaroun
Controversy aside, I don't see EO being a good fit or a step in the right direction. It's more like a step backward. And the better question is: Would EO be back in the parks today if MJ was still alive? I think not. And that's exactly the reason I don't understand why EO is back now. It's a cheap milking of the public interest that arose from a person's death. No arguing that. :shrug: And it just feels wrong. :lookaroun
I think the Californians (i.e. Disneyland) responded much more positively than visitors to Epcot are likely to. It's a different "crowd," so to speak.
Mr. Morrow
New Member
This isn't a good pool with only 2 options.
It's a yes or no question.
Mr. Morrow
New Member
Well you can be against it for different reason. Like me I am against is not because of what he is accussed of but because it dates FW even more than it is.
David Roberts
Member
So no Rod Serling on ToT?:shrug:
Monty
Brilliant...and Canadian
- In the Parks
- No
Actually, once you elaborated on what yes and no mean to you it no longer qualifies as a yes or no question. Someone may very well think "yes" because the attraction itself is worth bringing back regardless of its star. Others might think "no" because it's a piece of crap attraction, nothing to do with MJ's supposed transgressions.
I'd say that comment is about the *attraction*, not the *man*, so it belongs in the other thread... the one you kicked this conversation out of.
SleepingMonk
Well-Known Member
No.
For all the reasons mentioned.
For all the reasons mentioned.
Right but the purpose of this thread was to specifically discuss MJ's 'supposed transgressions.' There is already a thread to discuss the attraction of "Captain EO." The reason I made this thread in the first place is because any personal discussion of MJ was being met with ridicule, as it didn't "belong" in the EO discussion.
Mr. Morrow
New Member
Well you shouln't have put EO in the title.
Monty
Brilliant...and Canadian
- In the Parks
- No
I haven't seen Rod's rotting corpse on ToT... Have you?
The poster you quoted was making a joke.
Live Rod Serling in an attraction....Fine. Rod Serling's corpse walking around...not so fine.