Feelings about Animal Kingdom

[CTXRover]

Originally posted by AddyL
Also, how recent was your last ride on the Safari? I heard that they had problems in the first year or so, but every safari I've been on, I've seen tons of animals! It's better to go on the safari first thing, because the animals are more active in the morning.

I agree with you 100%. I've been going to this park at least twice a year (December and March/or early June) during its five years, including once during previews before its grand opening.

I've seen what appears to be an ENORMOUS increase in all animals from day 1. Especially with Elephants and Hippos. For instance, I would usually be lucky to see one elephant when it first opened, but now I see on average of 3 to 4 on each trip!

One thing I've noticed is a lack of Zebras. Were they all moved to AKL or have I just been unlucky?

 

[TURKEY]

Originally posted by CTXRover


One thing I've noticed is a lack of Zebras. Were they all moved to AKL or have I just been unlucky?

Over Christmas, I did the Safari twice. I saw 4 or 5 zebras on each trip.

 

[Matt56]

Are there separate animals at the lodge and safari? I assumed they had free roam of the whole savannah.

 

[CTXRover]

Originally posted by Matt56
Are there separate animals at the lodge and safari? I assumed they had free roam of the whole savannah.

AKL has their own separate savannahs from that in the AK theme park. I think in total, AKL has 3 "smaller" savannahs that surround the lodge. So yes, there are separate animals for the lodge and safari.

In other words, the safari in AK is not connected at all to the savannahs at AKL. Hope that clears up any misunderstanding.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Originally posted by WDWJunkie
In all honesty, Animal Kingdom is a pretty, much more well-maintained zoo than most state zoos......but....at its center, that's really all it is..a zoo. It's a very impressive-looking park that showcases the exact same type of creatures found in any other zoo, but does so in a way that they look more like they're in their natural habitat rather than in captivity. It has a few rides, shows, and attractions here and there, but in my opinion, it has the least Disney-like feel of all the theme parks. I certainly hope bigger changes are in store for it.

I think you will agree that it is nahtazu after Everest opens, along with Dinosaur, Kali, Kilimanjaro, and Tough to be a Bug. The animal exhibits may be very zoo like (except for the fact that they are the closest to the wild you can see these animals in, without actually going to Africa), but the other attractions make this a theme park. As for theming, I, too, love the ambience music here, and this park, by far, has the most beautiful scenery of the parks. It is incredible how natural this park feels. Besides that, this park takes you from a 50s American town to Asia to Africa in the same day, and does it so authentically (look at pictures of African villages, for example--you will be impressed at how authentic Harambe is). You explore real life issues that Disney has ALWAYS been a part of (Walt was a naturalist--watch some of the old Wonderful World of Colors) while experiencing a distinctly-disney park, with both Festival of the Lion King and the Jammin Jungle Parade, which is clearly the best daytime parade on property (certainly the most popular and the most fun). This park is just so different from the other parks that I think that makes some people not really like it, but I think beyond that, it is the most beautiful park at Disney World and still filled with magic--the entire park is just breathtaking; disney was right when they called it "a new species of theme park".

 

[Matt56]

I would think they would throw in some new animal exhibits with Everest - maybe in the queue or surroundings.

Have any new animals exhibits or species been added in the last couple years?

I still think an Anartic or Australia land would be great as far as wild life and attractions! Maybe even throw in a rain forest!

 

[kennyj29]

How people still compare this to a zoo is beyond me. You can tell me you have to wait on line to see animals. Don't you get it? The safari ride is totally different than a zoo!!! It's supposed to make you feel like your on a safari in Africa! It's not waiting on line to see animals! Those statements are what makes me realize that you are young! Do you see animals in cages? Do you see nothing else but animals? Don't even go there. You obviously don't like the park and that's okay but don't keep saying it's just a zoo because that's not what it was intended to be and that is far from what it is.

 

[WDWJunkie]

Originally posted by kennyj29
How people still compare this to a zoo is beyond me. You can tell me you have to wait on line to see animals. Don't you get it? The safari ride is totally different than a zoo!!! It's supposed to make you feel like your on a safari in Africa! It's not waiting on line to see animals! Those statements are what makes me realize that you are young! Do you see animals in cages? Do you see nothing else but animals? Don't even go there. You obviously don't like the park and that's okay but don't keep saying it's just a zoo because that's not what it was intended to be and that is far from what it is.

First of all, take a few deep breaths, pal, and calm down. Not everyone is going to view AK the same way that you do and it's their right. The safari ride is fine, but still, you see the exact same animals you can see anywhere else, the only difference is you're riding a tram while doing so. Whoop-dee-doo. It doesn't give me the feeling that I'm in Africa....it just makes me feel like I'm in a theme park, being pulled around on a tram to see some animals I can see anywhere. I'm going to assume you're about 15 or younger, if not, it's my bad. Animal Kingdom, at least still for right now, is a zoo.....it's one of the best-looking zoos around, but all it is is a zoo and not much else.

 

[AkiraRaptor]

Originally posted by WDWJunkie
First of all, take a few deep breaths, pal, and calm down. Not everyone is going to view AK the same way that you do and it's their right. The safari ride is fine, but still, you see the exact same animals you can see anywhere else, the only difference is you're riding a tram while doing so. Whoop-dee-doo. It doesn't give me the feeling that I'm in Africa....it just makes me feel like I'm in a theme park, being pulled around on a tram to see some animals I can see anywhere. I'm going to assume you're about 15 or younger, if not, it's my bad. Animal Kingdom, at least still for right now, is a zoo.....it's one of the best-looking zoos around, but all it is is a zoo and not much else.

I'm hoping your just using that "tram" term to make a point. You do know they are free roaming trucks that are used for the safari ride.

So I guess by your thought, any place with animals are a zoo? So BG or SW are zoos too?

When I go to a zoo, they never have rides and shows like Dino and Bugs. But theme parks do.

Look, no ones gonna agree on this. I think it's a theme park centered around conservation and naturilist ideas. And to do that well, Disney has given us real live animals to teach us something. Wow, what a concept, learning on a vacation instead of riding a mindless ride...oh wait...wasn't that called Epcot....

BTW, you even called it a theme park in you last statement...

 

[dox]

OK everyone deep breaths here...remember we are all buddies on this site whether we know each other or not.

First, thanks BigNorm for getting back to me on CTX and Dinosaur. Do you know if Dino has been improved in recent years...i found it a much "faster" ride this last visit (8/2002) than my first visit (5/2000).

Now Kenny i'm actually 31 and i am not all about rides. Have you been to Miami Metro Zoo...animals here run freely and have tons of space. They have bengal tigers roaming around an abandoned asian temple. Seem familiar? Yes the Bronx Zoo has some antiquated stuff but have you seen the gorilla exhibits. Seem familiar? Maybe both of these are not at the level of Panganini and Maharajah but that is my point. The animal trails are beautiful no question about that. And yes animals are exhibited better than at BG... but basically it is a much more elaborately themed zoo.

Does that make AK a zoo? No definitely not. But it also doesn't make it that much different than BG. Does it surpass BG in theming, beauty, scale and scope.....yes no question. But at it's heart the park is a theme park and lacks in that area. It lacks few "wow" attractions, other than Kilimanjaro, Bugs and Dinosaurs. The animal trails are great but not worth doing on consecutive visits if you have access to some of America's great zoos. BTW most zoos in this day in age don't keep animals in cages anymore and have been moving towards what we see in Miami and Disney for quite some time. That concept died out in the late 70s/early 80s.

That all being said..i think it is one of the most beautiful theme parks at Disney and i love spending time there. And I really believe with an extra land this park will be great. But all this park has is Africa and Asia. As for Asia it doesn't have much and has no sense of place unlike Africa which is very authentic looking. Dino land stinks. Anyone who defends that is stretching. Camp Minnie/mickey is an afterthough.

And yes i have done everything on my visits except for the animal trails. But i can tell you on first visit to AK i did everything at that park and was out of there by 2:30 or so. The parade back then in 2000 i didn't catch. On my subsequent visits, sometimes i have done an animal trail sometimes not or I pick and choose which one I want to see. Again I don't consider them must sees. And I think most ppl agree with me on that.

The one thing all of us here agree on is that AK is beautiful. And one day will be awesome. Till then I enjoy it but not a must see.

 

[AkiraRaptor]

Originally posted by dox
Have you been to Miami Metro Zoo...animals here run freely and have tons of space. They have bengal tigers roaming around an abandoned asian temple. Seem familiar? Yes the Bronx Zoo has some antiquated stuff but have you seen the gorilla exhibits. Seem familiar? Maybe both of these are not at the level of Panganini and Maharajah but that is my point. The animal trails are beautiful noq

My hope is that all places that have animals take note of places like the Miami Zoo, AK and places like that and give their animals a more natural habitat. I hate seeing animals all caged up, pacing from side to side. Just for our enjoyment.

And back on the other topic...Ak is an accredited zoo as well, so in that respect, on the two trails, the safari, Asia's monkey area, and Discovery Island area, it can be called a zoo. But what would people call Camp Minnie Micky, or Dino, or the Tree, or all the other areas outside of the animals sections. They are not a zoo, it's a theme park. Thus, if anything along this line of thought, AK would be, to me, a theme park with live animal attractions. Or a zoo inside a theme park for those who just have to call it a zoo.

On anoth line of thought, what would you call Sea World? Even before they added the thrill rides, I still never considered it a zoo (or aquarium). It's always been a theme park to me centered around fish and mamals of the sea. They deffinatly push the concept of humans and animals getting along together in our world, and educating the public. Sure sounds like AK in some ways. If anything, AK is more thrill/theme park than Sea World.

Ok, sorry to keep going on. Takling a deep breath dox...

 

[WDWFREAK53]

Animal Kingdom is quickly becoming my favorite park. Theming...I'm sorry, but it has the best theming of all 4 parks.

You need to take this park with the right "state of mind"

If you're going to the Animal Kingdom expecting to be entertained by rides and the hustle and bustle like the other 3 parks, then you're not going to enjoy yourself. Animal Kingdom is different, meaning YOU YOURSELF have to go SEEK the entertainment...sure, some is thrown at you but to find the true beauty of this park, you must do some exploring on your own.

For instance.

Magic Kingdom...99% of the attractions are found on the map.

Animal Kingdom...The "areas" and MAJOR attractions are found on the map...but...the TRUE attractions need to be "discovered"...you never get the same experience twice.

 

[stingrock23]

I've been to wdw 3 times since AK has opened, but i still haven't gone.
It just doesn't seem like a good enough value for me at this point.
When Everest opens, that's when Animal Kingdom will get my almighty dollar.

 

[dox]

Well you are missing out. Despite AK's shortcomings, it is a wonderful place to visit. And has greatly improved since opening day. Next time you are at WDW dedicate at least half a day to this park and you won't be disappointed. Don't wait for Everest. I for one look forward to my time at AK.

 

[WDWJunkie]

Originally posted by stingrock23
I've been to wdw 3 times since AK has opened, but i still haven't gone.
It just doesn't seem like a good enough value for me at this point.
When Everest opens, that's when Animal Kingdom will get my almighty dollar.

I don't dislike AK enough to tell others not to go to it, but don't go expecting much, or even to be there past the morning hours. You'll be able to see the best (though only a handlful) attractions and quickly move on. Since you haven't gone yet, go ahead and at least see it once.

 

[stingrock23]

Well, I'll be going in October, so maybe i'll spend a morning there. It will depend on how much time I have.

I'm sure the park looks beautiful, and I'm sure I would enjoy it.

It's just that for my time there, I'd rather go to MGM or Epcot. Maybe it's because those parks and Magic Kingdom have more meaning to me than AK. I know that's not necessarily a fair statement since I've never been to AK, but maybe ill spend some time there on my next trip.

 

[CTXRover]

Originally posted by WDWJunkie
I don't dislike AK enough to tell others not to go to it, but don't go expecting much, or even to be there past the morning hours. You'll be able to see the best (though only a handlful) attractions and quickly move on. Since you haven't gone yet, go ahead and at least see it once.

If you take your time, walk every trail and watch the animals (not just walk quickly past them), ride every attraction, see all three live shows, take the train to Conservation Station and spend a while there (you may even be lucky to see some animals being cared for through the windows into the "nursery and care rooms") and see the parade, I think you easily can spend an entire day there. It does depend on crowds though. Small crowds will allow you to visit things quicker. For first-timers who want to do everything and not drain themselves "running" from ride to ride, AK would require a full day, in my opinion.

The one big difference in AK and, say, MK is that you CAN see EVERYTHING in one day at AK, but it is almost impossible to see EVERYTHING at MK in one day. However, MK has had over 30 (31?) years to evolve and AK is only going to be 5 years old this month!

(EDIT: I see you did say that you could see the best rides in the morning. I will assume you mean the traditional E-rides, but in my opinion, everything at AK is worth seeng)

 

[Michael72688]

I love AK I would say it would be my second favorite park after MK, it has some of the best rides on property (except RRC) like Kali, Primeval Whirl, Dinosaur, Safari, and great shows and parades! Its awesome

 

[wdwforus]

Originally posted by mine1204
Personall, this is my favorite park. I took my family there last year, had one day. We saw all the shows enjoyed all the rides and the theming is spectacular. It took us the whole day and still did not see some of the trails and we thoroughly enjoyed ourselves.

I cant imagine anyone actually getting through AK in just one day. I agree with you about the theming and the Lion King was an awesome show but I wasnt all that impressed with Tarzan. It was fun but not something I would do next time. I guess if I didnt have kids I could probably run through it in a day but all of it? No way. Doesnt it close at 5 p.m.? We only had about half a day to spend there and we didnt get to any of the safari stuff. Too many autographs I guess. I didnt post a response to the poll because what I saw I did like but didnt see enough to give it a real opinion. Theres always 2005 right?!