Ask me again in a week
Last edited:
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
HKDL gets new castle, frozen land and marvel land.
- Thread starter Kiwiduck
- Start date
davis_unoxx
Well-Known Member
Who’s the blue haired chick? I thought cast members could only dye hair of natural colors.
Haymarket
Well-Known Member
1:20 she's a VP at Imagineering.
IMDREW
Well-Known Member
Been rewatching lots of videos of the land and rides and I just absolutely love it. One thing I think would've made FEA better is having Anna and Elsa in the last scene appear as they do at the end of Frozen II. Queen Anna and Else in her white outfit. Would've tied the whole franchise together in the park.
I also love Bruni everywhere in the land.
I also love Bruni everywhere in the land.
PymParty
Well-Known Member
do you have a link to the Facebook post ?
Hkayer
Member
It is a private group so you have to join the group to see the posts. I will send the link of the group in the next comment as it seems to take long to get approval.
And others spot a display of Mickey also.
Hkayer
Member
Here is the link if you want to join. https://www.facebook.com/groups/1232807927181877/?ref=share&mibextid=K8Wfd2
Scroll down a little and you will find the drone post.
Scroll down a little and you will find the drone post.
Last edited:
Supersnow84
Well-Known Member
It really seemed like subbing out a generic off the shelf flat ride for a custom themed coaster stretched the budget hard and they had to cut somewhere
I still think it’s an achievement and it certainly gives the land alot more kinetic energy than the alternative
It also puts to rest the idea that they should have shoved the whole land and eaten the TSL plot so they had more space to make a full 7DMT, it looks like WOSS broke the budget by itself
Supersnow84
Well-Known Member
Here a question I have been pondering for a bit
How do you think peoples opinions on the COMD have changed since it’s completion
I know this forum wasn’t a big fan of it as it was going up, has your opinion on it changed if you have seen it in person since? Do you think it was a good change the park needed or was it pointless and overhyped?
I’d be interested to see how people view it now
How do you think peoples opinions on the COMD have changed since it’s completion
I know this forum wasn’t a big fan of it as it was going up, has your opinion on it changed if you have seen it in person since? Do you think it was a good change the park needed or was it pointless and overhyped?
I’d be interested to see how people view it now
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
I still remain disheartened by it. Even if a new castle was warranted, it could have been so much better. The castle was inspired by a Disney Junior show and "unbounded by existing architectural conventions." Disney castles tended to be grounded in real places and buildings. One of the tragedies of Disney Imagineering has been its embrace of its own stereotype. A sizable group of people always felt like Disney Parks were lowbrow, infantile, and cartoonish. This unfair characterization remained with Disney regardless of what it created.
A version of this conflict occurred with the Disney's America debacle. People did not want "low brow" Disney anywhere near history. Why? Because Disney is pathetic and childish. History is for adults, not for Disney. Disney cannot be expected to accurately represent anything or communicate anything of value or importance. Disney is something that you turn on for your kids to shut them up or visit when your kid is little. Adults who like Disney are immature.
Was this true? No, not at all. Disney Parks fans knew that Disney was so much more than a cartoon. Disney was a joyful celebration of life, of friendship, and of family. It often cut against the grain, but it changed the world while doing it. Sophisticated architects in the 1960s and 1970s hated Disneyland and Walt Disney World, but they conceded that they were creating meaningful spaces that people loved. Disney joyfully created exceptional architecture and stories in suburban Anaheim and the swamps of Florida.
And then, for whatever reason, Disney Imagineering lost its soul. It seems more and more like the cuts to Imagineering that occurred in the early 2000s left Imagineering unmoored from its history and purpose. Mediocrities like Bruce Vaughn replaced legends like Tony Baxter and Eddie Sotto. The generation of Imagineers going up the ranks today have no sense of what Disney was. To them, Disney Parks exist to bring Disney cartoons to life. Imagineers are responsible for learning as many obscure Marvel references as possible to throw in the queue for fan service.
The new castle is a reflection of Disney's cartoonification. It is childish and unrealistic. Disney has become its own stereotype. Cinderella's Castle and Sleeping Beauty's Castle have been replaced by plastic mcmansions. It's sad.
Of course, I'm in the minority with my critiques and I get that. I'm just someone far too curmudgeonly, cynical, and defeated for my 25 years of age.
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
I agree with this. The land looks great. The coaster is not aimed at serious thrill seekers. It's a family coaster. Obviously, more is always better. But I also know that it's better than what was originally announced. I'll take that beautiful coaster any day over the spinner.
This is a fair critique. Marketing departments are often under pressure to use superlatives. But what you're saying has to match what you're selling.
Supersnow84
Well-Known Member
Interesting, I guess my question becomes then do you not think it matches wider HKDL, due to the budget the park has always been small and “plasticy”, not to the extent of say Mickey avenue but you can really feel the difference in most of the legacy lands compared to the original 4 magic kingdomsI still remain disheartened by it. Even if a new castle was warranted, it could have been so much better. The castle was inspired by a Disney Junior show and "unbounded by existing architectural conventions." Disney castles tended to be grounded in real places and buildings. One of the tragedies of Disney Imagineering has been its embrace of its own stereotype. A sizable group of people always felt like Disney Parks were lowbrow, infantile, and cartoonish. This unfair characterization remained with Disney regardless of what it created.
A version of this conflict occurred with the Disney's America debacle. People did not want "low brow" Disney anywhere near history. Why? Because Disney is pathetic and childish. History is for adults, not for Disney. Disney cannot be expected to accurately represent anything or communicate anything of value or importance. Disney is something that you turn on for your kids to shut them up or visit when your kid is little. Adults who like Disney are immature.
Was this true? No, not at all. Disney Parks fans knew that Disney was so much more than a cartoon. Disney was a joyful celebration of life, of friendship, and of family. It often cut against the grain, but it changed the world while doing it. Sophisticated architects in the 1960s and 1970s hated Disneyland and Walt Disney World, but they conceded that they were creating meaningful spaces that people loved. Disney joyfully created exceptional architecture and stories in suburban Anaheim and the swamps of Florida.
And then, for whatever reason, Disney Imagineering lost its soul. It seems more and more like the cuts to Imagineering that occurred in the early 2000s left Imagineering unmoored from its history and purpose. Mediocrities like Bruce Vaughn replaced legends like Tony Baxter and Eddie Sotto. The generation of Imagineers going up the ranks today have no sense of what Disney was. To them, Disney Parks exist to bring Disney cartoons to life. Imagineers are responsible for learning as many obscure Marvel references as possible to throw in the queue for fan service.
The new castle is a reflection of Disney's cartoonification. It is childish and unrealistic. Disney has become its own stereotype. Cinderella's Castle and Sleeping Beauty's Castle have been replaced by plastic mcmansions. It's sad.
Of course, I'm in the minority with my critiques and I get that. I'm just someone far too curmudgeonly, cynical, and defeated for my 25 years of age.
It would be too much to rebuild the park from scratch so could you almost argue that it kinda really fits the park even if it’s a bit messy in isolation
Haymarket
Well-Known Member
The COMD is something else: it's very much of our current era; apparently it's "a celebration of diversity, inclusion, and dreams." (0:50) 
What could have been:
What could have been:
Last edited:
Supersnow84
Well-Known Member
The COMD is something else: it's very much of our current era; apparently it's "a celebration of diversity, inclusion, and dreams." (0:50)
What could have been:
View attachment 750444
To be fair i personally find that second rendering ugly as hell but I can at least appreciate its consistency
We stayed at the Disneyland hotel. All 3 resorts seemed impressive for their price levels. Onsite hotels also get their own security and entry lanes.
Wait times fluctuate more than I’ve seen. Grizzly could be 30 minutes then an hour later a walk on mid afternoon then back to 20 minutes. But overall waits were more than manageable.
Let’s get wicked and wonderous book are great shows and very popular. Arrive accordingly! App wait times and info is very precise.
Momentous is well worth it. We could get a spot in the hub 20 minutes before showtime but of course it could be busier when you go. Recommend you look at the explorers semi buffet with front row fireworks viewing. Exceptional food and drinks and worth the (reasonable) cost IMHO.
Ask away and I’ll do my best. I’ve started a trip report thread; maybe ask me there to avoid clogging this one up
Last edited: